P2P vs DMCA
by Alexandra Dill
Peer-to-peer technology faces challenges in our media economy today through it's struggle with file sharing and copyright infringement. People from all over the world are posting copyrighted music files on the Internet and sharing these files with other persons. According to Slyck News (http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=763) the number of members on file sharing websites is increasing at alarming rates each year. With this number of people, the more difficult it becomes to track down and prosecute those involved in this illegal activity.
The Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) is attempting to regulate file sharing by monitoring the programs that file sharers download onto their computers unknowingly when they download a song using one of the major file sharing programs. They are also enlisting the help of new businesses that track ISP addresses that appear to be sharing files
If P2P technology is substructure and DMCA is superstructure, their relationship is dialectic but also a type of "cat and mouse" game. While the evolution of P2P networks has forced the arrival of the DMCA and other copyright protection actions, the DMCA works to seek out potential violators and keep (in the case of music sharing) the music industry a money-making industry. At the same time, neither really has an upper hand on the other. Both are updating their ways of hiding from or finding each other and while right now it may seem DMCA has taken the lead, P2P networks are sure to create another innovative way of evading their watchful gaze.
The three laws of dialectics play out in the relationship between P2P technology and DCMA in that to begin with, now it is not near as important how many P2P networks are out there but rather their ability to avoid DMCA conflict, the same goes for the DMCA. Secondly, while these two are 'enemies', it is because of each other that they keep flourishing. Neither one is going to give up any time soon because the other is gaining more strength. Finally, P2P can act as the thesis, the proposition as to how to share files covertly, and the DMCA can act as the antithesis, the action taken to track and punish violators. At the same time, both of these create a synthesis in that one simply would not exist, at least not in so many numbers, without the other.
The DMCA and Texas A&M's mutual relationship I find to be fair. What file sharers are doing is illegal and it is merely the DMCA's job to manage this problem in order to protect the ones whose files are being shared. At the same time, the article does state that many times people don't know they are violating these laws and there can be harsh punishment for minor, innocent violations that I do not agree with. I also believe that people may be deterred from file sharing if warned of the covert actions taking place on your computer BEFORE the download even takes place.
The DMCA protects the interests of those who's files are being shared when they are copyrighted. This includes game creators, artists in the music industry, and programmers among others. The DMCA attempts to protect these individuals by establishing tougher copyright infringement laws and tracking potential violators of the Act with smarter technology. While it does appear that the DMCA protects the larger names in copyright laws, such as big name musicians and companies, it could also attempt to look after the 'little man' companies and people whose copyrights are also being abused by violators.
If I were the policy-maker for this technology, I would encourage a more innovative and informative way to let violators know that they are in fact being monitored and also list the possible retribution if a violation should occur. I would also look after the smaller companies and single people by extending copyright protection to them as well. While I'd understand that a tough hand should take place in the monitoring of this behavior, I would instill a 2 strike policy that would let offenders be warned the first time they are caught and then if a second offense should occur take strict legal action. Many of today's file sharers don't seem to realize how harsh of an offense they are committing and I think by showing them how easily they can be discovered and the potential punishment for such acts, the number of file sharers may start to decrease over time.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Technology and Political Economy Lab Exercise
1. Peer-to-peer technology makes illegal file sharing easy. Also, such software allows people to access items that would normally be expensive to buy without cost. The widespread use of P2P technology makes prosecuting all who engage in such piracy very difficult.
2. To regulate the use of illegal file sharing, "The RIAA has also stated that it "chose who to sue by using software that scans users' publicly available P2P directories and then identified the ISP [Internet service provider] of each user.""
3. The DMCA must regulate P2P technology before the P2P technology gets out of hand and becomes a problem too difficult to control. I see P2P technology as subordinate to the DMCA and think that it mustfollow the legal guidlines of the DMCA.
4. The transformation from quantity to quality concerning file sharing is a law played out by the DMCA who pushes the move towards quality. The unity of opposites law comes from the opposite goals of the DMCA and P2P technology, each are working to achieve different things. And thesis-antithesis-synthesis comes from the DMCA wishing to stop illegal file sharing and copyright infringement and the the P2P survives from such file sharing so it is considered the antithesis, but the prosecution of the illegal file sharers and the regulations that the DMCA are trying to enforce represent the synthesis in this case.
