Introduction
Music falls into the category of intangible assets for which the owners are given exclusive rights when it comes to their use and distribution. It is a creation of the mind similar to literature, art, discoveries and other inventions. The owner has a copyright to his work ensuring that he is the only one authorized to gain financially from the music. He has to receive the credit for his work. It is therefore a criminal offence for an individual to obtain and distribute copyrighted music without permission from the owner.
Intellectual Property Rights
It has been a long journey for the musicians in protecting their intangible assets. As technology keeps changing, the music industry takes the necessary steps to ensure that the rights of the musicians are protected. The Copyright Act of 1790 used to cover books, charts and maps only however in 1831, the law was expanded to also cover music. When the VCR and video cassette technology hit the market, the Federal Copyright Act of 1976 allowed the people to make copies of the music once they had purchased the original music copy (McCourt & Burkart, 2003). The copies however would be for personal use and not for financial gain. The legislation however changed in 1997 when the No Electronic Theft Act forbids the copying and distribution of copyrighted work whether the individuals used the copies for personal or financial purposes. In 1999, a student from the University of Oregon was convicted by the Department of Justice for illegally copying and distributing copyrighted music (Hopkins, 2004, 161). In the 1990s, music copyright received a lot of protection through new laws due to changes in technology.
The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 gave the people the authority to make digital music copies for personal or non-commercial use. They were however prohibited for making serial copies. The computer and MP3 manufacturers faced a lot of lawsuits which stated that they allowed the production of digital music in serial copies. The courts however held that these companies had no obligation to pay royalties to the musicians or introduce copyright management systems in their organizations.
In 1998, the music industry received a boost from the legislature through the enactment of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The new law amended the Federal Act of 1976 provisions that allowed an individual to make copies of the original for personal use. The music industry in 2000 won a major lawsuit against MP3, a website company that allowed musicians to distribute their music through the internet. The company had to pay high penalties and royalties to the musicians in order to continue with its business.
The industry also went after Napster for copyright infringement. This was a company that allowed file sharing in the internet through the use of MP3. Many people started trading and downloading copyrighted music files without paying a cent. The courts found the company liable to knowingly infringing on music copyrights. The company filed for bankruptcy. The file sharing companies that exist now charge a fee to the customers who download the music files via the internet. However, people are ignorant or knowingly continue to break copyright laws. A survey that was conducted by the Pew Internet Project in 2000, found that over 70% of the people who downloaded music files for free via the internet did not perceive that they were doing anything wrong. Over 60% of the people interviewed did not care that the music could be copyrighted.
The music industry tried to get sue the individuals who use file sharing services through the internet companies however it has proven to be difficult as the internet service providers are unwilling to divulge the names of their customers. The industry tried to sue Verizon for refusing to divulge their customer’s details however the U.S Supreme court voted in favour of the company which cited privacy concerns.
The music industry therefore resulted to “John Doe” lawsuits before they could acquire the subpoenas to get the individual’s addresses and personal details (Rainie & Madden, 2004). The efforts were successful. As at the end of 2004, the recording industry had sued 1,977 individuals. When the reality set in and the court cases went up, it was reported that the number of people who used to download music illegally substantially decreased. The people were afraid of being caught and taken to prison or paying high amounts in penalties and damages. Only 10% of the people stopped because it was wrong to do so. Majority of the people stopped due to the possible repercussions.
Conclusion
References
Hopkins, W.W. (Ed.). (2004). Communication and the Law. Northport, Ala.: Vision Press.
McCourt, T., & Burkart, P. (2003). When creators, corporations and consumers
collide: Napster and the development of on-line music distribution. Media, Culture & Society, 25(3) 333-350.
Rainie, L., & Madden, M. (2004). The impact of recording industry suits against music file
swappers. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from: www.pewinternet.org.
