Network Neutrality
Network (or Net) Neutrality is the concept that
Internet Service Providers will not interfere with or restrict, among other
things, access to content on the internet. Critics of this concept argue
that in the interest of sustainability and growth on the Web, ISPs should be
granted discretionary power over website accessibility. This would
essentially make ISPs the gatekeepers of information on the Web. The aim
is to encourage innovation and quality of service by shaping the flow of
internet traffic in such a way that favors those websites that deliver these
measures. However, this "non-neutrality" could also open the door
for monetary compensation to ISPs in exchange for favorable treatment. The
resulting disparity would undermine the very purpose of non-neutrality, with
smaller, more inventive websites falling to larger, better-funded, less
pioneering websites.
Copyright Infringement
A major issue with ownership on the web is copyright infringement. This was
a huge problem when sites such as Napster
first started showing up on the web. It was argued by Napster that because
the files were being shared from an individual’s own computer and Napster was
just facilitating the exchange, no laws were being broken. Eventually,
Napster became the defendant in a lawsuit brought on by Metallica when an
unreleased version of “I Disappear” made it’s way onto the network and from
there to radio stations. Napster lost the suit and eventually filed for
bankruptcy. The site has changed ownership and is no longer a free site.
Napster was bought out by software company Roxio and now sells music
legally. However, many sites still exist for music file sharing such as
LimeWire or Aries.
Copyright Infringement
Cases
Something called, "Bittorrents" has taken the world
by storm, in which people download files from the internet in a P2P community,
much like places like LimeWire, Bearshare, Etc. However, they are different in
the aspect that Limewire is from searching and browsing through files, finding
the right file, and downloading it. Bittorrent is filespecific in the sense that
somebody makes a tracker for a specific file or files (their can be a compressed
zip including much more than one file) and a person that is downloading it
causes better bandwidth for the next person downloading. They also can speed it
up by having a tracker on the same file. However, the MPAA has announced a
tremendous escalation in their fight against online piracy - this time targeting
BitTorrent, eDonkey2000 and Newsgroup NZB indexing sites.
Where will we go in the United States with publishing information and music on the web? Please also feel free to identify other issues that you think are important on this topic.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Ownership & the Web: From Napster to Net Neutrality
To start off with a little background, your fellow students in another section of LIB102 identified the following issues:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I understand why artists have issues with P2P sharing of files because they make money from album sales and when a person can just connect to limewire and get all the songs to an album for free would be very frustrating. But also, when you connect to limewire, you also run the risk of catching a possible hardrive crashing virus which no one wants. But things like limewire are good in some sense of possibly a new artist trying to become known might put some of their songs onto limewire so when a certian word is searched their song will some up and be heard. All in all, P2P sharing has its positives and negiatives.
P2P sharing though lime wire or any other program is illegal and overall immoral.Although it makes the retrieval of certain songs and videos much easier for us, people must understand that they are ripping off the songwriter and the production company. It is how they make a living and we are slowly taking it away from them. its just wrong!
I am a child of music. My father was a drummer, my mom a keyboardist, so it is only natural that I am a songwriter myself. As such, I believe music is art. I have been writing ever since I have had the ability to hold a pencil. I have never once pursued music for personal monetary gain, and I think it is immoral to turn art into a cash cow. In most cases, the artists hold these ideals, but the record companies do not. I once happened upon a harvard study that showed that illegal downloading has cost record companies less than 1% of their profit. Yet somehow, the average Limewire enthusiast is supposed to feel guilty about putting a dent in somebody's multi-million dollar wallet. Music does belong to the artist, but once it gets released, it belongs to the world. If an artist does not appreciate the fact that their music is reaching people one way or another, they should simply not be putting it into the ears of the public to begin with.
My main concern is, if the music sharing issue is such a huge concern to artists and record companies, why is lime wire still up and running? I don't see many artists today rallying to completely shut down lime wire and make it unavailable. If it was such a huge concern, lime wire would not even be on the internet anymore. Artists and record companies make money in so many other ways, that they seem the least bit concerned with sharing of music for free. I could easily borrow a CD from my friend and burn the music onto my computer without paying for it. Although this practice of sharing files online is illegal, so many people are going to do it anyways regardless, so why make a big fuss.
I believe that file sharing should be legal even though io do understand artists who can not make money doing performances so they rely on there albums which make them seem to be much more talented then they really are. i believe that artists that are so truly talented, they dont need to worry about file sharing because if they are that good they will always attract fans regardless of how their music is aquired.
Personally, I don't think the US should do any sort of censoring or checking on the information on the web. I am not saying letting people get away with illegally downloading copyrighted material, since that is against the law. However, it was mentioned that the US government should step in and stop the possibility of such illegal activities using censorship and the like. The government should attempt to catch those who violate the law, but by searching through all the information that is published on the web the government is violating privacy of those who use the web.
Illegal downloading of music should not be a concern to artists. While making millions of dollars within the first week of having a record drop, they should allow those who may not have the money to go out and buy the cd to download it offline for free. Their fan base will continue to grow by having music available to everyone.
The issues that arise when sharing music, movies, and other files are part of a larger internet problem that is becoming more and more influential on our database and network searches. There are always new ways to "download" things that woould otherwise be sold for a set amount of money. Therefore the person who is trying to sell these things is essentially robbed. As long as people have very open access to the wide world of the internet they will always find ways to get these things for free. More regulation is necessary to stop this bootlegging
I think file sharing should not be illegal but regulated. It does cause a huge concern for musicians specifically becuase they lose alot of money. People share their files and instead of making money for the music being sold, they dont make any. When people buy their music from the internet however, this could be ok for the artists. Personally it does not effect me but it is something that effects hundreds of musicians.
Even though musicians do make thousands of dollars, they are entitled to and do deserve to be able to charge for the use of their music. This is a capitalist world and even though sharing music for free sounds nice and warm and fuzzy, it robs musicians of their deserved money. Now with that being said, I think stopping the sharing of music for free between people is not something that will ever be able to be controlled...cause there will alwayd be some program, legal or not that can share and download/upload music
Artist today are only concerned with making money so if music is downloaded illegally then people will buy less records thus the artist will make less money. Artist have a right to be mad becasue its like there just making their music for free.
How would you feel if you don't get paid for hours of hard work? Does how we should approah the issue of P2P sharing. Artist lose tons of money anytime people download music and movies for free. Though i have downloaded a couple of music and movies myself, I think this is an immoral and efforts should be made by the government to prevent this act.
Music sharing is a huge issue in today's society. I do understand that artists lose money due to the decrease in album sales, but regardless, I do not believe that anyone will ever stop just finding some sort of resource to download music or other files.
Post a Comment