Intellectual Property Issues Related To Cyber Piracy

Industries involved in creating, producing, commercializing and distributing content find

themselves facing major change because of digitization. These include the music, film sectors
and the IT software electronic publishing. The impact of digital content on the various sectors of
the entertainment industry is substantial. In the cyberspace virtually all intellectual creations can
be protected by some form of intellectual property law. Intellectual property divides the universe
of intellectual creations into three parts: copyrights, trademarks and patents. Generally,
copyright protects expression, trademark protects names, and patents protect ideas. Creative
expression that has been reduced to a tangible form, such as a book, piece of recorded music,
computer program, screenplay, painting, photograph, or motion picture can be protected by
copyright. Traditional business models used by distributors in each of the creative industry
sectors based on the controlled access to the products created, in this case films, software and
music (recordings). Copyright gives them control over the use and marketing of their products,
for which they may charge consumers. The practice of file sharing or illegal downloading,
however, is making it increasingly difficult for them to maintain control over their works, with the
risk of eroding their commercial foundations. (http://www.benedict.com/Info/Law/What.aspx)

Entertainment industry differs from other industries on a number of key points. It first discusses
particular qualities of the industry’s products and services, implying a specific production
process marked by certain economic characteristics. It subsequently explains why the industry’s
products and services are ideally suited to digital operation and distribution, but thus also
susceptible to unlawful distribution and file sharing. It then moves on to describe the industry’s
business model and the changes afoot. These changes have been discernible first in the music
industry, which is therefore central to our discussion of new business models. Experiencing
goods and public goods like film, games and music industries are generate the quantity of their
revenues by marketing their products directly to consumers. We are talking here about the
release of films on DVD or Blu Ray, music on CD and games on consoles, and not so much
about the generation of royalties. This is the market in culture, information and entertainment,
whose products appeal to consumers primarily for their symbolism, representing a world and
evoking an experience. Their value is in the experience that consumers can typically only rate
after consumption – which is why these are also known as ‘experience goods’. To an important
degree, marketing and promotion in these industries involve managing expectations – by
selectively releasing parts of the product, for instance, a phenomenon known as sampling. In
fact, the music industry is known for sharing its products with potential customers by releasing
them for radio broadcasts and by producing music videos to promote them on TV. Experience
has shown that consumers will then want to own their own copies of the music and thus have
access at self-chosen times and frequencies. In the film and gaming industries, by contrast with
broadcasting the whole product through mass media as a means of promotion is unusual, as
this is not expected to generate turnover the way it does in the music business. Broadcasting
films on television is a way of generating revenues for film producers and distributors in itself,
and is certainly not aimed at promoting DVD or Blu Ray sales, even if this is often its effect, e.g
television series whose DVD appeal lies in the fact that they have been previously broadcast. In
this way, then, the music industry is significantly different from the film and games industries.
Although most entertainment industry products are in physical format – in the shape of DVDs,
CDs and games – their value is primarily non-physical: it is in the experience, the story, the
information. With all of these products essentially involving information, developments in
information technology typically have major implications for the way in which the entertainment
industry is able to operate or commercialise its products – the digital revolution being a case in
point. Another typical feature of these experience goods is that their consumption by one
consumer does not happen at the expense of other consumers’ ability to use them. If someone
buys and eats a loaf of bread, nobody else will be able to eat it, but this is not the case when
someone watches a film on DVD or plays a computer game. Economists call the latter type of
goods ‘non-rival’. If it is possible to prevent a person from accessing goods, these are
excludable and called ‘club’ goods, whereas if their access is non-excludable they are known as
‘public’ goods. Because of their non-excludable and non-rival nature, public goods often depend
on public finance.

Internet piracy is a big issue in terms of copyright and intellectual property. My hypothesis
proves that we can use some solutions to avoid illegal stealing, but it would require more efforts
from publishing web sites. There are number of useful options like electronic paying or making
sample of part of the material for getting acquainted with particular content.

