As we know, the internet has a major impact on so many things. People use it everyday for multiple reasons. With every action though, we know there must be some kind of rules or regulation set in place, especially with when addressing the internet otherwise, IT’D BE A BIG MESS! Within this article Palfrey aims to show the phases of ”Internet Regulation,” and also describes what each of them are. There are four phases associated with internet regulation, these phases are: open internet, access denied, access controlled, and access contested.
The first phase, Open internet, which takes place in 1960′s-2000, deals with the internet as being a separate space. This space allows individuals to post their thoughts, opinions, and ideas freely on the internet(Palfrey Vol. 77.) The second phase, which takes place 2000-2005 is access denied, is when states come to realize that information and other things on the internet need to be blocked and managed in various ways(Palfrey Vol. 77.) Third, is access controlled which takes place 2005-2010 consists of states emphasizing regulatory approaches that functions not only as filters or blocks(Palfrey Vol. 77.) Lastly phase four, which is present day, access contested. The internet as we know plays such a big role on everything in our culture today, and is also ”mediated by digital technology” which has an impact on economic, political, and cultural ways(Palfrey Vol. 77.)
The Internet, Innovation, and Intellectual Property Policy dives back into the start of the internet and how it has advanced, as seen in my other post by the internet has came a long way and emerged. This article shows that because of this emergence of the internet, it is transforming information industries, and challenging intellectual property law to develop a competition policy strategy to regulate networked products. Within this article a proposal is made, this proposal is a competitive platform model(Weiser Vol. 103.) This proposal consists of governing intellectual property and internet policy. As I stated previously, the article shows how the internet has emerged, therefore this platform is designed to ”guide intellectual property in the internet age(Weiser Vol. 103.)” The articles states that this is due to the ”continuing evolution of hardware and software infrastructure that supports internet content gives rise to radically different visions for how intellectual property should regulate the internet software infrastructure(Weiser Vol. 103.).
Fair Use, Film, and the Advantages of Internet Distribution discusses websites such as YouTube and Yahoo, who ”breathes air into fair use for filmmakers(Lohmann Vol. 42.)” Within this article they go on to show the controversy dealing with these two sites, the problem is that people who upload videos to these sites can get a global audience in no time, and not even have to satisfy the rights clearance that have been put in place by gatekeepers. These websites go by different rules and regulations. Instead of demanding rights, clearances, errors, and omissions, online video hosting providers rely on a notice and takedown policy to protect them from copyright risks(Lohmann Vol. 42.. This article was pretty cool to read because people upload videos that I know all the time, and never once thought about any of this.
Fair Use in Face-to-Face Teaching aims to address and inform about the dilemma of copyright within classrooms. As we know today, getting access and using someone else’s work is so easy to find, and use, as stated in the article ”it is not always clear what can be performed, listened to, and distributed without permission from the copyright owner(Leary & Parker Vol 55.”) Copyright owners hold the right to duplicate, distribute, exhibit, and alter their materials. Instructors on the other hand have to get permission, which is a license agreement which may consist of financial compensation(Leary & Parker Vol. 55.) They may also use open licensed works which are resources that are openly available on the internet(Leary & Parker Vol. 55.). Lastly they have the choice of operating under fair use doctrine, which consiss of three main areas (journalistic, parody, and educational(Leary & Parker Vol. 55.) In order to see where the line is drawn with the dilemma of copyright within face-to-face taught classroom.