Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age

Sharing: Culture and the Economy in the Internet Age
Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age book. Happy reading Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age Pocket Guide.

Contents:

  • Item Preview
  • Sharing: Culture and the Economy in the Internet Age
  • Introduction

    • EMBED for wordpress.

    Item Preview

    Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples, and help! In the past fifteen years, file sharing of digital cultural works between individuals has been at the center of a number of debates on the future of culture itself. To some, sharing constitutes piracy, to be fought against and eradicated.

    • Sustainability in Engineering Design;
    • Sharing + Energy & Environment?
    • Colorado: A History of the Centennial State;
    • Sharing : culture and the economy in the Internet age?

    Others see it as unavoidable, and table proposals to compensate for its harmful effects. Meanwhile, little progress has been made towards addressing the real challenges facing culture in a digital world. Sharing starts from a radically different viewpoint, namely that the non-market sharing of digital works is both legitimate and useful. It supports this premise with empirical research, demonstrating that non-market sharing leads to more diversity in the attention given to various works.

    Society and Culture in the Sangam Age

    Module descriptions and information may vary depending between years. Browser does not support script. Learning outcomes By the end of this module students will be able to: Assemble the key features of the sharing economy into a conceptual framework; Locate the political, economic and social implications of sharing economy services and platforms; Differentiate between multiple theoretical frameworks by which the sharing economy is conceived in contemporary research; Evaluate links between the sharing economy and critiques of capitalism.

    Sharing: Culture and the Economy in the Internet Age

    Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Belk, R. Boltanski, L. London: Verso. Botsman, R. London: Collins. With the introduction of new technologies — radio, the VCR and the personal computer — tensions between the rights of copyright owners and creators have often been pitted against the rights of users to have fair access to information. In fact, these tensions are as old as the idea of copyright itself. For example, the Statute of Anne in shifted control of artistic endeavor from the patron to the publisher, printer, or bookseller. According to legal scholar Dan Hunter, while authors, artists and creators were granted control over the product of their endeavors, individual inventors and authors typically don't have the capital to exploit their invention or idea, and so they sell or license their patent to the capitalist Hunter , Hunter observes that "intellectual property is not property in the sense that we typically understand it.

    Thus, in intellectual property there are material rights such as the payment of royalties and nonmaterial rights such as acknowledgement of authorship and the guarantee that a work will be transmitted without distortion Alekseev, Ashkinazi and Kuznetsova , It is tempting to see these rights as directed at different right holders material rights for the publisher and nonmaterial for the creator of a work. As technological developments such as tape recorders, VCRs, photocopiers, and computers make it easier for people to copy information without paying for it, policy makers have tried different policy and legal solutions to protect intellectual property.

    These solutions include making unauthorized copying a crime; making copying more difficult; and appealing to people not to take advantage of creators by denying them money or recognition for their creative work. Industry players and copyright holders have also lobbied to protect their rights to exploit the creative works under their control.

    However, their attempts to block the technology were unsuccessful. Copying from one VCR to another is not. As in the US cases, new media in Canada must confront copyright issues. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission CRTC , a Federal government agency responsible for regulating Canada's broadcasting and telecommunications systems, has refrained from regulating the Internet as a broadcasting technology on the grounds that new media complement rather than replace traditional media services.

    1. Sharing: Culture and the Economy in the Internet Age : Philippe Aigrain : !
    2. Easy Pop Melodies, Book 1;
    3. The Five Ancestors Book 6: Mouse;
    4. Shaping the Internet Age?

    According to the CRTC, the Internet gives Canadians access to more information about the things they find interesting and to expanded programming from that available through their televisions. What are the benefits and dangers associated with copyright protection in the global economy?

    To answer this question we must evaluate the main arguments invoked to justify strong copyright legislation and enforcement.

    First, it is claimed that copyright protects the rights of individual creators; it ensures some compensation for them and for their heirs. Second, it is claimed that copyright provides the necessary incentives for creators to continue to produce works of art: copyright ensures innovation. Third, it is claimed that by ensuring the continued creation of creative works, copyright benefits all of society. From this perspective copyright protects individual creators from those who would deprive them of the fruits of their work.

    In the digital age, where copying becomes easier and policing more difficult, some call for stronger laws. From the perspective of the digital age, "the fact that [a work] eventually falls into the public domain, or that the property grant might come with fair use limitations, appears completely unfair" Hunter , Jack Valenti, former president of the MPAA, argues that stronger intellectual property laws are needed to protect media against challenges posed by the Internet. Valenti has been aggressive in his attempts to prosecute copyright violation cases, arguing that piracy threatens the incentive structure on which the creative arts depend and could destroy the market.