My research objectives are the following:

List of methods to get protection from illegal copying;

Holding piracy in manageable position with different solutions to avoid cybercrime;

Possible scenarios in further development of copyright and intellectual property.

Current Position of illegal internet piracy
Nowadays more and more valuable content finds its way onto the world wide web and creators,
publishers, content providers are becoming increasingly concerned about controlling access to,
and use of, the content they place in cyberspace. The ease with which content is copied and
distributed over the internet makes these concerns very real. Moreover, existing intellectual
property doctrines may not provide the level of control that content-providers would like.
Although copyright law provides some protection for many types of content, it is costly to
enforce. And copyright law may not prevent copying of valuable data placed on the web.
Further, as we have seen, intellectual property doctrines may not be sufficient to give content
providers control over how others display and link to their sites. Accordingly, content-providers
have begun to turn to alternative methods of intellectual property protection that do not rely on
the traditional legal controls. Timely response to these changes is of the essence in order to
safeguard their position. In some cases this will necessarily entail a redefinition of business
models. Digital copying of intellectual property is poised to do major damage to the content
industries. The recording industry has been hardest hit thus far because digital song files are
small enough to transmit quickly. But peer-to-peer networks contain every conceivable kind of
content: high definition films, television programs, software. Virtually every product sold to
consumers is vulnerable to theft, which is why retail stores spend money to prevent shoplifting.
Content is particularly vulnerable in the digital environment, however, because an infinite
number of perfect copies can be made from just one original, and because those copies can be
distributed to millions of Internet users around the globe at no cost.

According to internet e – commerce ‘stealing off the Internet is not only illegal, it can cripple the
future of e-commerce, that's why it should be made easier to buy content legally’ (Blueprint
Magazine 2004, http://www.ppionline.org/). The troublesome is that this piracy is not a massive
criminal conspiracy, but rather the collective actions of millions of otherwise law – abiding
Internet users who have grown accustomed to the culture of free Internet content. Many people
have a hard time distinguishing between the vast amount of free content music, video games,
other programs and the illegally pirated content. Widespread Internet piracy seriously harms the
artists (both the famous and struggling) who create content, as well as the technicians sound
engineers, editors, set designers, game programmers who produce it. Widespread piracy also
has serious economic implications beyond the lost revenue of the stealing itself. Fear of piracy
has caused many content providers to resist making their products available for download over
the Internet, which could save consumers millions of dollars by eliminating the middleman
retailers. This resistance, in turn, has slowed the growth of broadband deployment and the
digital economy, since many Internet users do not want to pay for high-speed access if they
cannot use it to get movies, music, and television programs.

Copyright encourages the creative efforts of authors, artists, and others by securing the
exclusive right to reproduce works and derive income from them. For instance computer
software which contains graphics and text appear on a computer screen or that written material
is intended to control the operation of computer hardware. Also there is a several copyright
limits that does not give an owner the right to sell or distribute a work. For example, one
person's enhancements to another's program might (or might not be) copyrightable, it would
infringe without permission of the owner of copyright in the original. And of course, the right to
sell a particular work might be affected by laws governing matters such as obscenity or the
rights of privacy or publicity of any persons who might be depicted in it. Even with that in mind,
there are further limits to copyright. For example, partial or limited reproduction of another's
work may be permitted under the doctrine of fair use. This doctrine is especially liberal where
the use advances public interests such as education or scholarship and specifically permits
making a backup copy of a program.

Solutions and methods of intellectual property

protection in web sites
One of the options to sellers of helpful software, such as clip art or programming libraries,
permitting hassle – free distribution of non – competing works created by licensed users.
Beyond fair use, still more fundamental limits to copyright protection should be considered. The
basic idea is easily illustrated: An author of an online story has protection for her words, but not
for facts that she went to the trouble to collect or her basic plot. Similarly, a programmer has
protection from others' duplicating a segment of code but not from their writing different code to
accomplish the same end. Protection for facts as such is probably not available, and processes
can be protected, if at all only by trade secrets or patents. That said, caution is nevertheless
warranted. Copying someone's creative presentation of facts could easily infringe. Also, merely
translating from one language into another may infringe – just as would translating a novel from
French to English.

