| Where do you get your music files from? These days CD player is out of date, and people usually use Mp3 files to listen to the music. However, there are many people who downloads those though private websites. Intellectual property, the term itself is unfamiliar, but it is deeply related to our lives. Theft of intellectual property, or IP should be considered as wrong doing. It makes creator lack motivation, puts industry into worse position, and against the law.
Firstly, if people depends too much on illegal downloading, the creator of IP would be discouraged to come up with new ideas. I know that to you the temptation is just undeniable, but to creators IP is a 'job'. They need to make living out of the creations. However, if illegal downloading flourishes, they would not be able to get proper pay check. More and more artists will lack the motivation to show the world 'the new piece'. They will turn back from creating IP, and rather they would find other jobs to sustain their lives. This overall causes the fall of choices we would have in the field of music, film, or etc.
Secondly, the entire industry will fall. IP theft is not only harm to personal creators, but it will endanger entire industry. Creators need investment, and the companies who make the profit from IP makes the investment. However, the companies are different from creators. For creators, there is a chance that they will still choose to come up with new IP even if they could not get proper pay check. However, for companies, this is not going to work. The moment they do not make the monetary profit is the moment they close down. The entire industry could fall. With no investment, there would be no intellectual property.
Lastly, the IP theft is clearly against the law. The laws are there to protect the industry. Simply it is a crime. But it seems that no one near us gets being accused of illegal downloading. People are not getting caught yet because companies themselves have to file a lawsuit in order to punish illegal downloads. However, just because they do not file a lawsuit to every single person that does not mean it is legal. The law is there for the long-term benefit for everyone. When law says so, then there is a reason. We should not risk breaking the law just for the temptation of little enjoyment.
In conclusion, the IP theft is a crime, demotivates creators, and eventually bring the entire industry down. You are just a person, but you are the people at the same time. You think you cannot make the change, but it is only you who could make the change. We enjoy going to a theater every Friday. We enjoy listening to music while walking. It is we who enjoys everything, so it should be we who protects it.
|
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
201102687 Lee, Jun Ki/ Argumentative Essay 2nd Draft / Thus 1~3pm
Dong Yi Kang /Abstract Does not mean Free/Thursday 56
Intellectual property has become a hot potato nowadays, and actors, actresses, and musicians are publicly lamenting people's lack of morality, and urges people to stop downloading movies and music from the Internet, and purchase them rightfully. Against this, people are insisting 'copyleft', a movement to make all the information available to the public. However, I think and feel that information should never be free, and people should not feel regret about paying for intellectual property.
In my personal point of view, payment is the most direct way of showing appreciation for something. If one thinks that a piece of clothing or a furniture is worthy, he would have no hesitation in paying for it. The same should be applied to intellectual property. If one thinks that a song or a movie is worthy, he should pay for it, ultimately contributing to the growth of the industry. If people stopped paying for music or a movie, the industry will not be able to attract much talented artists, and the overall quality of the products that people are served will decline.
Secondly, I would like to emphasize that downloading intellectual property illegally is, though in abstract form, theft. Like a chair was made with wood in the hand of a carpenter, music was created with extreme efforts, by a skilled musician, employing much time, thoughts, and facilities. People tend to feel much more guilt for tangible property, but illegally copying and distributing intellectual property is clearly, a crime. It's just that people tend to feel less guilty because it's so easy. Because something is easy does not alleviate the seriousness of a crime.
Lastly, the music industry and the movie industry are industries with many people working in it. When a singer releases her CD, it has not been made by herself. There are many people who have contributed to that piece of CD, and by purchasing the CD, the buyer is giving credit and contributing for the payment of all those who have participated in making that CD. I realize that these people are much neglected, yet they are real people who are impacted by online piracy.
To sum up, I am a personal believer of the notion that "good things and good labor must be purchased with sufficient amount of money". Electronic art must never be free, and people should not show hesitation in paying for a film or a music, and consider intellectual property theft with the same gravity of considering actual theft.
201103477 Chun Young Ho/ IP second draft/ Thus 56
201103477 Chun Young Ho/ IP/ Thus 56
Is it justifiable when someone uses your own creative idea without any permission? You will feel very offensive when this happened. However we commonly steal other's intellectual property with ease. It is very pervasive that we often download music, movie and essays through internet without any sense of guilt. These are nearly considered as public goods. It is essential to restrict pervasive plagiarism and stealing of other's intellectual property. If not, the industry will have bad influence. As for essays, it is not advantageous to your ability. Ultimately it is against the social justice.
When you download music and movies by internet without any paying it will discourage the desire of creation for innovators. They will not make creative ideas, music or movies because they do not get a appropriate results. Even if the fee is very little it should be compensate for artists. By that way we can be served by high quality works. It is very fundamental motive for artists.
