The people at the concert have been deemed as carrying out illegal behavior because they are listening to remixed music. Culture always builds from the past, therefore making their action unlawful creates a moral dilemma which should further be explored instead of criminalized. The activities are similar to past music which carried similarities in recordings such as the Staple Singers, “this may be my last time” and the Rolling Stone, “the last time”. Additionally, the corporates are allowed to file lawsuits on what they feel does not suit them.
Copyrights were created to encourage creativity. However, huge corporations are exploiting the music institution to make money rather than the desired effect of encouraging originality. Through the creation of strained laws, the corporates build exploiting rather than stimulating production. Additionally, the law is supposed to provide between personal data and that of the public domain, however, creating restrains creates a monopoly in the music industry.
Napster allowed sharing of music which is an essential component towards the innovation of more music. However, when the corporate instructed the shutdown of the website, they went beyond their reach. More so, they went further to incriminate individuals. In essence, by criminating Napster, the corporation created a monopoly which aims at satisfying their selfish needs rather than giving power to the people.
When people share information without any contribution to the creator, it is illegal since the hard work of the artist goes unrecognized. However appropriate laws should be created to allow free sharing considering that not all people are financially endowed. More so, the current laws suit by record labels and copyright industries serve to their benefit rather than the artist and the public. As a result, the oppression affects both the creativity of emerging artists and the artist owning the work.
No comments:
Post a Comment