Most of the concerns about copyright related web issues have existed since the advantage of
linking to a website without permission. Such linkage probably would be beneficial to
businesses. In other words, the mere provision of access to another's site, as long as no one
directly steals, gives credibility and free advertising to the company providing the site. People
would be telling others of the organization free of charge. More importantly, there are other
issues involving cyberspace that need to be examined. Most scholars feel that some issues will
remain the constant. In other words, treatment of material on the Web is similar to that of
literature. While information on the Web may be protected, it should be noted that copyright
protection does not extend to computer systems, processes and the like. The copyright
protections do not cover machinery. Clearly actions such as browsing, e-mailing and related
practices seem free of major problems.

In discussing the issues related to Copyright and Intellectual property in the internet
(http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property99/alternative/) web sites there are three basic alternative
methods of intellectual protection:

Making Contract with particular resources. One of the alternative ways to the traditional
intellectual property regime is an increased reliance on contract law. If you have spent any
appreciable amount of time on the web, you will undoubtedly have come across web pages that
look suspiciously like contracts.

Web technologies. Most technological alternatives to contract exist as a way of controlling

content on-line. For example, access to a well - known news site (like The New York Times or
CNN) and looking for material which you interesting for you. By simple electronic paying you
can get full access to article.

Exclusion of any intellectual property in the internet. "Information wants to be free" it’s a well –
known slogan famous American writer Steward Brann, there is no doubt that full free access to
useful information in world wide web will bring the world's knowledge to anyone, anywhere,
anytime. And we can expect that knowledge would be supported by free open sources.

Conclusion
If the content industries can't protect their intellectual property, there are two likely scenarios:
One is a marked decrease in the production of high-quality content, as investors refuse to put
money into a product that is sure to be widely stolen; the other is a tighter lockdown of content
through encryption and other technologies that restrict consumer uses of content. Both of these
scenarios punish law-abiding consumers along with the pirates. Protecting content will, of
course, have costs and inconveniences, but the goal should be to place those burdens, to the
greatest extent possible, on the pirates themselves, rather than on law-abiding consumers as a
whole. To hold piracy to a manageable level if two things happen together:

First, the inconvenience of piracy and the risk of getting caught and punished for it must
increase. This means that government and industry must cooperate to make it more difficult to
put pirated content on the Internet and to make it more difficult for people to find and download.

Second, both public and private measures must be taken to make it easier for consumers to pay
for the content they want to download. The recent stunning success of Apple Computer's iTunes
service, which sold more than 1 million songs in its first week of operation, proves that
consumers are willing to pay for content if it is easy to find, flexible to use, and reasonably
priced.

The Internet has been characterized as the largest threat to copyright since its inception. It has
made global distribution of content easier than ever, and it holds the ultimate promise of
slashing costs by reducing the role of middlemen who produce, distribute, and sell physical
copies. Stealing off the Internet is not only illegal, it can cripple the future of e-commerce. That's
why we must make it easier to buy content legally.
Pirates of the Silicon Valley – Reaction

Pirates of the Silicon Valley is a 1999 film showing how personal computers evolved from mere boxes
with buttons into modern-day computers with mouse, screens and colorful displays. This is a film about
Steve Jobs the co-founder of Apple Computers and Bill Gates co-founder of Microsoft.

Good artists copy, great artists’ steal. This is the phrase that had the biggest impact on the future of
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. Who would have thought that these two college drop-outs would become two
of the world’s successful people?

In the film you can see how Apple Computers and Microsoft begun. How the rivalry of these two
companies brought the development of personal computers in the modern-day and how this “pirate”
thing happened and made a history.

