Today, however everything has changed. Recently, in the congressional hearings the dying newspaper industry had several of the largest newspaper owners in the country complaining that they were being ripped off, that their content was being displayed on blogs, e-mail newsletters, and copied directly off their websites. In many cases, these so-called electronic copyright infringement violations were completely legal, as only 200 words or less were copied and the newspaper was cited.

Unfortunately, in many Internet forums the posters to discussions, often using only screen names, will copy and paste the entire article into the discussion group. And do this without even citing where it was from, and rather than putting up a link that people could click on to go to the newspaper’s website. The newspapers during the Congressional hearings were considered by many to be “grabbing at straws,” looking for help from Congress to crack down on online media (something they themselves are now trying to break into), and using copyright law as their reason.

Of course, luckily the Internet media was there also during these Congressional Hearings and made their case. It appeared that the legislators did not side with the newspapers. Although many newspapers are having their content lifted, almost in real time, not the next day; and the newspapers admit there is nothing they can do about it, as they cannot chase every single blogger around the Internet. Please consider these issues in copyright law, as they are very much part of our modern information age.

Lance Winslow is a retired franchisor – Lance Winslow’s Bio. Lance Winslow is formerly the CEO of WashGuys family of franchises which Lance; http://www.windowwashguys.com/links.shtml/.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Lance_Winslow

Author: Lance Winslow

Technorati Tags: copyright lawyers

Technorati Tags: copyright lawyers

Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of material that is covered by US copyright law, in a way which violates one of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works. A copyright holders exclusive rights include the right to: reproduce the copyrighted work; prepare derivative works based upon the work; distribute copies of the work to the public; perform the copyrighted work publicly; and display the copyrighted work publicly.

In order to prove a copyright violation of these exclusive rights under U.S. law, a copyright holder copyright holder must show that he/she is the “owner” of an original work and a prima facie case for infringement. Ownership of a copyright is established by showing “authorship” of an original work fixed in a tangible medium – articles, books, pictures, movies, musical recordings, etc. The person who created the original work is the copyright holder. A copyright holder may ‘assign’ the copyright to a third person, who then has all the exclusive rights of the original author, including reproduction, performance or the making of derivative works. The issue of who actually owns a copyright is one of the most overlooked and oversimplified issues. Some employers assume they own copyrights to their employees work. Employees and independent contractors sometimes incorrectly assume that they own work prepared for third parties. Ownership issues need to be identified and clarified early. Simply claiming ownership or an original work and registering the copyright may leave your copyright registration open to attack at a later date when rights are being asserted.

US Copyright laws help define the basics of copyrights. Section 17 U.S.C. § 102(a) provides: “Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.” An idea is not copyrightable , although it might be patentable. Expression of an idea in a fixed tangible form (i.e., in written pages of a book, on a CD, on a web page, on canvas, as a printed photograph) affords the possibility of copyright protection. While these principles sound complicated, an experienced copyright lawyer can help you understand whether you can copyright protect your original work and receive the protection which copyright law affords.

Infringement occurs when a third person copies the copyright protected work. Unauthorized copying is proved with direct evidence (sometimes copying is obvious or admitted) or inference (not surprisingly, infringers often deny copying). Circumstantial evidence of copying is often important to show infringement.

Registration of a your original work with the US Copyright office is not required for you to have common law rights. However, registration is often critical for enforcement and must occur before filing an infringement suit in Federal Court. Our copyright lawyers often receive calls from authors of original work who failed to register their works before learning of infringement. This can be a critical mistake making enforcement challenging or impossible.

Copyright claims are on the upswing as the internet makes ‘copying’ as easy as the click of a mouse. Original works are harder than ever to protect. Luckily, innovations in technology makes tracking infringement almost as easy as unauthorized copying. But you aren’t protected if you are not monitoring. Owners of original works need to understand how to register their works, as well as how to track on-line infringement in order to maintain their value as the author.