You sometimes have experience that you plagiarized or downloaded essay for assignment in internet when the deadline is closed. Firstly, this affair is not good for you. You will lose the chance to enhance your ability to write a creative essay. Not only you lose the chance to write but you will also lose the opportunity for thinking and studying that topic.
Lastly it is against the social justice. It is stealing of other's property when you download items via internet without any permission. Not only visible things but also invisible intellectual ideas are one's property. We often neglect ownership of these things just the reason that it is not visible and it is pervasive. When we do 'plagiarism', we all know this is against our virtue, goodness and social justice. We often do this affair just because it is convenient. This cannot be the reason for justifying plagiarism.
To sum up, we should respect other's intellectual property because it is good for yourself and for nation. Also it is right in social sense. Even though it is very pervasive in our society to steal one's IP, each individual should avoid this affair. When each individual care about IP, creators will produce more artistic results. Because they feel their results are well deserved. Respect on other's intellectual property will ultimately result in free and creative atmosphere of our society.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015
Gayoung Kim / What Is Wrong With the Copyright Law(2nd draft) / Thu 1~3 p.m.
What Is Wrong With the Copyright Law
With the advent of information society, the importance of knowledge is being emphasized. As retaining information is regarded as competitiveness, copyright issue is surfaced. It means that if someone reproduce or perform a piece of writing or music without their permission, that person will be treated as a thief. Many authors insist it is legitimate to strengthen the protection of copyright however it raises a lot of problems in fact; due to the copyright law is in collision with characteristics of knowledge, its restriction is unreasonable, and it has become a tool for huge media enterprises to monopolize profits.
Firstly, the concept of copyright law is against to a feature of knowledge. Unlike material resources, knowledge doesn't diminish. As more people use information, its value climbs and different kinds of knowledge and culture spin off from sharing it. But the copyright law encourages exclusive possession and poses a threat to this great point. Knowledge is being commercialized and capitalism is invading information market. As a result, the development of knowledge and progress of mankind seems to be blockaded.
Second, the law restricts reproduction of information too excessively, so that it is arousing a big controversy. The copyright law protects all the kind of "original and creative work and author". But it is difficult to define which work should be sorted as a "creative work". And if the meaning is interpreted too widely, the law will be applied arbitrarily. Furthermore, the "individual use" that the law is banning even includes educational and non-commercial use.
At last, monopolistic companies abuse the copyright law to accumulate wealth. Media industry all around the world is running by several monopolies. So the profits generated under the current law only go to the strong in the market and they threaten even the livelihood of young rising authors. A claim that makers should be rewarded seems fair, but they need more direct funds supply, such as support funding and steady income, not the ineffective copyright policies.
In conclusion, there is a certain necessity to protect artists in our society however the copyright law is not the answer for it. The development of affluent knowledge society is being hindered by the impractical law which does not reflect reality at all and sides with a few giant corporations. We should aim at free and creative media environment with actual respect and thanks to creators.
201302308 Dooseok Lee / Protecting and supporting small businesses / Wed 1-3pm
Have you seen cases when certain business succeeds, similar businesses arise making use of its naming and ideas? Claiming intellectual property when doing new business is very difficult in Korea. When certain business succeeds, other entrepreneurs apply its intellectual property and open a similar business. This happens a lot to small business entrepreneurs because they do not have money and power to keep hold of their intellectual property. Therefore, the Korean government should support small business entrepreneurs protect their intellectual property in order to protect small businesses, encourage new businesses, and change major-company focused economy..
When entrepreneurs of small companies start their business, they face other people copying their initial ideas. This is a bad situation for them because arise of similar businesses also means loss of profit. To prevent this, they need help of law. However, claiming rights by law is a big burden to them because hiring lawyers is too expensive. Small businesses are a crucial part of healthy economy. They bring diversity to the market, thus providing many choices to consumers. Therefore, the government should protect them for country's economy.
New businesses are also a very important factor for healthy economy. If new businesses do not appear, current businesses make use of that situation and they do not show will for improvements and developments. However, if intellectual property is not well protected and other firms can easily make use of it, new businesses will not be opened. No one will be willing to start new business in a situation when other wealthy firms can easily steal their ideas. The government should thus support new businesses in order to prevent these situations.
Current Korean economy is focused on major companies. This kind of environment is not very ideal because it generates monopoly and loss of diversity. Consumers will be provided with limited choices. However, encouragement of small business can prevent this situation because it encourages competition. Therefore the government should focus on supporting small business to empower them against big firms.
