The United States has had copyright laws since 1790. In 1978 a new copyright law went into effect. Under it, the creator of a work can obtain a copyright without waiting for the work to be published. In most cases the copyright continues for 50 years after the creator’s death. If the work was commissioned by an employer, the employer may hold the copyright. Such a copyright lasts for 75 years from the date of publication or for 100 years from the date of creation, whichever is shorter.

Permission to use a copyrighted work is usually granted on payment of a fee. Every time a disc jockey plays a song on the radio, the authors of the words and music must be paid. When a play is performed, the producer must pay the playwright. Authors of books receive payments for all copies of books that are sold. These payments are called royalties.

Using copyrighted material without permission is a form of stealing. The owner of the copyright can sue someone who does this. But there are exceptions to the law. Films and plays may be presented for educational purposes if tickets are not sold. Teachers may make a few copies of a work for class use, but whole books may not be copied in this way.

The laws of one country do not protect authors if their work is used in other countries. Two treaties provide such protection. They are the Berne Convention of 1886 and the Universal Copyright Convention of 1952.

Copyrighted material available over the Internet and in other digital forms is particularly vulnerable to theft. Laws such as the United State’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 regulate how such material can be used.

The symbol © or the word “copyright” appears on all copies of a copyrighted work. In a book this notice is usually on the back of the title page. On the Internet, it is usually at the bottom of each Web page.

Copyright Symbols (Photo credit: MikeBlogs)

Pipa (Photo credit: dave was already taken)

SOPA and PIPA are 2 on-line piracy acts currently being voted upon in Congress. Their objective is to finish the unfold of unlawful sharing of music, movies, and different varieties of media.Like a lot of legislation within the post-9/11 world, the govt. is endorsing this legislation as necessary for the security of all who use the net, and particularly in protecting those firms concerned in media.The PATRIOT Act of the net, SOPA/PIPA would be a method of protection, supporters claim. These legislations would increase copyright protections and forestall piracy.The Country Music Association and therefore the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are 2 supporters of the bills.But net firms grasp higher.These acts are being sugar coated to sound necessary for the security of the individuals. In reality, the sole ones benefitting from these laws are the govt.. SOPA and PIPA are on-line censorship laws. they’d increase copyright laws, and hold net firms chargeable for imposing those copyrights. If not enforced, firms may be severely punished.There are many issues with these laws:1. Censorship is clearly contradictory to the thought of freedom of expression.2. With quite two.1 billion individuals using the net, it isn’t doable for net firms to be constantly policing the planet Wide internet searching for copyright infringements.3. even though they might police the net, our net firms ought to be performing on creating the planet Wide internet additional valuable, not on catching dangerous individuals.4. SOPA and PIPA are fear-based legislation, driven by the assumption that pirates are everywhere. we have a tendency to should bear in mind, the planet may be a safe place and therefore the majority of individuals respect one another.If SOPA and PIPA pass in Congress, the net are going to be controlled by the govt.. Strict censorship are going to be in place to shield copyright laws. firms would don’t have any time to contribute worth to the net, as they’d got to be constantly on the look ahead to people that were breaking the law. the net would, basically, be converted into a fascist police state.These acts are clearly not in agreement with the democratic freedoms we have a tendency to believe therefore strongly in.Democracies encourage everybody to share their opinion. With SOPA and PIPA, the govt. can decide who gets to mention what.Democracies are operated by trust. they provide everyone the liberty to try and do what they require, once they need to try and do it. the govt., during this police state, operates out of concern.Much like education, nothing useful will return from permitting the govt. to regulate our net. I too, protest the SOPA and PIPA legislation and hope you may with me.

ACTA is of course, not a bill like SOPA, but an international trade agreement that sets standards for the enforcement of intellectual property rights.  Unlike SOPA, the focus of ACTA is enforcement of larger-scale copyright infringements.  So while it is not a law that says who can and who can’t be defined as theives of intellectual property, it encourages those that sign it to create such laws, and crack down harder on those who break them.

Surely if the United States had signed such an agreement we would have heard about it, right?  Nope.  The United States signed ACTA on it’s day of birth, on October 1, 2011.  Citizens were not informed of this not because of some distraction such as SOPA or the Occupy Protests, but because the various governments that signed it decided it was better to keep it a secret.  It was only during the turbulence of SOPA when ACTA was exposed to the majority of the citizens of the countries who signed the agreement.  Some other governments who have also signed include Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, and 22 members of the European Union.

Protests have already sprung up across the globe, with the most fierce gatherings in Europe.  This also comes to show why internet activists are still so up in arms about the copyright issues with protests such as Black March.

Below is a promotional poster spread across the internet by supporters of Black March.

They plan to achieve such a lofty goal by boycotting all copyrighted consumer goods, such as music, movies and books.  As described in the promotional image above, this will give “all governments an economic hit that can be visible”.

So is this actually possible?  Will it actually do something?  There are a couple very good arguments that say no.

