next section

previous section

interactive activity

table of contents

return to home

related links

post your thoughts

But what of computer programs in the form of software? Is software protected, just as literary works, from unlawful distribution? Yes! In fact, computer programs, according to the WIPO Copyright Treaty, are protected exactly as literary works are protected under Article 2 of the Berne Convention for Protection of Artistic and Literary Works. This means that the copyright privileges that literary and artistic works enjoy extend to computer programs as well. Therefore, only the owner of the copyright itself enjoys the exclusive right of authorizing the making available to the public of copies of the computer program in question.

The same applies to computer games, a more specific type of computer software. The US Copyright Law states that although the idea for a game is not protected by copyright, the manner of expression of the author (in artistic, literary, or musical form) is. Therefore, it is unlawful to distribute copies of computer games without the copyright owner's explicit permission.

But what of works made available to the public on the Internet? Are they at all protected by copyright? Once again, yes! For works made available over a communications network (such as the Internet), the copyright protects original authorship. This, of course, applies only to those who wish to obtain the copyright. But just as limitations exist with games, they exist in this case too: the copyrighting of online works, according to the Copyright Law, does not protect ideas, procedures, systems, or methods of operation. This means that once such an online work has been made public, nothing in the copyright laws prevents others from developing another work based on similar principles, or ideas.

Although these exceptions to the rules make things more difficult, everything described until now probably seems relatively simple. The above discussion, however, is just an over-simplified explanation of the relationship between copyright laws and computers. With the increasing popularity of computers and the growth of the Internet, matters have of late become more complex. New situations arise daily, and these are often unprecedented. That is, they are indeed so new, that the copyright laws currently available are not adequate to deal with them. Traditional copyright laws often seem outdated in the ever-changing technological world. Because the copyright laws that are currently available do not clearly enough define what should be done in such cases, controversy is often the result. Two examples better illustrate this.

Caching simply means the copying and storing of web pages. This process can occur at two different levels: it can be performed by one's own browser (recently visited web pages are only recalled from memory when visiting them again), or it can be performed by the server of one's Internet Service Provider. Such providers may store the most frequently visited web pages on their servers and make only the copies available to the users. But is caching (which in a sense defies copyright laws) at all legal? Well, it might seem so. After all, surfing the Internet is about speed, and caching allows data to be retrieved faster by users. Therefore, from this perspective, it has positive results. But are there any adverse effects? Unfortunately, yes. Caching interferes with web sites' analysis of their users, and even worse, users seeking real time information (such as stock market quotes, for example) do not have access to an updated web page, but rather only the cached copy. Because of these arguments, it is not yet clear whether caching should be allowed under the present copyright laws. Therefore, it remains controversial for now. [Schlachter, Eric "Cache-22." IP Magazine. Summer 1996 (Jun. 1999)]

Yet another example will show the controversial aspects of the current copyright laws. With the appearance of MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3 (more commonly known as MP3) digital files just a few years ago, audio digital files are now freely available for users to download. Songs available in MP3 format can be found at various sites on the web, and by simply downloading these files, users have free access to recordings they would have had to purchase beforehand. MP3 files, that is, are digital copies of actual music recordings. But is this trafficking of such files not illegal? Doesn't the existence of MP3 files, after all, infringe upon the copyright of such songs? Major record companies assert that this is the case: such pirated (or illicitly copied) material available on the Internet, they say, discourages customers from purchasing legitimate recordings. As a result, the record companies state that they have sustained major losses (and continue to do so) because of digital piracy. In an attempt to resolve this issue, MP3.com (one of the leading providers of MP3 files) agreed to sign a license in June 1999 in conjunction with the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP). The license states that all songwriters registered with the ASCAP are entitled to receive royalty fees (or reimbursement) based on how frequently their songs are downloaded from MP3.com. [Napoli, Lisa "Music Licenser Announces Agreement with Web Site." New York Times. 19 June 1999 (Jul. 1999)] This seemingly minor compromise may in fact be the beginning to an important compromise between the two opposing sides. Moreover, the recent court case of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) v. Diamond Multimedia Systems involved a similar issue: "the intersection of technology, the Internet,  and music listening". Diamond's "Rio" is a portable device that allows a user to download MP3 audio files from a computer and listen to them elsewhere. The RIAA held that such a device would be involved in the illegal trafficking of recordings, and therefore have adverse effects on the recording industry. In the final ruling, however, the court held that the player "merely makes copies in order to render portable...those files that already reside on a user's hard drive", and therefore its use is legal. So what is the latest relationship between MP3 files and copyright? As long as MP3 files are used for home use, their use is legal. However, it is illegal for anyone to create a web site that contains pirated copies of MP3 files!

As you have just seen, issues involving copyright laws and computers tend to become rather complex, so it is not at all surprising that so much controversy often arises in this novel area of computer ethics.

back to top