Modern uses of copyrighted material are more varied than ever before. New technological inventions such as the introduction of player pianos, video games, use of multimedia and rapid development of the Internet have often led to changes in order to tackle infringement of copyright law. Copyright protection has grown over the centuries to control the copying of literary work and the internet transmission of digital recordings of all sorts of literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic materials.
The question of how UK copyright law applies to the Internet and the material appearing thereupon has not yet received much systematic treatment in the standard texts on the subject, even those the latest editions of which have appeared within the last years. Accordingly this proposal approaches its complex subject in a very simple manner, by looking at the main rules of UK and EU copyright defining what material may be subject to copyright, drawing attention to those subject matters which appear to be especially relevant to the Internet and sites thereon; and then turning to how copyright in that material may be infringed, again highlighting application of the rules to websites, and defences available against infringement. This will demonstrate some of the difficulties with which the Internet confronts copyright, and this essay will finish with some of the international reforms to develop the law and to meet these difficulties.
Furthermore, the problem of copyright infringement as a result of the technological development had been increased by the introduction of new technology such as the peer to peer file- sharing. So we must examine how the copyright law in UK, US and EU had respond to this new technology with reference to case law.
The problem with the peer to peer file-sharing was first examined in the famous case of A&M Records, Inc v Napster, Inc (9th Circuit), 25 March 2002 [1] . From its creation, the Napster service was both popular and controversial and this is the reason where the Napster case was one of the most controversial cases in US. In this case, representatives of a number of recording studios claimed that Napster was liable for contributory and vicarious infringement. The Court found that Napster was liable for both contributory and vicarious liability and made an order to shut down the server.
The Ninth Circuit held that Napster infringes the right of "reproduction and distribution of the copyright holders" on the basis that the "uploading of file names to the search index for other users to copy, infringed the distribution right and the downloading of files containing protected material infringed the reproduction right".
So It can be argued that the decision in the case of Napster was the beginning of the end of the peer 2 peer file-sharing.
Aims and Objectives of Research
Aims:
Highlight how UK and US copyright law had responded to the technological development in the past.
Highlight the Areas of copy right law which are not completely cover the online infringement of copy right, Peer2 peer file sharing and other crimes relating to modern technology.
Criticise UK, EU and USA laws and decisions relating to violation of copy rights and other types of online infringement of copy right.
Objectives:
Define copyright law based on European Union Legislation as implemented in the United Kingdom as a Member State and its relationship with internet.
Identify the stakeholders and the issues such as online infringement of copyright, sharing files, video games and peer 2 peer networking.
Examine how copyright law in the European Union and beyond e.g. USA, has responded to the challenges of technological development with reference to case law in the European Union and United Kingdom and the action that copyright owners are taking to protect their interests.
Assess what reforms are required to maintain a balance between the interests of the consumer and the copyright owners.
Research Strategy
A Literature Review will be undertaken in relation using the following data bases University of Northampton Library: Metalib database research, British Library and online sources, E journals and review the documents. The initial sources are as set out in the bibliography.
Research methodology:
The research will focus on a qualitative approach which is subjective rather than a quantative approach which is objective. The qualitative approach focuses on analyzing and reflecting on the intangible aspect such as values, attitudes, perception, emotion feeling.
Following the statement of the law on copyright an analysis will be made of the cases which seek to interpret and apply the legislation and develop the law while at the same time seeking to maintain a balance between the different demands of stakeholders.
Primary data/sources will be used in the form of legislation and cases. Secondary data/sources will be used in the form of books, articles, reports, journals, e-journals, web sites. All data be collected and analyzed to address the aims and objectives of the dissertation.
Structure of Dissertation
Chapter 1 - Introduction
In this chapter an outline of the role of copyright will be given including its purpose. The main purpose of copyright is to allow original creators to gain economic rewards for their efforts and so encourage continued creativity and inspire the development of new material. Copyright material is usually the result of creative skill and significant labour or investment, and without protection, it would often be very easy for others to exploit material without paying the creator. Further copyright is an important type of intellectual property rights. It legislates for the fair use and reproduction of original creations. Anything written, recorded or printed in any type or format is subject to copyright law from the time of its creation including copy right [2] .It gives an exclusive right to the owner which prevents copying of an original work and control the exploitation of work by others. It comes into force being upon the creation of an original artistic, musical, literary or dramatic work.
The problems/issues will be identified particularly those relating to modern technology. These include much compressed treatment of a very large subject, and space prohibits anything other than fairly abbreviated discussion of the issues. In particular, it is only possible to make the most incidental of references to the Database Directive of 1996 [3] which has important implications in this area of law, and to the problems of international private law.
Chapter 2 - The Law
Define Copyright;
Copyright is an exclusive right of the owner which prevents copying of an original work and control the exploitation of work by others. It comes into force being upon the creation of an original artistic, musical, literary or dramatic work. So copyright cannot therefore be used to prevent the independent production of an identical or similar work. So according to section 1 of Copyright, Design and Patent Act copyright consists of the following types of works:
1- Original literary, dramatic, and musical works
2- Artistic works
3- Sound recordings, films and broadcasts
4- Typographical arrangements of published editions
An outline of the Laws of the European Union generally will be given with particular reference to modern technology e.g. Information Society Directive (2001/29/EC) for EU and Digital Economy Act 2010 in UK which seeks to safeguard:
Online infringement of copyright - to tackle online infringement of copyright, by placing obligations on Internet Service Providers and to take technical measures against infringing subscribers.