First, how many people will actually give up buying copyrighted material for an entire month?  I’d like to think we all have the self-discipline to take on such a task, but unfortunately many of us don’t.

Second, won’t these companies experience a boom when this is over?  Everyone who participates will no doubt have a few things in mind to blow all that saved up money on when April comes.  This could overwrite any damage that is done.

Whatever the case, it is good to see people willing to give up some of their entertainment and consumerism to make a difference in the name of freedom.  Whether or not it does make a difference in the end, I will be participating in Black March, and I would urge the readers of this article to do the same.

It’s a good plan to spot your work with the international copyright symbol © go after by your name and the year of design. This will classify you as the holder of the copyright which will construct it easier for a possible user to get your authorization.

For non-print objects, where they © would not be in evidence, you could use former ways of presenting copyright in sequence. For model, some websites need users to have the same opinion to their copyright conditions and circumstances prior to they can actually purchase any music or film from their website.

Departure a dated print of your effort with a bank or legal representative, or posting a copy of your effort to yourself by particular release, leaving the dated enclose unopened, may help to show in any legal actions that you had the effort in your ownership at that time. It is main to note that this does not establish that you are the writer or holder of the work.

International copyright protection

Under worldwide copyright conventions, matter produced by UK nationals or residents is secluded in several countries. It may assist in assured countries if you have marked your effort with the worldwide copyright symbol ©, your first name and the year your effort was created.

If you feel your copyright has been infringed you will require taking action yourself in opposition to infringers, using the laws of the nation state in which the assumed violate of your copyright takes place.

The group of hackers published on this page a number of links to music downloads from the Sony catalog. Anonymous had direct access to complete discography and film premieres and released to the Internet free of charge down to their computers.

Among the works are made available to Internet users (all protected by copyright) are entire collections of bands like AC / DC, Aerosmith and Bruce Springsteen as well as films produced between 2000 and 2011.

“Remember, download and share all the free music you want,” Anonymous said when sharing via Twitter a link to the download page.

WORLD WEB WAR

The term “World War on the Internet” began to spread in cyberspace the same day that Megaupload was closed by the FBI. The intervention was seen as retaliation for the anti-piracy protest against the laws and PIPA SOPA who actively supported sites like Wikipedia, Flickr, Wired, Boing Boing, among many others, and had the support of Google and Facebook.

Although the Justice Department denied that the closure of Megaupload directly related to the mass protests against SOPA  and PIPA, Anonymous unleashed a wave of attacks on government websites such as the FBI and the White House. Also promoted the collapse of pages that defends the rights of copyright and the music industry.

The Speakman said, in his post on the subject, that he was unsure if it mattered that SOPA and PIPA became law in the US, and I have to wonder if he is truly from the same writing planet as the rest of us?  In one sense it is unimportant, because Erin Miller – bless her – posted the wonderful news that the legislation has yet again been abandoned by both houses, seen as unworkable in the present form.

What just happened to megauploads is a classic case in point of the potential consequences of such draconian law, and whilst I applaud his sentiment that every artist, film-maker, musician has a right to expect that their work will generate income for them, the question of just how you put this genie back into the bottle is an impossible ask.

As global communication becomes ever more pervasive and wide-reaching, there is an inevitability about the up and downloading of material by both genuine fans and more nefarious types, but how on the earth do you police that in a fair and equitable manner?

I and every other writer feel strongly that intellectual Property Rights are important, and copyright is vital to earn a living, but as long as we post our stuff on the web we risk it being used illegally – this has happened to me at least ten times – with no recourse or possibility of putting things right, but that is the price you pay for the privilege of such wide exposure.

I agree with Rob that there are bigger issues out there, like starvation, disease etc, but even poor people in ravaged countries can download things to mobile phones, because the worldwide web takes no account of status, and is available to all. Erin made the point that freedom of speech is a fundamental right, and anything as ill-conceived as SOPA and PIA needs nipping in the bud before it can develop.

I do agree that perhaps tighter control of content and greater awareness of possible copyright infringement could only be good news for serious artists and writers, but there has to be an element of concession to the vagaries of internet habits. There are things which are not right or fair, to be sure, but how we address these problems is important as well.

Freedom is a fragile thing, press freedom the subject of endless controversy, but we need to ask ourselves how much we value it before submitting to the introduction of legislation that would undoubtedly devastate so much of what we take for granted just now. My work belongs, intellectually to nobody but me, but if I choose to share it with the worldwide web I have to take my chances, and that to me ios perfectly alright, SOPA/PIA screwed? Great news. 

Four percent of Internet traffic. That’s the magnitude that has Megaupload, the popular hosting service and file sharing. He has more than 180 million registered users, a figure roughly equivalent to the total population of Pakistan, the sixth most populous country in the world. In six years, has billed more than 110 million dollars in subscriptions. Without reaching the size of Google or Facebook, Megaupload is a name with a lot of weight in the network.