Enrico Schaefer is a copyright lawyer, specializing in intellectual property matters and on-line protection. Go to his web site to learn more about US copyright law or contact a copyright infringement lawyer directly for a free consultation, as well as the particular problems presented by on-line infringement.

Author: Enrico Schaefer

Jack of Kent: Copyright Infringement Is NOT Theft

I do not support copyright infringement any more that I support negligent driving; but just because it is a wrong, it doesn’t mean you can pretend it is also a criminal offence.

IPBiz: “Course Hero” and copyright infringement

IPBiz notes that, to sue someone over copyright infringement, the work of authorship must be registered. As to the universiites, the contract between university and professor would spell out

Ralph Lauren, Photoshop Disaster, Copyright Infringement and Fair …

Copyright Infringement and Fair Use: “Copyright law doesn’t give you the right to threaten your critics for pointing out the problems with your offerings. You should know better.”

Technorati Tags: copyright infringement, copyright infringement law

SMALL LAW FIRM VS. LARGE LAW FIRM: The size of the law firm has absolutely nothing to do with how well that office will represent you and/or handle your case. A large law firm (10 or more names on their letterhead) will not impress an insurance adjuster into giving you a better settlement. On the contrary, adjuster’s who’ve been around, know that huge law offices have multi-million dollar clients with mind-boggling legal problems. Because of this those types of law firms often do not put the time (nor concern) into a several thousand dollar personal injury case that a small office would. The bottom line? You’ll receive more and better attention from a small law office. Many of the best personal injury lawyers operate within the confines of a law firm with only two, three or, at the very most, four associates.

BEWARE OF LAWYERS WHO REPRESENT “DEFENDANTS”:The practice of law has become incredibly specialized. Find a lawyer who has experience representing claimant’s(called “Plaintiffs” in legalese) in personal injury cases.(You’re a “Plaintiff”). Be careful not to be represented by someone who is primarily an attorney for “Defendants’. These lawyers way of thinking are usually too closely tied to the values, attitudes and mental outlook of their cold and calculating insurance company clients.More often than not they’ll not extend themselves nor battle as hard – - consciously or unconsciously – - to obtain top dollar for your claim.(To you four or five hundred dollars more is a lot of money.To them it’s a drop in the bucket)!

COMPARISON SHOP: Talk to friends, acquaintances and/or co-workers who may have been represented by a lawyer on their own personal injury claim. Personal Injury lawyers normally don’t charge for an initial consultation.But, before you meet with them, find out if they do.If the answer to that is “yes”, go somewhere else.

While chatting with the lawyer, getting to know him and (generally speaking) what your case is all about, you should find out:

(1) How long have they been in practice?(10 years – plus – that’s good. 6 to 8 years is just okay. 3 to 4 years is highly questionable. 2 years or less is totally unacceptable).

(2) Roughly what percentage of his practice involves personal injury cases? If it’s less than 75% say “goodbye”.

(3) Does he often represent corporations and/or insurance companies? If he does than forge it, excuse yourself and take a walk.He’s not a Plaintiff’s attorney (you’re a “Plaintiff”) he’s a Defendant’s attorney (the insurance company is a “Defendant”). He’s not for you!

PAYING THE LAWYER – THE WRITTEN FEE AGREEMENT”: After you’ve discussed the fact’s of your case you may be able to get some sense from the attorney how much he thinks your case is worth, and how difficult it may be to get the insurance company to pay that amount.(He probably won’t commit himself. He’ll do a song and dance that would put Madonna to shame). Once you’ve grappled with that ask him exactly how much he’s going to charge you for handling your case?

If you’re at fault for the accident and it’s only your damaged ego that demands legal action he’s going to charge you for every move he makes – - and there can be a ton of them – - at hundreds of dollars an hour.If you have a case in which the other driver is clearly at fault (and your damages are substantial) his heart will be pounding with glee and he’ll be salivating furiously to have you hire him. In that instance he’ll be quite willing to waive all potential charges.

