Progress is Unstoppable: Copyright and Technology

Copyright is important in any modern society in order to protect the creative works of it’s citizens and society as a whole.Though copyright laws are different in varying countries, it is important to consider these varying copyright laws both from a national and international perspective. Canadian copyright laws are important to a culture that contains such creative and vastly different people. Throughout the years, with grand development in technological fields, copyright laws have changed through necessity, though they can still be found to be lacking, due to the amount of copyright infringement that runs rampant on the internet.

Copyright laws exist in order to protect creative works of an individual or group. These laws cover everything from a piece of written work to a performance to a computer program. This covers works that garner money along with works that do not. In Canada, as long as these creative works follow the conditions set out in the Copyright Act they are protected by copyright. This means that no one may copy the works created by someone without permission.

“Only one thing is impossible for God: To find any sense in any copyright law on the planet.” (Mark Twain, Letters from the Earth: Uncensored Writings)

Though these laws may seem strange and foreign, even to Mark Twain, these copyright laws are designed in order to protect both the consumer and artist, including Twain during his time as a well known author. These two sides- creator and consumer- must be considered when contemplating current existing laws. Before going into detail about the opposing sides of these laws, it is important to discuss the history of copyright and why the laws are currently what they are. With this in mind, it is easier to explain why and how these laws work and protect creative pieces, though a grasp on what copyright currently covers must first be understood in order to gain perspective on how and why these laws have changed over the course of history.

The criteria for filing a copyright can be categorized into three major requirements. The piece must have originality, meaning it must not be a copy of another piece of work and must contain enough originality that it is not considered plagiarism or another person’s work. The piece must also have some sort of material form. One cannot simply copyright a thought or idea, it must be containable via some sort of physical or virtual form. This does include performances, along with computer programs and audio files that are all copyrightable. Thirdly, the Canadian Copyright Act requires the piece to have been created by a Canadian at the time of its making in order to be protected by Canadian copyright, or be created by a creator of a foreign country that is a member of one of the copyright conventions that Canada is also a member of.

Registering a copyright is different depending on the work and the artist. The factors involved depend on how the work is shared. A musical work in Canada can be registered for copyright by filling a form from the copyright office and sending it to CIPO (Canadian Information Protection Office). The artist can then hire a lawyer when they suspect someone has infringed on their copyright.

Claiming copyright online is different. By simply tagging the work as their own, the creator can easily protect work that can be shared and viewed by many. Then it is up to the creator to catch any infringement. This may not be enough, as it is easy to find work by artists online that have been stolen or published without permission.

The above criteria for copyright are very reasonable when considering the ease of which a creator can file for their creative pieces. The requirements are easy to fulfil for any Canadian. The Copyright Act has automatic protection, meaning that once these criteria are fulfilled, the artist’s pieces are entitled to be protected by copyright laws.

Generally, copyright lasts for the life of the artist or creator along with 50 years following their death. This means that even postmortem, copyright stands and protects the creative work. The family or whomever the artist chooses will still benefit from the artist’s work long after their passing.

Though the importance of these conventions are easy to realize, the coming of the digital age has made it so that changes and adaptations had to be made in order to better protect creative pieces. Not only that, but differing platforms of creative works had to be considered when creating new conventions to protect works. From digital audio, which is easy to share, to computer programs and databases; things that didn’t exist to the world upon the creation of the Berne Convention, one of Canada’s international copyright unions, it was clear that new and special laws had to be created to better protect new creative works.

International treaties between multiple countries ensure copyright in the various countries around the world. This allows the protection of foreign works in different nations, facilitating trade of creative works. With the rise of the internet and the ease of international data sharing, international copyright is very important. Canada currently follows Berne and Universal Copyright Conventions. Having international copyright laws also allows for a standard form of copyright and makes it easier when accusing someone of copyright infringement internationally. This also makes protecting works easier.

The two varying conventions have changed over the years. These changes are often necessary as content and the way creative pieces are shared change. Both of these conventions get changed as need be, during meetings where members from the varying countries meet up to discuss in what ways these laws can best protect works that can be easily shared and produced internationally. Though the introduction of the Universal Copyright Convention was created due to the limits and the lack of benefits it provided to the Americas, whereas the Berne Convention favoured the Western civilization, where the convention had first been introduced and created, it is found that multiple countries, Canada and the United States, use both in order to protect their works.