In that sense, Megaupload closure by the Department of Justice Internet shook. One day after the world turned against SOUP laws and PIPA, the U.S. government sent a powerful message: the war of copyright will be harder than before. Is it a counteroffensive against the protests of January 18? It is very probable. With the river so upset, it sounds logical that the U.S. authorities have been the ideal moment to strike a blow on the table. According to the crimes charged, each of those listed could happen up to 50 years in prison.

In its indictment, the FBI issued an arrest warrant against seven employees of the page-from the manager to graphic designer, for the crimes of intellectual property infringement, money laundering, racketeering and conspiracy against the copyright. ¿Conspiracy? Indeed, it seems that Hollywood screenwriters lent, as the FBI claims that Megaupload is a “global criminal organization whose members are committed to the violation of intellectual property and money laundering (?) On large scales.”

Likewise, those who believed that laws only apply to U.S. citizens, are quite wrong. Megaupload is a site based in Hong Kong. In addition, the arms of the law caught up with four of these defendants, who were arrested in New Zealand. In addition, the FBI are looking elsewhere abroad, such as Rapidshare.

Of course, the action has not left anything cheap. Millions of people demonstrated against the closure of Megaupload. Anonymous hacktivist group displayed a denial of service attack (DDoS) that affected the websites of the Department of Justice, the FBI and the MPAA, the RIAA and Universal Music. For its part, Rapidshare has announced his return with an alternate site (www.megavideo.bz).

The closing of Megaupload is a sample of what the U.S. government can do so to benefit the industry-now, imagine what could be achieved if SOUP or PIPA are approved! -. Under the protection of intellectual property, this action passes over the rights of users, assuming that the entire contents of the site is illegal. Let’s take, for a moment, the issue of copyright: What happens, for example, if a student wants to send a file from one job to a friend? Why not be entitled to access a file of his own? Why can not share their work through a site that offers a hosting service?

The scenario is extremely dangerous: rather than seek another business model, the industry has decided to pull the stick to rebuke, to destroy, to break. And governments, with so much money injected by the defenders of copyright (as the millions that Hollywood has decided to withdraw towards the re-election Obama for speaking out against SOPA), provide the tools. If a big as Mediaupload has fallen, what is the stage for other similar services? One very, very bleak.

His real name is Kim Schmitz Kim but calls himself Dotcom (dot) com. Lives in New Zealand for two years and is considered one of the wealthiest 10 men there. Born in Germany in 1974 and before becoming an entrepreneur became known as hacker. Their illegal activities earned him several convictions for credit card fraud, embezzlement and other crimes. Spent 20 months in prison.

Kim Schmitz, Megaupload creator is the man of today is spoken in the network after the FBI intervened popular file sharing site accusing it of violating copyright-protected content to hold copyright. The charge on him and his co-defendants includes the offenses of conspiracy to racketeering and money laundering.

According to the New Zealand press, Kim is an eccentric figure and amateur sports cars, computers and women. Caused a stir in 2010 when buying a house valued at no less than $ 30 million. He is married and has two children. His move to New Zealand he explained, is because it considers this country become a “paradise”.

This character was the one who offered $ 10 million reward for the capture of Osama bin Laden during the Afghan war. His love of cars led him to participate in the “Gumball 3000″, a luxury car rally.

Today he is arrested after the FBI closing no Megaupload and New Zealand authorities ordered his arrest. According to the indictment against him and his associates conspired Dotcom to commit a crime and violated the intellectual property. It is estimated that Megaupload generated revenues of up to $ 175 million.

New Zealand police seized company assets valued at about $ 4.8 million and about $ 8 million deposited in accounts in various banks in New Zealand.

I am sure everyone has heard the news recently, but the American Congress has been trying to pass a bill that would force websites to remove links to websites with copyrighted material.  The problem with this is that it places an unfairly large burden on websites such as YouTube, Google, and Wikipedia.  If this bill comes into effect it could incur major costs towards websites such as this, since they would have to filter through thousands of links and remove any with improperly used copyright material.  This can also be looked at as a threat to free speech, because companies could block the links to sites that are properly using the material just because they do not like how the website uses the material.  This would give large corporations even more power over the media, not to mention the fact that they already have control over the news companies they sponsor.  The internet is the last method of spreading news that is not largely controlled by corporations, and SOPA threatens that.  If we do not stand together now to stop this, when will we.  There are already over 1.5 million signatures towards petitions stopping this bill, and more coming in by the day.  Believe that the people behind this that need to realise that the even though it sounds good in theory, the world is not that simple.  This reminds me of a situation in one Canadian school recently.  This school put a ban on balls (soccer balls, footballs, baseballs) just because several kids got injured.  Just like this scenario, a politician looks at the people who are doing something wrong, and end up punishing everybody for the actions of those people.  In conclusion, if this bill gets passed, it is a threat to free speech, and will cause a huge amount of damage to legitimate websites.