The introduction of the Internet has led to an increase activity in digitised and network environments, intensifying the tensions between ownership and use of copyrighted works (Flew, forthcoming in 2005, p.11). As a result content creators seek greater legal protection to ensure recognition of the integrity of both themselves and their work in its reproduction (Flew, 2002, p.158). In the late 1990s, the United States Congress added new provisions explicitly addressing digital copying to the existing copyright law (Biegel, 2001, p.295). These provisions included the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which was enacted on October 28, 1998 by Bill Clinton after an unanimous vote in the United States Senate (Nimmer, 2003, p.329), two years after the Geneva agreement (Biegel, 2001, p.166).
The DMCA served to implement the two World Intellectual Property Organisation copyright treaties in the United States (Biegel, 2001, p.166). These two treaties were geared towards copyrightable works of authorship (Nimmer, 2003, p.139), the digital exploitation of works and how copyright should be governed on the Internet (Nimmer, 2003, p.215). Therefore, the DMCA significantly increased the legal tools available to prosecute alleged copyright infringers using digital media (Biegel, 2001, p.296). However it is necessary to examine the Berne Convention, in order to better understand the treaty framework of international copyright law, as most recent treaties are built upon it (Nimmer, 2003, p.51).
The DMCA enacted a variety of strict regulations that strengthened the entitlement of copyright owners across the broad (Biegel, 2001, p.296). For example, it suggests that internet service providers (ISPs) may be liable if they knowingly link to infringing material (Biegel, 2001, p.296). Furthermore, as used in DMCA, ISPs include more types of online services such as that which provides Internet access, email, chat room and web hosting (Biegel, 2001, p.296). In addition this Act consists of the much debated anti-circumvention provision which means that it is illegal for online users to circumvent copyright protection devices and that ISPs are required to take down content from users’ websites if copyright owners complain that the materials appear to constitute copyright infringement (Biegel, 2001, p.296).
Although defenders of the DMCA insist that fair use would not be compromise, many still argue that the Act strengthens the copyright owners’ ability to pursue legal protection against alleged infringers while providing little rights for online users (Biegel, 2001, p.295). Hence upsetting the balance reflected in the original United States Copyright Act (Biegel, 2001, p.295). As stated on the Anti-DMCA Website (2004) this legislation “is being used to silence researchers, computer scientists and critics…Corporations are using it against the public�. More significantly, Litman (in Flew, forthcoming in 2005, p.12]) views that the Act seeks to impose liability on citizens for infringing provisions that they have no reason to suspect are under law and furthermore, based on the rationality that it will assist in preventing piracy, to make non-commercial and non-infringing behaviour illegal.
Anti-DMCA (2004) Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), retrieved October 16, 2004, from http://anti-dmca.org/
Biegel, S. (2001) Beyond Our Control? Confronting the Limit of Our Legal System in the Age of Cyberspace, Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, ISBN 0262025043.
Flew, T. (2002) New Media: An Introduction, South Melbourne: Oxford University Press, ISBN 0195508599.
Flew, T. (forthcoming in 2005) “Internet Law and Policy�, in T. Flew New Media: An Introduction, 2nd ed., South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
Nimmer, D. (2003) COPYRIGHT Sacred Text, Technology, and the DMCA, The Hague: Kluwer Law International, ISBN 9041188762.
Weena Tan 13:48, 22 Oct 2004 (EST)