5. I agree with the regulations set by TAMU and the DMCA. Illegal file sharing should not take place on campus. TAMU will lose money if they are sued for infringing copyright laws. If Texas A&M begins to lose a significant amount of money, the loss will rbe reflected in the rising cost of tuition and fees students pay each semester.
6. The DMCA reflects the interest and protects artists and designers of games and software because it works to keep their ideas/creations from being exported and abused. Such artists must make a living and it is unfair and unethical for their work to be ripped off. I dont think that the DMCA is disregarding the interests of others, they are simply setting down rules that stop the unethical practice of illegal file sharing.
7. I realize that it is difficult to regulate peer-to-peer technology, but I woud prosecute and find people who drastically violate the laws by file sharing in huge amounts. I would prosecute on a basis of worst offenders first and go down the line. Also, I would work to shutdon the major outlets which help make file shareing possible such as Kazaa and Limewire.
-Kallie Gallagher (10-2-07)
2. To regulate the use of illegal file sharing, "The RIAA has also stated that it "chose who to sue by using software that scans users' publicly available P2P directories and then identified the ISP [Internet service provider] of each user.""
3. The DMCA must regulate P2P technology before the P2P technology gets out of hand and becomes a problem too difficult to control. I see P2P technology as subordinate to the DMCA and think that it mustfollow the legal guidlines of the DMCA.
4. The transformation from quantity to quality concerning file sharing is a law played out by the DMCA who pushes the move towards quality. The unity of opposites law comes from the opposite goals of the DMCA and P2P technology, each are working to achieve different things. And thesis-antithesis-synthesis comes from the DMCA wishing to stop illegal file sharing and copyright infringement and the the P2P survives from such file sharing so it is considered the antithesis, but the prosecution of the illegal file sharers and the regulations that the DMCA are trying to enforce represent the synthesis in this case.
5. I agree with the regulations set by TAMU and the DMCA. Illegal file sharing should not take place on campus. TAMU will lose money if they are sued for infringing copyright laws. If Texas A&M begins to lose a significant amount of money, the loss will rbe reflected in the rising cost of tuition and fees students pay each semester.
6. The DMCA reflects the interest and protects artists and designers of games and software because it works to keep their ideas/creations from being exported and abused. Such artists must make a living and it is unfair and unethical for their work to be ripped off. I dont think that the DMCA is disregarding the interests of others, they are simply setting down rules that stop the unethical practice of illegal file sharing.
7. I realize that it is difficult to regulate peer-to-peer technology, but I woud prosecute and find people who drastically violate the laws by file sharing in huge amounts. I would prosecute on a basis of worst offenders first and go down the line. Also, I would work to shutdon the major outlets which help make file shareing possible such as Kazaa and Limewire.
-Kallie Gallagher (10-2-07)
Lab Section Exercise: Technology & Political Economy
- Peer to peer technology brings many challenges to copyright protection as in the convenience of the filing sharing, and the secret world of illegal public networking.
- Because most of these filing sharing programs lack permission from the copywriter/ owner, a law called the Digital Millennium Copyright act is enforced to punish those who use the filing sharing programs illegally.
- P2P technology as a substructure fits much like the economy does. The P2P technology determines the DMCA in that the act must be updated to keep up with these new advances in technology. The DMCA works has a superstructure in that ultimately influence the economy.
- The three laws of dialectics are played out in this conflict because the filing sharing programs are forced to look at quality in stead of quantity because they may get caught. Also, this issues has many opportunities for both sides to come together to agree on something. And lastly, The p2p and DMCA can, over time, keep going back and forth in their agreements as more and more discussions and offers arise.
- I feel that the TAMU campus regulations are appropriate mainly because this is a educational environment, and if we as student cant respect their computers, then I guess they are forced to regulate. I believe these regulations are fail to both (student) internet users and copyright holders.
- DMCA interests reflect and protect the rights of the Record Labels as well as the producers and artists/actors of the music or movies them self. The people's interest witch is over looked here could be addressed in a way to compromise the amount of filing sharing. Maybe only allowing 4 shares per day or something to that effect.
- If I were a policy maker- I would regulate a policy that has more effect on the prosperity of our country poverty wise. Not just a policy acting as a watchdog so to speak on illegal downloads.
DMCA
By reading the case study, everyone these days are pretty much aware of the p2p technology. The study involves different Acts that try to outlaw p2p sharing. I believe that this is a major issue that students need to be aware of.
