This document discusses the relationship between copyright and freedom of speech, exploring how copyright can both encourage and restrict creative expression. It also examines the concepts of read-only and read and write cultures and their implications for copyright.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Running head: COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH Name of the student Name of the university Author note
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
1 COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH Answer to question 1: The United States Supreme Court as Netanel (2008) explains has labeled copyright as “the engine of free expression”. The Copyright law gives an important economic encouragement to create and disseminate most of the music, literature, commentary, film and art that constitutes much of the public discourse. However, Copyright does not always guarantee protection of privacy rather; it acts as a burden to free speech. People often require copying or building upon the work of others like music, images, words or statements to convey their own experience or thoughts in an effective way. This could not be possible if the original creator withholds permission with the help of the Copyright law or labels a license fee that is beyond what people could afford. NIEP theory refers to the Neoclassical Institutional Economic Property theory. As per this theory, intellectual property is the same as real property and hence, trespassing the intellectual property is equally punishable as trespassing the real property. Further, the theory alsodemarcatesbetweeneconomicregulationsagainsttheregulationofexpression.The neoclassicist economics upholds the idea of providing maximum authority and control to the copyright holder.Anderson and Christen (2013)state thatwhile the traditional copyright approach views copyright as essential but faulty solution to the problem of public goods, neoclassicists find copyright much more than just an incentive for the creator but also an instrument for assisting markets in obtainable expression. Netanel (2008) explains that viewing copyright, as an essential tool to save the creators’ work is wrong because the real work of copyright is to encourage the progress of science, as mentioned in the First Amendment by inciting the formation and extensive distribution of varied expression. The author further argues that copyrights should be treated as proprietary rights as longs as the original expression serves
2 COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH the purpose completely. Otherwise, copyright should be limited in duration and scope if it unnecessarily comes in way of free speech. Lotov (2003)explains that the concept of free speech and copyright restrictions is what creates the democratic paradigm. The First Amendment guarantees rights to free expression, which is the essence of true democracy. In a democratic society, people have the right to go to court if they feel that their work, their intellectual property has been copied without their permission (Barendt 2005, p. 249). Democracy allows the people to express freely even if it means using others’ words or expression. An example of copyright law and democratic paradigm conflict is the Alice Randall retelling of Margaret Mitchell’s classic novelGone with the Wind. Randall retold the story from a slave’s perspective in her workThe Wind done Gonethat was not accepted by Mitchell’s heirs. They filed an infringement case against Randall, which was upheld by the Georgia district court but the Eleventh Circuit reversed the decision stating that copyright law should align with the First Amendment. However, even if the copyright law prohibited Randall’s work, she could still have vented her thoughts through op-ed pieces and that is the democratic paradigm. Answer to question 2: The read-only culture, according Lessig (2008), is a one-way process where the public act as passive consumers. Books could be used as examples of read-only culture. Apart from that, the traditional media are also an example of read-only culture because there also, the public are passive viewers without any scope to revert or interact. The information in the read-only culture is provided to the public by a professional source, which owns n authority on that specific information.
3 COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH The read and write culture, on the other hand, revolutionized the way the consumers consumed the content. This culture encouraged imitative works through combining or abridging materials that already existed to create a new product. The culture came to be known as theremix culture(Hafner 2015).It is rampantly present in the music industry in the present era, as Lessig (2008) observes. The author finds that the the norms that govern the musical forms of expression are much more restrictive than those governing the literary are are or any other textual forms of expression. It however must be remembered that the right to remix or quote any form of art is crucial for maintaining creative freedom and any free society must not restrict it. With the advent of the digital platform that empowered the public to use copyrighted works in blog and other forms, the RW culture has rapidly expanded. AsAufderheide and Jaszi (2018)observe, ranking and tags system such as in Reddit or Digg or even in del.icio.us, has made it possible for the consumers to use copyrighted works without breaking the copyright law. Any blogger could use tags or ranking systems to mark the story or post they read online to make it available to others reading online. With the increase in tags, the content becomes even more important and interestingly, the consumers or viewers who directly create the significance rather than the advertisers. Thus, it gives immense power in the hands of the consumers although it is also true that this power could easily go out of control. To ensure that sycophants do not misuse the power, the role of copyright becomes important. Copyright laws make sure that sycophants do misuse the work of any artist by putting enough restriction on the work. In case of read-only culture also, copyright could play an important role, as it would restrict undue broadcast of information that is not necessary to convey a message. Now, people would ask about the need for copyright in read-only or RO culture. The
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
4 COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH answer is that remix culture is created through the combination of RO culture elements. Copyrighting the RO culture would invariably restrict the RW culture as well and this would ensure that the information or product is accessed and disseminated responsibly(Ku 2017). Therefore, as evident from the above discussion, copyright facilitates both read-only and read and write culture. It gives the original creators as well as those using the original work a way to be accountable for what they are reading and copying.
5 COPYRIGHT AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH References: Anderson, J. and Christen, K., 2013. ‘Chuck a Copyright on It’: Dilemmas of Digital Return and thePossibilitiesforTraditionalKnowledgeLicensesandLabels.MuseumAnthropology Review,7(1-2), pp.105-126. Aufderheide, P. and Jaszi, P., 2018.Reclaiming fair use: How to put balance back in copyright. University of Chicago Press. Barendt, E., 2005.Freedom of speech. Oxford University Press. Hafner, C.A., 2015. Remix culture and English language teaching: The expression of learner voice in digital multimodal compositions.TESOL Quarterly,49(3), pp.486-509. Ku, R.S.R., 2017. The creative destruction of copyright: Napster and the new economics of digital technology. InCopyright Law(pp. 207-268). Routledge. Lawrence, L., 2008. Making Art and Commerce Thrive In The Hybrid Economy. Netanel, N.W., 2008.Copyright's paradox. Oxford University Press.