PricewaterhouseCoopers recently released a report that attempts to provide a “holistic view” of the so-called sharing economy, including how it is unfolding “across both business and consumer landscapes.” While an exact definition of the “sharing economy” can be hard to pin down, it generally refers to the concept of using information technology to allow consumers to rent or borrow goods, especially those that are underutilized, rather than buy and own them. Undoubtedly, the sharing economy is an important and innovative approach to commerce, especially having given rise to wildly popular services such as Airbnb and Lyft. More broadly, the sharing economy can boost economic welfare by allowing the economy to more efficiently utilize goods and services.
Given all this, we certainly need thorough analysis of the sharing economy to fully grasp its potential. Yet PwC’s report errs badly in at least one important respect: It conflates unlawful sharing of digital media with legitimate peer-to-peer activities.
With regards to the challenges of the sharing economy in digital media, PwC writes:
“The ambiguity of the sharing economy is particularly evident in entertainment and media, where consumers are open to ‘sharing’
As any musician or songwriter will tell you, music copyright law is a headache.
Today, ITIF filed comments with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to address the consent decrees of Performance Right Organizations (PROs) such as the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI). These PROs manage licensing for public performance rights for compositions, the rights to play an artist’s music in a public place, or transmit it to the public via a medium, such as radio, television or the Internet. In 1941, the PROs settled a lawsuit brought by the DOJ with a consent decree designed to stop them from participating in anti-competitive behavior created by the accumulation of public performance rights held by their member songwriters and music publishers. We argue that DOJ should rework these decrees to assist in modernizing the way music copyrights are licensed in the digital age, keeping an eye on innovation, competition, transparency, and fairness.
Last week, the Expendables 3 was leaked online three weeks prior to the movie’s on-screen release date. It was downloaded close to 100,000 times in the first 12 hours and days later had already surpassed 500,000 downloads, making it the most pirated movie of the week. Pre-release privacy costs films millions, while reducing creativity, stalling innovation, and harming free speech. While our beloved action heroes were unable to protect their movie from copyright infringement, the Internet community can adopt initiatives to reduce future leaks.
The Expendables III is not the first movie to be pirated before it was released in theaters. This type of leak has occurred for a variety of prominent movie releases, including Star Wars Episode III, Revenge of the Sith, Disney’s the Avengers and X-Men Origins: Wolverine, an incomplete work print copy of which appeared several weeks before the official theatrical release in 2009. Pre-release piracy hurts films because the people who are most interested in seeing the film are those most likely to pirate the pre-release, and therefore not pay to see it in theaters.
The Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) estimates that
My Free Unauthorized Use, Trespass, Conversion and Misappropriation Summer Vacation: Don’t Worry It’s Not Stealing
My wife and I are in the saving money mode since unfortunately our son is likely to go to some pricey liberal arts college next year and sock us with a huge bill. But we don’t want to give up on our summer vacation. After all we deserve to have fun too. So after reading The New York Times op-ed by law professor Stuart P. Green entitled “When Stealing Isn’t Stealing” I came up with an idea, that if I say so myself, is brilliant. I will have a vacation based on unauthorized use, trespass, conversion and misappropriation, since according to Green, it’s no longer stealing when I use non-rival, intangible goods (e.g., when I download movies, video games, software, books, music, etc., without paying for them). It’s unauthorized use, trespass, conversion and misappropriation.
Read the rest