1. One of the challenges that comes up is the fact that so many people do this. Companies and different music corporations are trying to stop this. The copyright protection is there, but people don't go by it. I honestly don't think that any time in the near future that this is going to stop.
2. The article discusses how the DCMA is out to get you, which they are, it's their job. The RIAA comes into play on this question. They are threatening users of p2p sharing that there will be punishments.
3. The p2p substructure is kind of like politics and the DCMA is like the economy. Both go with eachother but there are certain aspects that you have to look at. The p2p technology is taking over and the DCMA is trying to do everything they can to stop it. Just like politics. The economy doesn't want a poorly ran country so they try to stop the government taking control.
4. I think the 3 laws are played out in the relationship, but that doesn't mean they will be effective. Many illegal things have laws, but people don't follow. The DCMA does a good job of threatening people, but I don't think that means people will stop.
5. TAMU I believe has a pretty strict policy. They stress p2p sharing in newspapers and in magazines. Even on the internet they tell students that p2p is illegal and wrong. By doing this, I think that more students will be aware and stop.
6. DCMA I believe is more relevant to the music business. People that own companies and just work everyday jobs aren't going to be as affected by it as the music industry. Different singers/songwriters have stronger feelings towards this issue. This is their lifestyle and their job. When people don't support buying their music, they fail.
7. If I was a policy maker I would try to come up with a solution to stop all of the programs like Limewire and KaZaa. I just don't see how technological things are today why this hasn't been stopped. I guess there is pretty much a way around everything when it comes to computers but I don't know if this ever will stop. Policy makers are trying their hardest to communicate with the DCMA and make p2p no longer exist, but I don't know how long it will take.
Kasey Boykin
1. One of the challenges that comes up is the fact that so many people do this. Companies and different music corporations are trying to stop this. The copyright protection is there, but people don't go by it. I honestly don't think that any time in the near future that this is going to stop.
2. The article discusses how the DCMA is out to get you, which they are, it's their job. The RIAA comes into play on this question. They are threatening users of p2p sharing that there will be punishments.
3. The p2p substructure is kind of like politics and the DCMA is like the economy. Both go with eachother but there are certain aspects that you have to look at. The p2p technology is taking over and the DCMA is trying to do everything they can to stop it. Just like politics. The economy doesn't want a poorly ran country so they try to stop the government taking control.
4. I think the 3 laws are played out in the relationship, but that doesn't mean they will be effective. Many illegal things have laws, but people don't follow. The DCMA does a good job of threatening people, but I don't think that means people will stop.
5. TAMU I believe has a pretty strict policy. They stress p2p sharing in newspapers and in magazines. Even on the internet they tell students that p2p is illegal and wrong. By doing this, I think that more students will be aware and stop.
6. DCMA I believe is more relevant to the music business. People that own companies and just work everyday jobs aren't going to be as affected by it as the music industry. Different singers/songwriters have stronger feelings towards this issue. This is their lifestyle and their job. When people don't support buying their music, they fail.
7. If I was a policy maker I would try to come up with a solution to stop all of the programs like Limewire and KaZaa. I just don't see how technological things are today why this hasn't been stopped. I guess there is pretty much a way around everything when it comes to computers but I don't know if this ever will stop. Policy makers are trying their hardest to communicate with the DCMA and make p2p no longer exist, but I don't know how long it will take.
Kasey Boykin
Vanchelsa Sandoval-DMCA
P2P networking can come off to users as a way to get around the DMCA rules. Since it is not a client-server network it is a way for both users to exchange all thier materials.
DMCA regulates trys to regulate this by encrypting the files to sound messed up when the user trys to play the downloaded material. They are scanning computer looking for file sharing programs which users might have on thier computer to share material.
I agree with Texas A&M trying to regulate the downloads because they could be sued for the actions taken by the students. But it does seems like an invasion of privacy to scan personal computers. I do see how it is necessary, if the computer contains illegal content then they are in violation.
DMCA is only trying to protect the copyright material for the people who own the content. If my job was a performer and people were stealing my material for nothing I would not be able to make any profits off my intellectual material.
I think the policy right now is suffiencent however, with the development of new file sharing programs one can not be too stiff. The scanning of the computers and the fining as punishment will let the user know that they have violated the DMCA.
DMCA regulates trys to regulate this by encrypting the files to sound messed up when the user trys to play the downloaded material. They are scanning computer looking for file sharing programs which users might have on thier computer to share material.