I watched this movie twice. At first, I thought that this is just a typical “the making of computers” film. I
got it wrong. I never thought that such one great artist like Bill Gates is a thief himself. It is clearly shown
in the film how this “windows concept” was stolen from Xerox’s PARC Lab by Apple and then Microsoft
developed Windows behind Apple’s back. Bill Gates is amazing. He had managed to develop his
Windows from the software Apple programmed for their computers without Steve Jobs knowing it. No
wonder he is still the world’s richest person.

The movie presented well the characters of both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. Jobs had this unenthusiastic,
abusive attitude towards his team and co-founders. He is a perfectionist, intelligent and too confident.
He also denies his child Lisa but it shows in his character that he loves to be with her. Despite all this,
Jobs had managed to uplift and give Apple Computers renowned recognition and success. On the other
hand, I kept seeing Bill Gates as a nerdy guy who is nuts about computers and stuffs. He also possesses
this negative attitude of trying to put everyone down in the business even though Microsoft at first was
an underdog. He was a nobody and even ignored by Steve Jobs in an expo. He is shown as driven,
intelligent, an opportunist, he wants to be on first.

Moreover, both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are the pirates in this movie. This is the reason why this is
entitled “Pirates of the Silicon Valley”. Silicon Valley is a place in California where computer
development at that time surged.

The film is not just about the pirates but also it includes the values to be learned by the people who will
in the future be doing businesses. Cooperation and good attitude is the key in dealing with different
kinds of people and personalities inside and outside an organization. One cannot achieve success alone.
We need companions along. Also, I just realized something. I’m always wondering why these days’
operating systems and software are all similar in functions and looks. You can see that there was just a
little difference in its added functionalities. I never thought it starts with the pirate thing :)
The movie The Pirates of Silicon Valley is simply a great movie. But at first I thought the
movie is all about how Apple and Microsoft born and rise. Most of the movie is all about
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates steal ideas from Apple Inc. And then after I finished watching the
movie, I then realized why it is titled "The Pirates of Silicon Valley". But I don't think Bill
Gates actually stole the Operating System. He only stole the idea on how it works. But the
story of the movie is all about how the two of the biggest computer company in the world
compete.

As the movie started, It's all about the late Apple Inc CEO Steve Jobs. But before I watch
this movie I know a lot of info about Steve Jobs. That he has an Anger Management, an
attitude that you'll never want. And the precise term is, he is not a good co-employee. That's
why I am not surprised why he is fired on Apple at that time. Although I already know the
story behind that. After he fired, he then created the Pixar Studios which is the competitor of
Walt Disney. Steve Jobs is the man that has only one side decision. It is always his
decision. And I think that's the reason behind Apple's success before he died. But is it really
worth it? He lost his best friend Steve Wozniak on the business because of his bad attitude
or behavior, the behavior exactly I saw in the movie. But he really a charismatic person. He
got the attention of many people because on what he did and invented. A great he really is,
but lack of responsibility to other things. He do have a family, but never took the
responsibility of being a father. That's a one big issue to him. But others don't mind that. All
they want is what Steve Jobs do to them. Steve Jobs did a lot of wrong things in Apple
before he's been fired. Success maybe on him at that time but the real meaning of being a
CEO is not at him.

The second man of the Silicon Valley is non other than Bill Gates. I great businessman with
no other goal but to compete on other companies and win that competition. We saw Bill
Gates in the story to be a typical businessman. But not only a businessman, I successful
businessman. Actually, I like the attitude of Bill Gates in comes of work. But the only thing
you will hate on him is his greediness. He made an offer to IBM with no assurance on his
hand. And he take his own risk in making a deal on Steve Jobs that he will work for Apple
Inc as a developer. You will see Bill Gates in the movie to be a person with no other things
on his mind but to compete on Apply and win the competition. This is the Bill Gates I know.
The person that faced many cases because of his business. But I know Gates is a good
man. He is just obsess on matching what Apple does have at that time. But overall in the
movie, Bill Gates is a fine man.

