Copyright, it is really a valid concept?
201100056 Kang Yooli
There was a case in Japan where a young man who made copied of a famous movie and distributed them got arrested and sentenced. The movie companies applauded at this decision saying that it sets a precedent, and help them stop piracy. However when you really think about this, is this fair? Should intellectual property be considered as a 'possession'? The mainstream of opinion says yes, but I oppose to this idea for the following two reasons.
First of all, piracy of intellectual properties is impossible to stop in current society. Technology is developing in an unbelievable speed, allowing people to copy literally everything. From recording a film by a camcorder to using sophisticated computer programs, there are numerous ways to copy an intellectual property. Unless you can go back in time and stop the development of technology, you would not be able to stop copying.
In addition, it is too difficult to measure an intellectual property. To start with, there is no clear standard of what an intellectual property is. If I made up my own saying and used it in my presentation, is it my intellectual property? If I found out that someone used that quote in his or her own book, is that a piracy? No one can clearly decide what an intellectual property is. Moreover, the definition of piracy is also ambiguous. There are many cases where a small business takes an idea of a large enterprise, in order to make their own product. Is borrowing the idea also piracy? Since there are so many arguments going on regarding this issue, it might be too controversial to punish a person for committing piracy.
I do not deny that intellectual property is an outcome of a person or company who put their time and effort. What I am saying is not that we should stop protecting them. My point is that the copyright law can be ineffective in the way it is right now. This is because of two reasons I mentioned above: skills of piracy is keep developing and the definition of intellectual property is too vague. Instead of preserving the law based on the punishment, it could be better to change it into 'allowing with fair payment'.
From Yoon-Shik Shin
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with the fact that there is no definite standard when it comes to intellectual property; because the ambiguity of the current law does not provide specified guidelines that underscore what is a violation of copyrights, and what is not.
The way you used rhetorical questions to emphasize your points throughout the paper was interesting, in that it urges the reader to delve deeper into your entire paper. The paragraph I liked the most was the second body paragraph; in which you discussed how the boundaries of defining intellectual property remains vague. You could make your conclusion more effective by clarifying on some points. It was interesting to see a different perspective of the issue which clearly underscores the problems with the current system.
Thank you for a nice read! :)
My final draft
ReplyDeleteCopyright, it is really a valid concept?
201100056 Kang Yooli
There was a case in Japan where a young man, Yoshihiro Inoue, made copies of a famous movie and distributed them got arrested and sentenced. The movie companies applauded at this decision saying that it sets a precedent, and would help them stop piracy. However when you really think about this, do you think this is fair? Should intellectual property be considered as a 'possession'? The mainstream of opinion says yes, but I oppose to this idea for the following two reasons.
First of all, piracy of intellectual properties is impossible to stop in current society. Technology is developing in an unbelievable speed, and it is allowing people to copy literally everything. From recording a film by a camcorder to using sophisticated computer programs, there are numerous ways to copy an intellectual property. When I say intellectual property it not only includes movies or music, but also photography, company logo, and numerous things. It is becoming easier and easier to copy an intellectual property, especially the ones exposed in the internet. In fact, it is not difficult to see people selling illegally copied movies in the streets of Gangnam. Unless you go back in time and stop the development of technology, you would not be able to stop copying.
In addition, it is too difficult to measure an intellectual property. To start with, there is no clear standard of what an intellectual property is. For instance, if I made up my own saying and used it in my presentation, is it my intellectual property? If I found out that someone used that quote in his or her own book, is that a piracy? No one can clearly decide what an intellectual property is. Moreover, the definition of piracy is also too ambiguous. There are many cases where a small business company borrows the design or logo of a large enterprise in order to make their own product and attract consumers. For example, many people say that the Korean automobile company ‘Hyundai’ actually got its name after ‘Honda’. They wanted consumers who are interested in Honda, also get to know ‘Hyundai’ and choose it instead. Is borrowing a name of a company also piracy? Since there are so many arguments going on regarding this issue, it might be too controversial to punish a person for committing piracy.
I do not deny that intellectual property is an outcome of a person or company who has put their time and effort on inventing an idea. What I am saying is not that we should stop protecting them. My point is that the copyright law can be ineffective in the way it is right now. This is because of two reasons I mentioned above: it is impossible to stop piracy and the definition of intellectual property is too vague. Instead of preserving the law based on the ‘punishment’, it could be better to change it into 'allowing with fair payment'.