I agree with Texas A&M trying to regulate the downloads because they could be sued for the actions taken by the students. But it does seems like an invasion of privacy to scan personal computers. I do see how it is necessary, if the computer contains illegal content then they are in violation.
DMCA is only trying to protect the copyright material for the people who own the content. If my job was a performer and people were stealing my material for nothing I would not be able to make any profits off my intellectual material.
I think the policy right now is suffiencent however, with the development of new file sharing programs one can not be too stiff. The scanning of the computers and the fining as punishment will let the user know that they have violated the DMCA.
Lab Exercise_Technology & Political Economy
Lab Section Exercise: Technology & Political Economy
In mass lecture, we are talking about the theory of political economy. According to the theory, the relationship between economy and politics is dialectic. Economy (substructure) determines politics (superstructure), and politics influences economy. Technology fits into this relationship as a critical driver of a country’s economy. Therefore, technology development shapes formation of national ICT policy; while, the ICT policy regulates technology development.
Meanwhile, three general laws of dialectics are played out in the dynamics of political economy. They are 1) transformation from quantity to quality, 2) unity of opposites, and 3) thesis-antithesis-synthesis.
In this lab exercise, we are going to apply the theory of political economy to do a case study about DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and its application on TAMU campus. The case study is posted on http://itim.tamu.edu/filesharing.html.
In this case study, you need to explore the following questions:
v What challenges do P2P (peer-to-peer) technology bring to copyright protection on the Internet?
v How do DMCA regulate the use of P2P technology?
v Considering P2P technology as substructure and DMCA as superstructure, please explore their relationship.
v See if three laws of dialectics are played out in the relationship between P2P technology and DMCA. How?
v Make comments on DMCA and TAMU’s campus regulations. For example, do you agree or disagree with them? Are they fair to individual Internet users or copyright holders?
v Whose interests do DMCA reflect and protect? How could DMCA be made to represent and protect their interests? How about the other people’s interests, which are overlooked by DMCA?
v If you are a policy-maker, what kind of policy do you want to create to regulate P2P technology? Why?
You are encouraged to collect related information on the Internet to support your arguments. The total length should not exceed 500 words.
In mass lecture, we are talking about the theory of political economy. According to the theory, the relationship between economy and politics is dialectic. Economy (substructure) determines politics (superstructure), and politics influences economy. Technology fits into this relationship as a critical driver of a country’s economy. Therefore, technology development shapes formation of national ICT policy; while, the ICT policy regulates technology development.
Meanwhile, three general laws of dialectics are played out in the dynamics of political economy. They are 1) transformation from quantity to quality, 2) unity of opposites, and 3) thesis-antithesis-synthesis.
In this lab exercise, we are going to apply the theory of political economy to do a case study about DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) and its application on TAMU campus. The case study is posted on http://itim.tamu.edu/filesharing.html.
In this case study, you need to explore the following questions:
v What challenges do P2P (peer-to-peer) technology bring to copyright protection on the Internet?
v How do DMCA regulate the use of P2P technology?
v Considering P2P technology as substructure and DMCA as superstructure, please explore their relationship.
v See if three laws of dialectics are played out in the relationship between P2P technology and DMCA. How?
v Make comments on DMCA and TAMU’s campus regulations. For example, do you agree or disagree with them? Are they fair to individual Internet users or copyright holders?
v Whose interests do DMCA reflect and protect? How could DMCA be made to represent and protect their interests? How about the other people’s interests, which are overlooked by DMCA?
v If you are a policy-maker, what kind of policy do you want to create to regulate P2P technology? Why?
You are encouraged to collect related information on the Internet to support your arguments. The total length should not exceed 500 words.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Technology and the Political Economy
Here is what I am going to present on tomorrow:
Technology and the Political Economy
The Political Economy of International Communications
By: Robert McChesney and Dan Schiller
1. The changing balance of public and private control over the media and telecommunications in the global political economy.
2. Patterns of concentration and investment in the overall communication sector.
3. Possiblities for improving telecommunications in different parts of the world.
Kasey
Technology and the Political Economy
The Political Economy of International Communications
By: Robert McChesney and Dan Schiller
1. The changing balance of public and private control over the media and telecommunications in the global political economy.
2. Patterns of concentration and investment in the overall communication sector.
3. Possiblities for improving telecommunications in different parts of the world.
Kasey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)