As I react on the movie, this is what came into my mind and what I conclude. That it is not
enough to be a genius on your field. You should make a bad thing to achieve success. As
the two gentlemen act after they become the man of their own company, issues came up
and a lot of things happened between them. But the principal of all they have right now is
their diligence in their work. They will not achieve what they have right now without working
it hard.
My Reflection of The Pirates of the Silicon Valley

Last July 13, 2014, we watched a movie entitled, “Pirates of the Silicon Valley “, When I watched
the movie , I was reminded that the most important thing that you can start a business is money.

The principal that you don’t need a lot of money is self-explanatory, but many people don’t believe this
to be true. The concept is that if you have a good idea, the first hurdle to overcome is just to take action.
This gets the idea to take a tangible form, to actually start the business. Money can be found from a
variety of sources including family or a willing bank.
The principal that you don’t need a lot of money to start a business is demonstrated in the movie when
Steve Wozniak built the first Apple computer out of old computer parts and wood. It cost him a little
money at first, but it wasn’t cost prohibitive. As a college student he didn’t have a lot of extra cash to
spare. Although they would need to secure capital to expand and grow their business, they were able to
start building computers out of a garage.
In the movie, I was interested by the fact that Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs decided to start building
computers out of a garage. Instead of giving up or deciding that it couldn’t be done because they didn’t
have the money, they took action given the limited financial resources they had. It shows that if you
believe in something or truly are passionate about a business, you shouldn’t let the resources get in the
way. Later on their business attracted the attention of some pretty large investors who helped turn their
business into a large scale operation, but they didn’t start out that way.
No one ever said that you have to be nice in business. When Bill bought out the seattle Computer
Companies operating system, both sides agreed on the deal. Seattle Computers were too dumb to
capitalize so Bill did it for them. Just as Steve capitalized on Xerox being too dumb to capitalize on their
ideas. This is how the real world works and the old business people knew nothing about computers so it
is their own fault they let it slip through their hands. Ethics on other thinks was a littler different though.
Steve was a coward and couldn’t even acknowledge his own kid. He showed to be pretty yellow for sure.
And Bill was pretty deceitful in how he got his user interface capability but the computer business was
very cut throat and everyone was stealing from everyone so who is to say that he is any more guilty than
Steve. Either way they both acted like computer nerds do and showed they weren’t very “strong”
people. And this is my reaction in the movie the pirates of the silicon valley.

As what I have observed in the movie, I slowly realized that I really hated Steve Jobs for his
manner and temperament. But he is a sort of a guy that shows an idea that can be great if you will start
to work and create. He is a great example that even a person didn’t graduate college or didn’t have a
degree can be wealthy, instigate others, and have a mark in the history of mankind. He is truly a
technoprenuer, I saw in some sites in the internet telling that he was the father of technoprenuership
and I believe in that. I did say no for his outcome because I don’t want the kind of failure he has gone
through. He has the best path of success to consider but his failure was not his business or his idea or
even his team but it was him. I will not imitate and show off bad influence, attitude, and approach that
he showed the people around him. This would therefore be against the principles of technopreneurship.
What Steve Jobs did to his employees is he managed them, which is wrong. As a good employer, we
should lead them, the employees, to better build a bond, build a team, and together become successful.
No one should leave anyone behind. We must always look back although we have gained all the goals
and success that we want in our lives, in short always put ourselves on the ground because everyone
starts there. We as being an technopreneur, we must possess the good character and relationships
between our employees in order for us not to be broken down and fail because of our bad relationship
towards our employees. But I will follow the positive characteristics and develop myself, the skills that
Steve Jobs have. I’m inspired of what Steve Jobs positive characteristics and Technopreneurial skills. But
as for now, I must study hard and give the best that I could in different subjects so that I will graduate in
this course and have a better degree than others.

If ever I would be given the chance to begin my own career I would really do my very best not to
meet the troubles and circumstances that Steve Jobs had back in his old days. I would never be
consumed by power but as an alternative it will try to stay my feet on the ground. I will really encourage
and move forward my employees to do their best in a way that is not abusive but instead being helpful
and being a religious person.

http://josephdeacon.blogspot.com/2012/07/technopreneurship-reflection-for-movie.html