Copyright is an old idea that has shifted and changed as need be by the human race. The first use of copyright was in England in 1710 with the Statute of Ann which was set in motion to protect booksellers and printers in order to not have their work copied or stolen. Copyright has since expanded and changed to cover and protect much more than written works.

Berne Conventions have been around since 1886 in Canada, which set the standards for local and foreign authors and creators. The standards of Berne were originally revised every 20 years, and today, Berne requires that copyright on a creative work last until 50 years after the creator’s death.

Canada first accepted Berne in 1886, signing under Great Britain as Canada was yet to be its own dominion. Though the public opinion at the time was against the joining of the Berne Union, the decision to join under Great Britain was done by Prime Minister Macdonald. During Canada’s separation from Great Britain, Canada attempted to denounce the Berne Convention, claiming that it didn’t benefit the growing country and instead only had European countries in mind during it’s design. Lobby groups formed that opposed the international law, and these groups had enough sway in the government to have them reconsider their joining of the Berne Union. The imperial government refused Canada’s attempt to denounce the convention, and Canada kept the Berne Union.

Views on the Berne Conventions in Canada switched throughout the years, viewing the laws as both good and bad, as Canadians had the opinions that either it encouraged good trade or discouraged national trade policies. In the 1950s discussion of the Berne Conventions resurfaced, as some started to question whether Canada should keep within these conventions. These opinions certainly started to become popular as the new Universal Copyright Convention surfaced. Though Canada retained its membership in the Berne Union, Canada then joined the Universal Copyright Union as well in 1962 and refused to sign the updated and revised Berne Convention.These views flip flopped once again in the 70s, with a need to embrace the Berne Convention instead. This seemed to be the final change in view of the Berne Convention as it has stayed in Canada’s Copyright dominion since then.

In 1996 consideration on digital copyright become an important discussion as works had become easier to share digitally. This shifted how artists made money, as it became increasingly easy to share creative works online as their work became available digitially. New copyright laws and conventions were suggested, and many internet treaties were suggested and accepted, including WIPO (World Information Protection Organization) treaty, which made sure to include computer programs and databases as works that could be protected by copyright. There is still debate to this day, as technology changes and adapts and it becomes even more common place to share and distribute intellectual property. Debate is common on both sides, as discussion about whether new technologies should be regulated or if laws should be improved or adapted or protection should be increased.

Along with the debate of technology regulation comes the idea of a more global copyright. Because of the internet’s ability to permeate globally, copyright also has to become a more global idea and become more constant and similar amongst differing countries. This is problematic as many countries have varying international agreements, and not all agree with the other. To truly protect creative pieces on the internet, heavier policing would have to occur, and so far bills such as these have failed to pass due to privacy issues.

At both international and national levels, Canada has aimed to strengthen its copyright protection. At a domestic level, Canada has had two reforms regarding the Copyright Act and its involvement within the realms of technology. Both of these reforms have failed due to the aforementioned privacy issues that Canadian citizens value.

It is these copyright laws that need to be better handled. The internet has made sharing easy and though this is wonderful for many artists that are trying to get their works recognized and sold, it is very easy to find numerous works stolen.

Because of how online copyright is handled, where the artist must be vigilant in order to secure the protection of their work, it is easy for others to steal work online, where the user base is large, and with thousands of differing web pages and web communities, it is often common to see an artist’s work being reposted elsewhere and claimed to be done by someone else. Though there are a few methods an online artist can attempt to lessen this, there still needs to be better laws regarding this. There also needs to be a better repercussion for these thefts. Usually, when a theft is reported on a community board online, the thief is simply blocked or banned from the website, which is a very lenient punishment.

Since it is often easy to find the reposter once your image or creative piece (whether art, audio or written) it is easy to confront them. But whether they will listen to the original poster is up to the thief. It is hard to reprimand a user when your choices are to ask them first and then report them after.

Because of terms in the copyright law, users can defend the use of the stolen piece as free use, if they take it and use it to create something that may be slightly different. A compilation of pieces sometimes passes as free use, and claiming this allows many internet thieves to take other’s art work or creation and claim them as their own. This is problematic in itself, certainly when the reporters do not credit the original artist. This is certainly problematic when the reposter hopes to profit off the original creator’s art.