Usually, in the majority of cases, it should be a straight “Contingency Fee” with no costs assessed to you. Once your financial deal has been agreed upon ask him to put that into writing, in his “Written Fee Agreement”.(If he balks at a Written Fee Agreement you should begin to hum that old tune “I’ll See Ya’ Later Alligator”, get up, thank him for his time, and exit that office)

Copyright (c) 2003 by Daniel G. Baldyga. All rights Reserved

DISCLAIMER: The only purpose of this insurance claim tip FINDING THE RIGHT LAWYER is to help people understand the motor vehicle accident claim process. Neither Dan Baldyg nor ARTICLE CITY make any guarantee of any kind whatsoever; NOR do they purport to engage in rendering any professional or legal service; NOR to substitute for a lawyer, an insurance adjuster, or claims consultant or the like. Where such professional help is desired it is the INDIVIDUAL’S RESPONSIBILITY to obtain said services.

Dan Baldyga’s third and latest book AUTO ACCIDENT PERSONAL INJURY INSURANCE CLAIM (How To Evaluate And Settle Your Loss)can be found on the internet at http://www.autoaccidentclaims.com. This book reveals “How To” successfully handle your motor vehicle accident claim, so you won’t be taken advantage of. It also goes into detail regarding the revolutionary BASE (The Baldyga Auto Accident Settlement Evalation Formula). BASE explains how to determine the value of the “Pain and Suffering” you endured – - because of your personal injury.

Copyright (c) By Daniel G. Baldyga. All Rights Reserved.

by: Dan Baldyga

About The Author

For over 30 years Dan Baldyga was a claims adjuster, supervisor, manager and also a trial assisstant. He is now retired and spends his time attempting to assist those involved in motor vehicle accident claims so they will not be taken advantage of.

How to find the right lawyer

Sometimes finding the right lawyer for your legal matters can be an arduous task. Most people take the right way out – by simply selecting the first lawyer that appears to be ‘nice’

How Do I Find A Good Lawyer And Avoid A Bad One | Free Lawyers

How Do You Find The Right Lawyer? Finding the right lawyer is a difficult and tedious job…. How to Find The Right Lawyer For You – Do Your Research Generally people don’t look for a lawyer

Need a Lawyer? Four Tips to Finding the Right Lawyer | Free Lawyers

Although none of us ever hopes to be in the position of having to find a lawyer, life circumstances are such that all of us will probably need a lawyer at some.

Technorati Tags: finding the right attorney, finding the right lawyer

While everything you write down is automatically protected by copyright treaties that countries like the U.S. have signed, there’s a reason why the same does not apply to words you speak. Otherwise, this would be the result.

Children at school would face this dilemma:

“You hit me harder than I hit you,” one child would say.

“No, you hit me harder than I hit you,” the other would reply.

“You can’t say that,” the first child would say. “I already have that phrase copyrighted. You just infringed my copyright. You owe me big time.”

“You just infringed my copyright on ‘You owe me big time,’ the second child might respond. “Now you’re in big trouble.”

“But you just infringed my copyrighted phrase, “Now you’re in big trouble,” the first child might respond. I said that in second grade. “Just how many times have you said my phrase?”

At this point, the second child would be wise not to say anything further before talking to an attorney.

A whole law firm of lawyers would probably have to be called in, the school might be named as a defendant for not warning the school children not to infringe other children’s copyrighted phrases, and its very possible that parent’s fortunes could be at risk if their children were not insured against copyright infringements.

In bars and nightclubs the results could be even more disastrous.

“What’s a nice girl like you doing in a place like this?” a man might ask a woman.

At which point the woman would probably start calling an attorney on her cell phone who would notify the man of how much he would need to pay for using that line.

If the man followed up his initial approach with, “You look familiar. Haven’t I seen you before?” the damages he would have to pay to settle the copyright infringement case wo 1000 uld be double.

Even lawyers would not be immune to such results.

Every time a lawyer stood up in court and uttered the usual “Objection,” damages would have to be paid to someone.

