Copyright Laws: Smith and Jenkins Lectures

In my opinion, both Kevin Smith's and Jennifer Jenkins's lectures on copyright laws and how the laws are colliding with new means of intellectual property were very interesting. Kevin Smith, naturally being a lawyer and librarian, discussed the fight between Google and authors and publishers around the world. Many authors believe that it is copyright infringement when Google, through Google books, allows people to see previews of their books. Because of the copyright laws, Smith explained to us that Google had to reach an agreement. Now, there are strict rules on which books people can preview and how many pages or paragraphs or sentences that can be previewed. One thing about the copyright law that Smith mentioned that I found strange was the length of copyright. Originally, it was for 14 years, after which the owner of the intellectual property could renew the copyright. But after years of progression, the copyright law is now the life of the author plus 70 years. Though I understand the need for copyright, in that it fosters creativity and innovation, it does not make much sense to put such a long time constraint on it. For example, if a person needs to use something, which has not been touched in years and something no one cares about, but is still protected by copyright law, that person is not allowed to use it without the consent of the owner. Even though there is a good chance that this person will never find the owner, the government still claims that it should be protected by copyright. This does not make much sense, and, in a way, may, as a direct result of governmental policy, cause a deadweight loss. This is detrimental to our society. I believe that copyright law should be a certain number of years, after which the owner can choose to renew it. This way, if no one renews the copyright of a tangible item, it is free to use in the public domain.

One topic that Jenkins talked about that I found interesting was the fact that the copyright law has been written in such ambiguous and arbitrary terms that it is almost impossible for anyone, without legal training, to understand the document. This means, according to Jenkins, that often times, in cases where copyright law is not clearly defined, judges usually rule based on their own gut feeling, and not strictly according to governmental law. Thus, many of the recent cases with copyright law and its collision with the new medium that displays intellectual creativity (ie. the Internet) will be decided by the will of the judges. This seems dangerous considering that many present judges, being relatively old and perhaps being not technologically savvy, may not see the importance in loosening copyright law so that creativity will be encouraged and promoted through this new medium.

Furthermore, after hearing both of the lectures, I concluded that there is a serious battle underway between copyright laws and digital creativity. It seems that much of what random people are creating online is, in the eyes of the United States Government, copyright infringement. However, in my opinion, these outdated, antiquated copyright laws are indeed stifling digital creativity. If you look at much of the material online, such as videos, pictures, sound clips, etc., a lot of this seems that it would be copyright infringement. In my opinion, if the government goes after those who created this items, or even becomes stricter with sites that facilitate these items, such as YouTube, there will be a great loss in digital creativity. For example, many of the popular mashups on YouTube, such as this song, which is a mashup of six popular songs, would not be shared with millions of people around the world. After listening to songs such as this one, and viewing videos that use copyrighted material, it is evident that these new items are very creative and don't have any intent to profit from the original material. I believe that if the government becomes increasingly strict about imposing copyright law on the Internet, digital creativity will soon be lost.