Supporting small businesses brings benefits to the economy. However, setting aside the benefit it brings, it is still important when it comes to protecting their intellectual property. If the government lets this situation, which major firms easily steal small businesses ideas because small businesses don't have law and financial power to stop it, it is not right at all. It's a matter of letting crime happen or not. Thus, Korean government should be more focused on protecting small businesses.
201200440 Kim Minji/Don't touch it!(Second draft)/Thursday1-3pm
Don't touch it!
Do you want to be a minister of South Korea? Then plagiarize a paper! Many appointees to the ministers have to attend on hearings. However, we could easily see the news about hearings which told the appointees' plagiarism of a paper. In South Korea, many people are not aware of copyright law so people easily copy and download the other's intellectual property even they are men of rank. Please don't touch the other's works because there is a risk of plagiarism. For protecting the copyright I recommend three tings; teaching the students about copyright law, increasing regulations for plagiarism, and making the system easy to pay the cost.
In South Korea, students don't learn the concept about copyright law or plagiarism in elementary school. Many students first learn about it when they have to do assignment in the college. However there's many internet sites which selling the paper and their friends buy it, students also did plagiarism without sense of guilt. The elementary school teachers should teach the students why it is important to keep the copyright law. It's not only for protecting the students from copying the other's work but also for teaching them how valuable the works are. If we know how the other's intellectual properties are the fruit of one's effort, then we surely take paying the cost for granted.
Last semester, I took a writing class and some students copied the Wikipedia for answering the question. However professor only gave zero points for that question and not gave any other penalty. I think this could not arouse student's attention because students think they were just unlucky. There's the rule in every college which treat the students with cheating very severely. However, in reality, students and professors don't want to make a noise so they treat the plagiarism as a small mistake. If we want to live the honest society, we have to give strong penalty to the person who plagiarized the other's work.
When I find the images and thesis, it's easy to click on the right mouse button to copy and paste but hard to find the way to pay the cost for copyright. If portal sites make the system easy to pay the cost, the illegal plagiarism will be decreased. We don't know which image is free to use and which has its copyright. Person who is not good at using computer could make a mistake if there's no caution mark. Therefore adding the function which helps to protect copyright law is recommended. If government starts the public advertisement about internet copyright law, it would help people to use the internet source more safely.
In daily life, we have risk of plagiarism if we don't care about it. There are many people who are accused by copyright law. They download the documents, film, and images because the things are easy to find. However, everything on Internet has its owner. Therefore, don't touch it before you know it's safe to use. For following the copyright law, the education about copyright law from elementary school, increasing the regulation for breaking the copyright law, making the internet sites easy to pay the cost are needed. If we follow these three steps, every copyright owners and downloader will get benefits.
Lim Jung-Yun/ How about No? / Thursday 56
How about No?
Music is one of the most universally enjoyed manmade product ever. Regardless of age, gender, rich and poor, music is one of the few things that has the power to link total strangers or even enemies together. Considering this, it is shocking how little respect the purchase of music is treated with. People shamelessly downloading music illegally through the internet literally exists by millions. What these people choose to ignore is that such actions are stealing and that their thoughtless acts endanger the direct livelihood of those in the music industry.
Once upon a time, there was a time where the concept of intellectual property was but a newly budding idea. Even till the very end of the 20th century, the notion of protecting ideas was a very unreal and foreign concept. However, the 20th century has been history for a long gone time. And so has the unfamiliarity of the concept of intellectual property. Students learn the dangers of plagiarism, the importance of respecting ideas of others from a very young age, some as early as from elementary school. University treats intellectual property with great reverence and a lot of schools have mandatory classes teaching students about plagiarism and protecting intellectual property. It is no longer possible to justify downloading watered down quality albums of Lorde by saying "What's the big deal?" People who sneakily download music via the Internet are making a deliberate educated choice to commit a crime, theft to be precise.
Besides the fact that people stealing music from the Internet are making informed choices to steal music, there is the problem that well, these people are stealing. Even a single song takes time, money and teeth grinding effort to be completed. A whole album requires the same thing with more intensity. With the few exception of world pop stars and glamorous rock bands, the majority of those involved in the music industry are vastly underpaid. If the album turns out to be a success, then they have a chance to reap what they have sown. But, that would be hard to do with people downloading their hard work without paying a dime. People illegally downloading music are basically robbing people in the music industry without even having to threaten them with a blunt dagger knife.
Yes, buying music is a hassle. Having to pay ten-something bucks for a CD with less than 12 tracks when it is possible to download the same thing on the Interne for free is irritating. Then again, how about No? No, it is not irritating to pay an adequate amount of money to the people who spent a lot of time and passion for their hard work. Just because downloading it for free on the World Wide Web is possible, it does not mean that it should be done no matter how much one's inner consciousness wants to take the criminal road.