The jury member who announced to the court at the conclusion of a case, “Not guilty, your honor,” would also have to fork out some money.

And while the words you write down may be copyrighted, individual words and common phrases are not owned to the exclusion of everyone else.

What is protected by copyright are literary works, i.e. books, music, plays, even advertising. A slogan that is used in advertising may also be a trademark or can be protected by obtaining a trademark.

If you would like more information about copyrights or trademarks, we invite you to visit our website.

By: R. Sebastian Gibson

La Quinta, Garden Grove and Corona Del Mar California Copyright …

If you have a copyright or intellectual property matter in Orange County, San Diego, in the Inland Empire, Palm Springs or anywhere in Southern California

California Copyright Lawyers – What You Can Copyright And What You …

California Copyright Lawyers – What You Can Copyright And What You Can’t No matter where you live in Southern California, from San Diego to Orange.

Technorati Tags: california copyright lawyers, Copyright Lawyer California

Music has provided some interesting lessons. Some musicians and the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) have aggressively pursued end-users who download copyright protected music in ways few anticipated. It used to be believed that it was simply impossible to try and stem the tide of illegal music downloads. Why try? But some in the music industry took up the challenge and devoted tremendous financial resources to pursue music copyright infringers.

Others in the music industry saw the Internet as an opportunity. They encouraged the free downloading and sharing of their songs, essentially providing a limited (not for resale) license to virtually anyone that wanted to download their MP3 onto their iPod, cell phone or computer. As a result, they were able to achieve distribution levels that took them from obscurity to relative fame. These music copyright holders often saw their CD sales skyrocket to unprecedented levels. Moreover, many made multiples of what they would have otherwise made at lucrative concerts which brought attendance levels that could never have been achieved without encouraging viral MP3 downloads.

As a copyright lawyer watching the market from within and representing musicians at both ends of the spectrum, I would make these observations. Every musician needs to decide for themselves which approach works best for them, but they should do so based on information. Too often, music copyright issues are addressed without properly analyzing the opportunity. Money and resources are devoted to pursuing protection against just about everyone, without considering all the options.

The real scofflaws for many musicians will be those who are trying to profit off of their works on the Internet, not those fans who are downloading for free. By drafting their copyright notice in a way which precludes monetization of the copyrighted works, they are put in a position where they can go after those who are illegally profiting from their copyrighted works from their copyrighted music, while leaving their fans free to download, share and promote their music as part of the social networking phenomena on the web.

Enrico Schaefer is a copyright lawyer, specializing in intellectual property matters and on-line protection. Go to his website to learn more about copyright law or to contact a copyright infringement lawyer directly for a free consultation.

Author: Enrico Schaefer

Universal Music Prevents Popular Play From Showing In Stockholm …

As the major record labels and their lawyers and lobbyists run around the globe demonizing anyone for any sort of copyright infringement, we keep hearing stories of how they falsely claim rights over

unfit blog – Music Copyright Myths and Royalty Free Music

Unlawful use of even a short excerpt from a song is enough to land you in a copyright infringement case. Don’t believe anyone who tells you otherwise, unless he is a copyright attorney! Remember

2009, the Year in Music Copyright Litigation – Bizmology: Business …

2009, the Year in Music Copyright Litigation Bizmology: Business Insight and Opinions from Hoover’s Editors In 1997, the Rolling Stones were forced to share songwriting credits with kd lang

Technorati Tags: music copyright lawyer, music copyright lawyers

Some mistakes website owners make is when they buy articles online; many times a buyer assumes they have full copyright. This isn’t always the case, depending on the agreement of ownership. To make sure you don’t fall into this trap, you should have a lawyer create a contract before you hand over any money; this way you know for sure if you have full ownership or if the writer does. You have three different categories you may purchase an article: usage, full, and unique. A copyright lawyer will explain exactly what each one means. Usage means the buyer gets to use the article one time, but the writer can use it again or resell it. Full rights will give the buyer all rights; they can even place their name on the article, saying they wrote it.

