I realize that the topic of internet piracy/intellectual property has probably been hashed over on CalPatriot blog already, I’ve probably even read about it. But I have two cents to add!

The discussion about piracy was inspired by a discussion with my father. I’d asked him to email me a song (”Another Day” by Paul McCartney’s Wings) as an attachment for iTunes. His reply was suprise that the email “let him do it”; he assumed that he would be unable to export the mp3 that he had uploaded from a CD. Like some DVDs are rip-protected from copying, he thought CDs would be protect too, under copyright law as intellectual property. The debate ensued.

Piracy of music is similar to other copyright law violations, but they each have their dimensions. Software comes with a liscense, an explicit agreement not to copy it. Use of written material from books requires citation to prevent plagarism, movies and TV require permission to show elements of their broadcast material. Musical lyrics should be cited too, similarly to books. Copyright law also protects from stealing musical matieral by other artists, case in point the Beatles being sued by the Supremes for having similar musical riffs. My take on all of this is that these media need to be considered separately especially regarding internet use, while protecting intellectual property.

First off, if someone buys a CD and burns me a copy, is that a gift or illegal? Is that different than making a mix-tape by recording from radio or other media? I realize that the intended use of the reproduction is also key. Using the music as personal entertainment is different than selling copies on the street corner, and I think they ought to be treated differently. If a listener is not selling or profiting or stealing components from music or other intellectual property, should they be dealt with differently? Is there a difference between downloading music from a torrent or other program and getting it from someone who has purchased the material?

There is a caveat for the purpose of education, which I support, that material exclusively used for education doesn’t need permission to be used. There is the understanding that money is not being made from it. But what about our class readers? Does every professor get permission from the publishers before copying their texts? Because they are sold by copy centers and not the professors themselves, does that maintain the integrity of their use “for education”? (Because I would certainly love to get free readers!) My mother ran into this issue. As a nurse, part of her job is to educate her patients. However, since they are paying for the service, we discussed whether or not she could defend giving them photocopies of written material as a reference.

But back to the internet. The internet and digital communications are certainly the future of technology, so I see no reason why entertainment shouldn’t follow. (For the record I support “obsolete” media for it’s own sake, I don’t want you to throw away your vinyl). Programs exist like iTunes where you pay for your music, ringtones, movies, etc, and that makes sense. However, nothing compels music users to obtain their music legally at this point, at least, no regulatory feature of the internet like the one my dad expected to encounter in his email. Should the internet have regulation of property built in? Should all downloaded material charge a fee to our monthly internet bill? Is it even possible to enforce?

These questions are all reasons I support looking at piracy and copyright laws with regard to the internet, and not just because I don’t want to pay $20 for a CD.