Another problem lies in the fact that many online users or community members do not know when they are committing copyright infringement. Without knowledge of these laws, many might see a piece of art or creative work that they enjoy and may want to share it somewhere else online, with another community. Law states that they must ask the permission for use of the piece, though many do not, and usually permission is assumed granted as long as proper credit is given.

Many online artists are also not aware of proper copyright laws either. Without the proper knowledge of these laws, it is easier for theft to happen. Without proper education on the copyright laws, it is easier for artists to have their work stolen or taken without permission. Many artists post disclaimers or notices with their art in order to warn people of the copyright on their pieces though this doesn’t always help. Some even place watermarks; simple tags or signatures of their name on their pieces that are easy to see but don’t necessarily make the art less valuable, that usually helps in keeping their credit. These can be easy to remove for the most dedicated internet user though, and are not always foolproof protection. Mostly, protection of a piece online is left to the creator, which is not enough.

With more effective  laws and repercussions regarding these thieves, the internet can become a safer place for posting creative work. Though the laws prevent others from redistributing or making copies of said posted work without explicit permission, it is very hard to prevent anonymous online users to do such. Perhaps with better enforcement amongst online communities this could prevent copyright infringement that so frequently happens on the web.

Considering copyright, movies and technology; maybe the solution to preventing art theft online will solve itself as movie copyright infringement has. Whereas ten or so years ago, it was common for people to illegally download or stream music and tv, nowadays that seems almost unnecessary. With new streaming services such as Google Play, Netflix or Apple Music, streaming content has become easy, fast, reliable and very affordable. Consumers no longer go out to stores to buy music or movies, and instead pay a very small fee per month that allows them very easy access to a plethora of music, movies and tv shows. This seems to have, for a good part, put a stopper on the amount of people torrenting or downloading content illegally.

With the rise of these legal streaming services a decline of illegal downloading has occurred. Perhaps the solution lies not in creating better copyright laws but instead in finding a third, creative solution such as these on-demand services.

Maybe the human race advances towards a society that will no longer rely on copyright in order to protect all of it’s creative pieces. With the decline of copyright infringement on music and film thanks to streaming services, perhaps other areas of creative work will also face similar futures.

“The absolute transformation of everything that we ever thought about music will take place within 10 years, and nothing is going to be able to stop it. I see absolutely no point in pretending that it’s not going to happen. I’m fully confident that copyright, for instance, will no longer exist in 10 years.” (David Bowie)

Currently there are two standard forms of repercussions regarding copyright infringement. On hiring a lawyer and filing a case, a court case may be formed and based on the severity of the case and the damages done, as proper punishment may be decided by the court. Usually this punishment is some sort of fine. Regarding cases where the government is involved and suspects a private party to be in violation of copyright, the offending party may face criminal and civil remedies. This may include either imprisonment or a fine or sometimes both. These repercussions usually involve a party that is large and very protected, such as a giant music label, not often a struggling artist that is using the internet to aid themselves in gaining popularity or status as an artist.

With smaller repercussions for these smaller thefts and better vigilance on the small injustices done to the smaller artists, steps could be made to prevent theft and instead encourage creativity that is easier to share. With better education among internet users and online communities, prevention of these small occurrences of copyright infringement could happen. If this knowledge was more common amongst tech users than perhaps copyright laws could stay as they are, and instead a more general stance would be held and more respect to those that post their creative work online would be had.

The need to share creative works online is necessary to the evolution and progress of humanity. If humanity fails to use the internet to the best of it’s ability, it can never reach a peak of creative glory.

“Progress is unstoppable. It is a drumbeat to which we must all march. Technology helps and good ideas spread - these are two laws of nature. If you don’t let technology help you, if you resist good ideas, you condemn yourself to dinosaurhood! I am utterly convinced of this” (Yann Martel, Life of Pi)

In conclusion, perhaps it is not copyright that needs to become better in order to protect the creative work of online artists but instead with a combination of different software solutions, a better education on the laws regarding copyright and a stronger respect for those that provide the creative work, the protection of the works will become natural instead, without having to rely on laws and heavier policing for this protection.