This week's IPI TechBytes commentary is
relevant to intellectual property, so I'm reproducing it here.
From the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI)
Number 2.36
September 22, 2005
Que Kazaa, Kazaa
Though it is known as the land down under, Australia’s understanding and respect for intellectual property rights are anything but upside down.
On Sept. 5, an Australian court ruled that Internet file-sharing network Kazaa violated the country’s music copyrights. The court didn’t shut down Kazaa, ruling that the company was not guilty of copyright infringement, but it ordered the company to modify its software to prevent file sharing, saying it had authorized users to illegally exchange copyrighted songs.
File sharing has been an issue since 1999, when Napster users began to swap music across the Internet through a central server. Kazaa is one of the file-sharing technologies that followed Napster, which was shut down in 2001 by the courts after legal challenges that it was violating intellectual property rights. Kazaa actually went further than Napster in that not only is music illegally exchanged but so are movies and software.
The Kazaa ruling closely follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that said Grokster, another file-sharing operation, could be sued for copyright infringement.
The courts, it seems, are at least being both clear and consistent. That’s because the people who create these file-sharing operations aren’t naive victims who developed an innocent product that is being misused by millions of people. The developers know exactly what they’re doing and why. They are purposefully and flagrantly providing a product that has one overwhelming use: to steal intellectual property.
What many consider harmless sharing of music is actually a form of piracy. It’s the theft of intellectual property, which costs U.S. business between $200 and $250 billion a year. That’s a lot of money, and that money represents a lot of jobs. The U.S. Customs Service estimates counterfeiting alone costs the U.S. 750,000 jobs. And in Kazaa’a case the theft includes software and movies.
So this isn’t just about rich rock stars and record company executives taking a light hit in their swollen wallets. It’s about the tens of thousands of everyday working people who make up the industry and depend on it for their livelihoods.
The protection of intellectual property means as much to them as it does to those who create it.
All Past TechBytes Commentaries
(c)
2005 Institute
for Policy Innovation
From the Institute for Policy Innovation (IPI)
Number 2.36
September 22, 2005
Que Kazaa, Kazaa
Though it is known as the land down under, Australia’s understanding and respect for intellectual property rights are anything but upside down.
On Sept. 5, an Australian court ruled that Internet file-sharing network Kazaa violated the country’s music copyrights. The court didn’t shut down Kazaa, ruling that the company was not guilty of copyright infringement, but it ordered the company to modify its software to prevent file sharing, saying it had authorized users to illegally exchange copyrighted songs.
File sharing has been an issue since 1999, when Napster users began to swap music across the Internet through a central server. Kazaa is one of the file-sharing technologies that followed Napster, which was shut down in 2001 by the courts after legal challenges that it was violating intellectual property rights. Kazaa actually went further than Napster in that not only is music illegally exchanged but so are movies and software.
The Kazaa ruling closely follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling that said Grokster, another file-sharing operation, could be sued for copyright infringement.
The courts, it seems, are at least being both clear and consistent. That’s because the people who create these file-sharing operations aren’t naive victims who developed an innocent product that is being misused by millions of people. The developers know exactly what they’re doing and why. They are purposefully and flagrantly providing a product that has one overwhelming use: to steal intellectual property.
What many consider harmless sharing of music is actually a form of piracy. It’s the theft of intellectual property, which costs U.S. business between $200 and $250 billion a year. That’s a lot of money, and that money represents a lot of jobs. The U.S. Customs Service estimates counterfeiting alone costs the U.S. 750,000 jobs. And in Kazaa’a case the theft includes software and movies.
So this isn’t just about rich rock stars and record company executives taking a light hit in their swollen wallets. It’s about the tens of thousands of everyday working people who make up the industry and depend on it for their livelihoods.
The protection of intellectual property means as much to them as it does to those who create it.
All Past TechBytes Commentaries
TechBytes is published by the IPI Center
for Technology Freedom of the Institute for Policy Innovation. TechBytes
is distributed via email, as well as through the website at http://www.ipi.org
Questions, comments, and subscription requests should be directed to ipi@ipi.org
Requests to be removed from this email list will be attended to promptly.
TechBytes may be reproduced or quoted with appropriate attribution, which
should include 1) the name TechBytes, and one of either 2) the name "Institute
for Policy Innovation", or 3) the acronym "IPI".
Media inquiries should be directed to ipi@ipi.org