Latent Ambiguity: WTF mate? (3 pts)
Before this class, I had never heard of latent ambiguity. However, it is rather self explanatory: there is an unanticipated (latent) thing that is not clear (ambiguity). Ok, so that is not the best definition, but you get the point. It seems like the internet has brought a tidal wave of these to the forefront. Specifically in the area of copyright, the lines have been blurred. What is piracy? What is the responsibility of the government and law in policing this? What are appropriate measures to put in place to discourage it? What our users rights in relation to copyrighted material?
The framers of the constitution put a single line in to recognize this important concept: “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. “ While the need for this protection is obvious, unless I was paid to create something, I would put no effort in it because it is not profitable (I know, an evil word). Anytime before now there was a physical attachment to a work. A book had to be printed; a record had to be bought. However, internet has made it possible for unlimited consumption via downloads of works of music, literature, television, and movies. This possibility was unforeseen by the framers of the constitution.
My use of a downloaded file does not preclude someone else from using or enjoying the same thing. The physical characteristic of property has been removed from these objects because of their widespread availability on the internet. The question then is what did the framers intend for us to do about protecting intellectual property when it is totally removed from ability to create value by creating artificial scarcity. Many companies are producing software and asking for donations for their work. I know the post-it software I use does this. However, I hate to admit it, but I did not donate anything for the software. But if this software was not already free, I would not have bought it. My use of the software does not equal lost sales of which reduction is the ultimate goal of the company. While initially I believe there was too little control, I now believe many companies have overstepped their boundaries.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
We cannot figure out what the farmers (refer to writers or authors) of the Constitution valued simply by looking at the Constitution. We should choose what value to protect in cases where there is a "Latent Ambiguity" as said by Dalis. Latent ambiguity changes the privacy like "worm" can lake the privacy and burdensome searches. As we discussed in class, "translation" is case where the value like privacy or some valuable property (innovation creativity) are protected and preserved very clear. Clear in this context means it is easy to find them in the Constitution. So, as Dalis said framers have right to protect and limited their produce and work. Of course, the technology like Internet used by farmers to protect their copyright and at the same time have managerial objective to make profit-making through his creator. We need much more control so that we become free to protect our right because I agree with Dalis believe that many framer have full power to control and overstepped their boundaries.
Post a Comment