A copyright lawyer will never tell you that you don’t have to register your copyright; in fact they will encourage you to do it. Sure, they get money to do it for you, but you will have documented proof of your copyright ownership. If you don’t file it, you can’t sue if someone uses your information. (To learn more about copyrighting your work, download my free ebook, “Copyright Basics,” at http://www.ResearchCopyright.com).

A copyright lawyer is not cheap. Most copyright lawyers will have special discounts on packages, which mean you can get a lot more than what you originally walked in for. Usually your lawyer will even advise you of things you didn’t even have knowledge about.

A copyright lawyer can help you better understand the laws of the virtual world, as well as the real world. Every day someone new is getting sued over content on the Internet. It can be as simple as someone stealing an article, quote, song or a picture. A big issue is using another company’s name in your tags to get the search engines to rank you higher. Other issues may be with bloggers today. Be careful with what you say about your places of business; not only could you get in trouble for any copyrighting issues but slander is another big issue.

Many people only look for a copyright lawyer when they want to copyright something or sue someone, but they normally don’t think about hiring a copyright lawyer when they are being sued. This is definitely the person you want on the job defending you if the time comes. Before you hire a copyright lawyer, if you have any other questions call them up and ask them. Lawyers love to give advice, especially if they think you’ll be hiring them.

Copyright Lawyers in the U.S.

A US copyright lawyer can help anyone in the United States, as they know U.S. copyright laws and the best ways to fight them. A US Copyright Lawyer protects you. A US copyright lawyer files a copyright, advises you and helps you get back what was once yours, and sue someone. If you are an American or someone currently living in the United States, you will be able to hire a US copyright lawyer; however, if you reside out of the States, you may have restrictions.

In the Internet world copyright issues are becoming a big thing and having a US Copyright lawyer behind you can help if you need to fight against someone stealing your work. Copyright lawyers must stay current in recent rulings dealing with copyright issues, which mean they know their job. Don’t just stick with a lawyer you already had because you’ve used them before. They may have been great at your car accident or your divorce, but for copyright issues, you need a lawyer who deals with copyright laws. A US copyright attorney can also help you to retrieve money, even if you never filed the copyright until after it was stolen or online. This can get a bit tricky to prove, however if you have a good lawyer, this shouldn’t be a problem.

A US copyright lawyer can help you copyright your work; it costs $20 to file a paper to get the copyright on your work. This does not mean there is a one time fee of $20 and all your work is safe. Y must do this with all your work. You are paying per piece. In the future if you need to sue someone for using your content, the violators can end up paying $35,000. A US copyright lawyer can help you with this if you live in the United States.

Your US copyright lawyer may have dealt with people stealing content, or maybe celebrity pictures. Recently a big name celebrity had her pictures leaked on the Internet. She sued the people who were spreading them, and it suddenly stopped. All those websites that had the pictures on them were asked politely to take them down since they were copyrighted. That’s what a good US copyright lawyer will do; he/she will be able to prove their case because they know the law. They will have to show proof of when something was taken, said, or documented. In the case of pictures, she was able to show she had the proofs and she had no agreement for anyone to use them.

Copyright laws have been changing since 1976; however, copyright laws change as our technology advances. Lawyers and judges know our needs and are learning every day how to protect them and in order to do that laws are passed and the copyright laws are updated. Granted laws may be different in other countries but the chances are if it happens on US soil, the best representative would be a US copyright lawyer because they have been studying ever since law school.

by Richard Cunningham

Copyright Law Blog: Exclusive Rights

A copyright law blog covering litigation, policy and academia.

Copyright Lawyer: Newspaper Biz Wrong To Charge Non-Profits For …

He argues in a report (pdf) that the new NLA licence—which in January is extended to cover the online distribution of news articles—is incompatible with copyright law because non-commercial sharin …

Copyright Law Update: Getty Images case – part 2 | Strickland …

In our post of yesterday, we reported on a copyright infringement case brought by Getty Images that has provoked debate from those who question whether Getty.

