Lessig debate is discussing on copyright. He says, copyright regulation denies majority of the people from accessing information. The law permits only a small portion of the population to access this information. According to him, scientific information on the internet is restricted to professors and university students in a university setting. Lessig says that the accessibility of information should be permitted to all. The right to personal creativity should be protected but when the information is not accessible to people it does not mean a thing. His concern is on science and not music.
Lessig proposes the creation of blue-sky commission that would work on copyright in the digital age. There are five elements of copyright architecture according to him. First he says copyright should be simple if it is meant to purport to regulate fifteen year olds, then they have to understand it unlike it is now where no one understands it.
Secondly, it has to be realistic. He says war has been fought against file sharing by peers and the pirates are our children, but the war has been a total failure. As it has not led to the achievement of reducing illegal, file sharing. He proposes alternative solution such as voluntary collective license or compulsory licenses.
Thirdly, copyright has to be efficient. In his argument, Lessig says that copyright happens to be the most inefficient property system known to man. Since we cannot say who owns what, it is important to restore some kind of formality like a system to record ownership. Fourthly, he says that copyright should be effective and provide revenue for the artist. Finally, he says it needs to be better targeted and regulate selectively. This is the distinction between what to be accessed by professional and amateurs.
According to Lessing, he says that individual creativity should be protected. He says that through piracy, individual work is shared through peer sharing which he refers as criminal activities. Someone’s creativity should be a source of revenue to enable him or her lives a good life. However, this is hindered by piracy. He says that there has been an increasing free culture that has permitted the sharing of individual works, by pirates therefore, robbing the creator his or her profit.
Lessig say that the implementation of strict piracy laws will protect the creators from exploitation by piracy. He however thinks that internet piracy has been used inappropriately. He thinks that room should be left for the expansion of the information. This means that the intellectual property right is necessary in protecting individual work to enable them earn revenue. This is possible through clear definition of what piracy is and appropriate application of the five elements in the copyright as he suggest to make the two understandable to all thus making it practicable.
Lessig argument is a powerful argued and taken into account all aspects of free culture that seem important. He discusses the free culture with practical examples that give insight to the reality. The amplified meaning of creativity as demonstrated by various YouTube videos and oral example make the audience aware of what the professor is really driving home. His analysis is comprehensible and lively. He accepts that we are in a crisis of cultural improvement but after his analysis, he does not deliver. He fails to give a clear way out in solving this problem and his recommendations and proposals are barely impractical and politically unattainable. He does not point out if copyright is a property right nor does he say whether property rights are a good thing.