    First, does copyright actually protect the rights of individual creators? It can, but the fact of the matter is that, ever since the first copyright act became law, protection has been more likely to benefit those who publish and distribute creative works than those who create them.

    Philippe Aigrain

    This is because individual creators frequently turn to large enterprises to make their work widely available. They assign or license their work to the enterprises because the costs associated with the production and distribution of creative works is extremely high. The traditional mass media have always been capital-intensive enterprises. As a result, the most powerful copyright owners are large corporations that lobby for strong protections for the copyrights they own as well as those they administer.

    Indeed copyright reform since the s has seen a shift from author to owner interests as the subject matter of protection Rice , If copyright protects business interests, does it actually promote new creative work? Again, the answer is, not really. Indeed, because copyright protection is so extensive and broad, it can actually impede new work. Copyright vests within its holders, often large corporations, the right to be protected against infringement by others. This means that the disposition of ideas contained within commercial activities is afforded the same protection as the disposition of ideas contained in an individual creative work.

    See a Problem?

    For example, the VISA symbol is not only a trademark, it is also a copyrighted work of art. As a result, the company using it is not merely protected against the use of its name by other companies operating in the same field, it is also protected against any company - even one not competing with it - from using the same disposition of ideas at all. The corporate interest in the form of expression allows the largest rights holders to police the activities of others and, in that way, to limit creativity.

    This leads us to the third argument for strong copyright: such protection benefits society. As already mentioned, those who argue for strong copyright protections talk about protecting starving artists from plagiarists and pirates. However, once we realize that copyright actually protects the interests of copyright owners who are as likely to be big businesses as individual artists or authors , we can think of the debate over copyright as a tension between private interests copyright owners and society the public domain.

    The problem is that the concept of protection for life plus 50 years provides almost perpetual protection to commercial rather than artistic work. Further, since such work is frequently produced by employees, copyright belongs to the employer and no benefit goes to the creator's heirs. In the end, copyright protection does not provide incentive to produce.

    Introduction

    Another question would be how to ensure the possibility for changing the system, once change will be needed again in the future? However, if the company tries to impede free communication it may lose many of its users, because the entry barriers in this industry are very low. They do this by appropriating positive social values associated with common understandings of sharing, such as community, generosity, shared values of cooperation, and participation. Toggle navigation Menu. Sociability is reconstructed as networked individualism and community through a quest for like-minded individuals in a process that combines online interaction with offline interaction, cyberspace and the local space.

    Indeed, it is absurd to think that computer software needs protection for up to a century, or that industry needs to amortize profits over a long period of time in order to innovate Vaver , The lengthy protection period actually makes it easy for the corporation to avoid innovation and to prevent others from innovating in the same area. What, then, are the effects of copyright reforms on the nature of the new media economy? It can be argued that copyright has become a strong tool for the propertization of information, and information is the fundamental commodity in the global media economy.

    The focus on new legislation like the DMCA is "on access to copyright works rather than on copying " Lipton , Given the scale of markets in the new media economy, it is not surprising to find large corporations using anti-competitive practices to gain access to new markets, to determine the shape of emerging markets to offset the costs of technological development, and to bar entry into the global marketplace to new competitors.

    Some recent examples illustrate this last point. Specifically, MP3. To guarantee that MP3. In another lawsuit, the same assembly of dominant players used the courts to shut down Napster, a company that facilitated trading music files across the Internet. The site also acted as a hub for users to connect with each other in a point-to-point transfer of music files.

    Napster was the digital equivalent of two friends meeting somewhere to trade cassette tapes of their favorite music. Because there was no sale involved, Napster hoped to invoke the Fair use concept in its defense. Although Napster received a temporary reprieve while the case was in appeal, the company did not survive the legal attacks from the big players. According to the Canadian Copyright Board, however, Napster does not offend Canadian copyright law because its server is located outside Canada.

    Further, because Canadian copyright legislation has a provision whereby copyright collectives i. In other words, the administration of copyright means that in Canada, with its tradition of collective copyright collection, a technology such as Napster does not pose a problem. In the US case, Napster agreed to charge for downloads even though the basis of its case was that the site simply facilitated the trading of music files between individuals, which was not a copyright violation.

    Charging for downloads meant that Napster now had something it could give to the big record companies, a percentage of the download fee. A similar suit was launched over the issue of re-broadcasting television programs over the Internet. Not only is the practice of retransmission legal in Canada it is based on a provision in the Copyright Act that allows for retransmission of a local or long-distance signal under certain circumstances , it is also the very basis of the cable industry in Canada.

    Signals that are piped to private subscribers are not considered public broadcasts. Although cable operators are subject to compulsory license, iCraveTV. Even so it offered to pay a tariff to be administered by a copyright collective. The offer was rejected.