Technorati Tags: copyright lawyer, copyright lawyers

I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume I’m not alone. The Internet is a vast cauldron of video-sharing, link-sharing, knowledge-sharing, and yes, image-sharing. The spirit of the Internet seems to be that of a free culture. We are less concerned with property rights in cyberspace, and more concerned with community and conversation.

I’m writing this essay because I want to know what are the claims to ownership on the Internet. Nobody seems to know the answer to this question. There is no absolute law we can refer to. And if there is an absolute law, then the spirit of the Net seems to challenge that rule, provoke the law, even mock its upholders. But there are also some of us who place a high value on the individual and therefore demand the individual know her work is being shared; we must ask her approval.

If getting an artist’s approval to post her image on my site is necessary and universal, then I should probably go back and obtain a plethora of approvals. Surely some will not be granted and then I must find another approval and another. Does it seem to you that this is the way things work on the Net? Or do people merely take what they like (like myself) and showcase it. Keep in mind in no way am I trying to pass off these images as my own. In fact, I credit the artists here. But I do not go so far as to ask each and every one of them if I can post their pictures. Many are in fact dead.

The Internet poses this contradiction. We recognize that file-sharing is rampant and that the wheels and cogs of the Web involve a dissemination of information; and yet we also feel the twinge of our old system of rights, copy rights, property rights, etc. To what extent is cyberspace a common space? And to what extent is it privatized? At what point should one say, “No, that’s not yours; that’s mine. I know I put it out there for all of you to see, but I only wanted it to appear on my site and not anyone else’s.”

Luckily nobody has ever said this to me. And if they wanted their image taken down, I would immediately do so. But I do not feel the need–in this wave of free-culture dissemination–to ask each artist for the approval to use their image.

I was provoked into writing this essay because of a post on a favorite blog of mine. The article, entitled “How to use Hyperlinks in Blog Fiction” didn’t specifically address copyright, but the nebulous area of Internet copyright turned up in the comments.

Bekah, a blog fiction writer, wrote:

“Yes, linking to things should be fine, although not if you pretend it’s your own work. But otherwise, of course that works. But putting non-stock images in blogs– definitely a copyright infringement, even if you give credit. It is true that a lot of illegal activity occurs on the web, but it’s also true that many lawsuits have followed. This isn’t likely in any case, but I don’t want to get near that.”

I don’t know much about the “many lawsuits” of Internet copyright law. What I’m more familiar with is the excess of abuses of copyright law. Especially surrounding file sharing. In the music industry in particular, copyright law is bending toward the file-sharers’ favor. Apple has removed the copyright protection on its mp3s and the music industry has publicly declared that it will no longer sue individual file-sharers.

Bekah continues:

“That being said, I don’t think it’ll ever be okay to post someone else’s picture on your blog without permission, but I don’t think that anyone is suggesting that you can or should do that.”

Now, artists who do not want their images shared take precautions. Some photos on Flickr for example will not copy to your hard drive because the artist has formerly set restrictions on them. In this case, it is impossible for me to copy them and the issue is moot. But what about in the cases where I can copy people’s pictures. Is it wrong?

Another blogger, who runs an art blog called Vince’s Ear, writes:

“Well, Chris that’s an interesting question because copyrights and copyright law can be interpreted in a number of different ways, including in the courts. The main thing for me to know is something called “Fair Use.” I won’t be able to sell a copyrighted image in any certain form, but I can perfectly legally display the image on my site for educational purposes.”

He goes on to say:

“Sorry for such a long response but I’d mainly say if a blogger is just putting images on a site, there is no need to worry at all, it’s Fair Use. If you were to print and sell the Novel of Life, make sure any illustrations are in the Public Domain, or you have permission if they’re not.”

