One example of a technology that has been really disruptive in the economic, social and legal environment over the past three years is file sharing, especially peer-to-peer. Through this technology, sharing music over the Internet has become commonplace for many people. Millions of copies of a song indistinguishable from the original can be shared at almost no cost. Yet much of this music is protected by copyright. It is the legal property of entities who are often not willing participants in the free distribution of their merchandise. They believe they are losing billions of dollars because of file sharing, and they are taking their case to the courts and to Congress.
As an institution of higher education, Rensselaer is not alone in having to address issues and problems raised by peer-to-peer sharing. Pennsylvania State University recently offered a music streaming service to its students, to “help students understand the issue and to provide them with an alternative.”
The legal aspect of the file-sharing controversy is covered by copyright, the body of law that has evolved to protect the rights of the creators and publishers of artistic and intellectual work. However, these rights have never been absolute. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power “to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” The copyright act of 1790 limited the author’s ownership to 14 years, renewable for another 14 years because they considered the free circulation of ideas and discoveries necessary to a healthy democracy. Today copyrights can be held personally, in which case the length of ownership is the life of the creator plus 70 years, or can be assigned to a commercial entity, in which case the copyright lasts 75 years.
Often, when a new technology has changed the way creative work is published, copyright law has been modified to take these changes into account. Social and economic issues also come into play. The Digital Millennium Copyright Law, passed in 1998, was an attempt to expand copyright law to meet the demands of the digital age. It defined infringing activities and provided institutional immunity for Internet Service Providers (which many colleges and universities are, in effect) if they cooperated and addressed infringement,. But its authors didn’t foresee the popularity of file-sharing technology; and, in many cases, it is difficult to determine who has the responsibility for enforcement of the law. In the current debate, there are many voices attempting to articulate a solution to this dilemma.
Congress is trying to frame new legislation under heavy lobbying by the various interests including the music industry, the motion picture industry, universities, libraries, and the general public. The Rensselaer community has a responsibility to uphold the law, and our Electronic Citizenship Policy identifies copyright infringement as a violation of Rensselaer policy. We also have a responsibility to take part in the discussion and try to shape the development of new laws, new business models, and new technologies for intellectual property in the digital age.
DotCIO, Student Life, and the Office of the Provost will sponsor a series of discussions and lectures on this topic. We hope you will participate.
John E. Kolb ’79
Chief Information Officer