Internet domain registries - to provide reserve powers in respect of efficient and effective management and distribution of internet domain names.
Video games - to make changes to how video games should be classified in the UK.
Access to electromagnetic spectrum.
Independent television services.
Chapter 3 - The Issues
Peer to Peer (P2P) file sharing which is one of the most recent technological development Peer-to-peer file-sharing permits users to directly access files stored on computers of other users in a network. The software to enable such file sharing is generally provided free of charge to users. The P2P is responsible for the most important problem that recording companies have suffered by illegal copies, on the basis that there is no loss of quality of the file and enables pirates to reproduce and distribute perfect copies of works. The P2P is responsible for the most important problem that recording companies have suffered by illegal copies, on the basis that there is no loss of quality of the file and enables pirates to reproduce and distribute perfect copies of works. Further The nature of digital file-sharing technology inevitably implicates copyright law. First, since every digital file is fixed for purposes of copyright law (whether on a hard drive, CD, or merely in RAM), the files being shared generally qualify as copyrighted works. Second, the transmission of a file from one person to other results in a reproduction, a distribution and possibly a public performance.
The problem with the peer to peer file-sharing was first examined in USA in the famous case of A&M Records, Inc v Napster, Inc (9th Circuit), 25 March 2002. In this case the Ninth Circuit held that Napster infringes the right of reproduction and distribution of the copyright holders on the basis that the uploading of file names to the search index for other users to copy, infringed the distribution right and the downloading of files containing protected material infringed the reproduction right. It can be argued that the decision in the case of Napster was the beginning of the end of the peer 2 peer file-sharing and the final blow was given by the Supreme Court in the leading case of Grokster.
But the most recent case in relation to a peer to peer file- sharing is the case of Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd [2005] FCA 1242. In this case, the court heard proceedings against Sharman Network, the company which operated the Kazaa peer to peer file-sharing software. So the court held that the defendants were liable for copyright infringement because they had knowledge that the software could be used for copyright infringement and they had not implemented any technical measures to prevent the infringement. The decision was based on the fact that two of the defendants sponsored a web campaign attacking the record companies and their opposition to the sharing of copyright music files.
The leading case to authorisation in UK was the case of CBS Songs Ltd v Amstrad Consumer Electronic plc [1988] EIPR 345. In this case, the appellants who were record companies brought an action against the respondents on the basis that they have selling copy machines without make sure that copyright in sound recording will not be infringed. Also, that the respondents' sales and advertising encouraged the public to commit an offence under the Copyright Act 1956 s.21 (3). The Court of Appeal found that there was a case against the respondents but they found them not liable. The appellants appealed to the House of Lords but the appeal was dismissed.
A balance needs to be struck between making lawful copies in line with fair dealing which is internationally accepted and preventing infringement by legal action or through technical advances such as encryption (DRM)
Chapter 4 - Reforms
According to my proposal approaches it is complex subject in a very simple manner, by looking at the main rules of UK copyright defining what material may be subject to copyright, drawing attention to those subject matters which appear to be especially relevant to the modern technology problems and then turning to how copyright in that material may be infringed. This will demonstrate some of the difficulties with which the modern technology confronts copyright, and my dissertation will finish with some of the international reforms to develop the law and to meet these difficulties. So here I would like to discuss reformssome to minimise these problems;
Copyright law must be simplified,
We need a modern copyright system that focuses on empowering producers, not criminalizing consumers.
Copyright can be enforced internationally in the light of the Berne Convention or Universal Copyright Convention by amending them under the supervision of UNO.
The public should be educated to recognise the value of property ownership.
Policy-makers should act faster to keep up with the rapid changes in new technologies.
Chapter 5 - Conclusion
In all this, it is evident that the scope and reach of copyright are likely to be considerably extended over the next few years. For many, this will be a matter of regret. The aim is clearly to establish as strong a regime of protection as possible for authors, providing a situation where publication on the Internet can realise its full economic potential. As a result, copyright is moving ever further from controlling the existence of copies to controlling the use made of material, and in this there is a danger of overlooking the public interest in the dissemination of ideas, information, instruction and entertainment without undue burden, and in the rights of free expression and privacy. Yet the uneasy may take comfort. Laws can be written in the most draconian terms, but the critical question is whether they can be enforced. It is all very well being able to say that the author has a copyright in the UK, but what good is that against an infringement in Europe The problem of enforcement of rights is what should be taking up the attention of reformers who want to realise and maximise the commercial potential of the Internet. The new laws are being strongly expressed to act as a symbol of deterrence, an approach which may in fact reflect the real weakness of the position in which commercial interests now find themselves.
Time Line
Literature Review - till Sep
Discussion -
Writing main body -
Conclusion -
Formatting and Tidy up -
Proof reading - this would be done in the last two weeks before submission of the full draft dissertation.
Ethics
The study will be consideration of literature. All sources will be referenced to ensure against plagiarism.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