I consider my writing educational and therefore the “Fair Use” clause may apply to me. The educational purpose behind this essay (and its adjoining image) is to make people think. But I must be honest here. I pick the images for aesthetic reasons mainly. This reflects a deeper attitude I have about the Internet, art, and information.

I suggest we are entering a new model of human relations, one based on the macro level of exchange, not the micro level. The individual will benefit from this system just as she benefited from the old system; she may even benefit more. When information/art/work is shared by the media, libraries, universities, publications, and organizations more fluidly and freely, there is less emphasis on individual compensation and more on communal benefit. Pictures, photographs, and images are floating around everywhere. If you wanted to track down every “thief” who re-posted an image on the Internet, you would be swimming against the current not with it. The current is in favor of shared knowledge and shared art.

It will take us some time to re-imagine ourselves with fewer boundaries. Because that’s what this all points to. The boundaries are dissolving all around us, geographical, political, cultural, racial, economic. The mutual exchange of ideas, images and texts will benefit us all, as it already has. We will only see this when we see it as giving work/information/art to each other, rather than taking it.

I am an artist myself. I write novels. But I’ve chosen not to pursue the path of traditional publishing (A) because it is crumbling and (B) because I feel I am part of a different economic model. I’d rather give my content away for free. What is a publisher but a protector, someone to handle my money? I don’t need a publisher. What I need is an audience. When I find an audience, I will get paid by myself.

The tectonic plates are shifting. We will soon come to realize that the proliferation of an artist’s work is worthwhile to everyone, artist, community and God. (I don’t believe in God but I think He will benefit too.) So called “property rights” in an online world is a chimera.

Silvio Gaggi’s scholarly work elucidates these truths. In From Text to Hypertext , the distinction between print and online worlds is made evident:

“Walter J. Ong argues that ‘print creates a new sense of the private ownership of words’ and that a ‘resentment at plagiarism’ develops with writing. Hypertext, in contrast, reinforces a sense of learning more as a communal than an individual endeavor. It creates situations in which individual contributions are likely to get lost within the conversation as a whole, and it creates new kinds of communities emancipated from physical, geographical, or political boundaries.”

This book written in 1997 presages much of what is going on today. The author uses the term “hypertext” to describe the textual networks of the Internet. While that word sounds outdated, the gist of it has relevance. Hypertext is shared text, linked text, common text. Blogging is a form of hypertext. From their niches blogs are woven into the greater body of the Net. Blogging is also a conversation. Search engines determine the relevance and popularity of a site based on its links. Complex algorithms pick up on strong and weak links and thereby rank the page. This essentially means that the search engine, that great, sacred filter of online knowledge, values conversation and exchange over private ownership. In essence, what is shared is of higher value than what is not.

Silvio talks about the two mindsets behind the print and online world:

“Individuals accustomed to an ethical system based on the book regard any infringement on their authorial rights or any use of a published text, without appropriate permission, as a moral and legal wrong . . . In contrast, individuals who have become accustomed to hypertextual exchange tend to regard any impediment to free exchange as a serious wrong. The free development and dissemination of knowledge is more important than always giving precise credit where credit is due.”

And here:

“Richard A. Lanham says that ‘electronic information seems to resist ownership’, and and Landow argues that ‘from the point of view of the author of hypertext, for whom collaboration and sharing are of the essence of ‘writing,’ restrictions on the availability of the text, like prohibitions against copying or linking, appear absurd, indeed immoral, constraints”.

So where do we stand on Internet Copyright Law? Should I feel guilty for posting the image above this article? I’m looking for answers.

Author: Chris Al-Aswad

Copyright Law and Society | Red Patent

Without copyright laws the publishing industry would come to a screeching halt. Already the music industry is caught in a bind over internet distribution. Yet there are some simple solutions to this p …

Copyright Law and Society | Red Patent

While Congress is spending millions studying the Drug War, Health Care, the Deficit and a myriad of other issues, the impact of an obsolete copyright law is far greater on society. On the corporate le …

Technorati Tags: internet copyright law, internet copyright laws