Please write two replies from two different people, and each reply do not write 200 words.
According to Doctorow, a good copyright system allows a large and diverse group of creators to make many diverse works for a very large and diverse audience. A bad copyright system is just the opposite: a system that only lets a small group of creators make a small amount of work for a very limited audience. He goes on to say that while some copyright law is acceptable, law that gets in the way of people just wanting to be creative has crossed the line. The U.S. Constitution certainly does protect intellectual property, however, it characterizes copyright as a way to promote innovation and the sharing of ideas. Doctorow argues throughout his book that current copyright laws are actually doing the opposite, hindering creativity and blocking the sharing of ideas.
Doctorow warns that increased content blocking and surveillance can be dangerous. He says that people spent years fighting for the freedoms we enjoy today, and to go back on those freedoms by increasing surveillance and content blocking would be somewhat disgraceful. He says that no matter what, creativity cannot be stopped. It can only be driven to the point where it must be practiced illegally. Many parallels are seen between Doctorow’s book and his TED talk, the first being his explanation of the importance of the Internet. He goes on to touch on surveillance, similar to the thoughts he shares in his book. He says increased surveillance leads to a more fearful and uptight society, and it can be assumed that a more uptight society would be far less creative in nature. Additionally, he makes connections to the current Internet copyright system being “broken.”
Technology can be used to build a freer world by using its powers to encourage sharing and creativity, not attempt to limit it for the sake of profit. Doctorow tell publishers not to let retailers take advantage of your relationship with customers through digital rights management. He then tells creators not to let their publishers use copyright as an excuse for regulations that limit the audience you can deliver your art to. These issues are important to us as professionals because in the business world, having a creative mind is an avenue for upward movement within a firm. If this potential creativity is blocked, some of the world’s brightest minds may remain stuck at the bottom of the totem pole (keep in mind this example isn’t even referencing the fields specifically gauged toward creativity, this is just illustrating the necessary need for creativity in business). If that potential reality is realized, it could be devastating to both individuals and society as a whole.
Doctorow talks about how important the internet is in our society, but also how it is being abused. He states that the internet was intended to be free but due to miss use, our privacy is being violated. He goes on to mention Edward Snowden because he was the one who revealed how much was being monitored. In the movie “Snowden” with Joseph Gordon Levitt, there is a scene where he first discovers that the United States government has access to any camera that is on. A woman begins to undress and I feel that really shows justice and backs up Doctorow’s point when he says how the internet needs to be more secure.
Doctorow defines a good copyright system as one that is very large and open to ideas and all creativity. He also defines a bad copyright system as one that is very small and has strict limits which hinder creativity. Two very popular songs “Under Pressure” by Queen and “Ice Ice Baby” by Vanilla Ice pretty much have the same beat which was originally made by Queen. Vanilla Ice added a note to the baseline beat making it legal to use in a song, but we can all agree it was essentially the same beat which went on to make him a nice amount of money. I feel the copyright fine print has loop holes leaving the question, was Vanilla Ice creative when he made that beat, or was he just stealing the baseline beat of another song?