The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2P Essay

The apparent motion brief intimacy of America (MPAA) vs. P2PIt began with the sacking of Napster, and has steadily expectant to become an all-out repellant against participants of on-line Peer-2-Peer (P2P) file sharing networks. slice the Recording Industry, (RIAA), may progress to fired the first salvo, the Film Industry, stand for by the Motion Picture Association of America, (MPAA), from recently jumping into the litigious fray. On November sixteenth, 2004, the MPAA announced it would grow launching lawsuits against a select stem of P2P users accused of possessing and/or convey copyrighted films. These lawsuits, in the same unprofitable as the RIAAs on-going legal offensive, are meant to intimidate separate P2P users to cease and desist any(prenominal) illegal activities involving movies1. From a distance, this recent spot down appears to be non lonesome(prenominal) acceptable, but withal morally unquestionable. Upon closer inspection of t he issue, it becomes right away apparent that scapgoating P2P networks is not however an redundant and unwinable battle, (as the RIAA endure attest), but also a waste of anti-piracy resource forth from real piracy threats. in the beginning any discussion on the actions of MPAA can be broached, it is necessary to turn back a brief historical flat coat on the intellectual plaza laws, in particular copyrights. To begin with, a copyright is used to treasure creative rather than industrial forms. No formal registration is inevitable to gain apology of a creation. The only requirement is that creation must(prenominal) be expressed, that is, an idea or cognition in and of itself is not copyrightable, only the expression of the idea.2 The first form of multinational intellectual property protection came in 1886 ... ... Accessed on November 16th, 2004Taylor, Chris. Invasion of the image Snatchers. Time Online Edition. November 2004. http//www.time.com/tim e/insidebiz/ term/0,9171,1101041011-709042,00.html . accessed on November 16th, 2004 Jardin, Xeni. P2P in the Legal Crosshairs. pumped up(p) March, 2004. http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62665,00.html . accessed on November 16th 2004Dean, Katie. Film Piracy Steals the Show. WIRED. celestial latitude 2003 http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,61673,00.html . accessed Nov. 16, 20041 MSNBC, November 16th/20042 Attallah, Shade. 20023 Attallah, Shade. 20024 Attallah, Shade. 20025 Chris Taylor, meter Oct. 20046 Taylor, 20047 Xeni Jardin, WIRED, may 20048 Taylor, 20049 Straubhaar, Media Now, 200210 Seradini, Video Age International, 200211 Dean, Wired, 2003 The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2P EssayThe Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) vs. P2PIt began with the sacking of Napster, and has steadily grown to become an all-out offensive against participants of on-line Peer-2-Peer (P2P) file sharing networks. While the Recording Industr y, (RIAA), may have fired the first salvo, the Film Industry, represented by the Motion Picture Association of America, (MPAA), from recently jumping into the litigious fray. On November 16th, 2004, the MPAA announced it would begin launching lawsuits against a select group of P2P users accused of possessing and/or transmitting copyrighted films. These lawsuits, in the same vain as the RIAAs ongoing legal offensive, are meant to intimidate other P2P users to cease and desist any illegal activities involving movies1. From a distance, this recent crack down appears to be not only acceptable, but also morally unquestionable. Upon closer inspection of the issue, it becomes readily apparent that scapgoating P2P networks is not only an unnecessary and unwinable battle, (as the RIAA can attest), but also a waste of anti-piracy resource away from real piracy threats. Before any discussion on the actions of MPAA can be broached, it is necessary to deliver a br ief historical primer on the intellectual property laws, in particular copyrights. To begin with, a copyright is used to protect creative rather than industrial forms. No formal registration is required to gain protection of a creation. The only requirement is that creation must be expressed, that is, an idea or knowledge in and of itself is not copyrightable, only the expression of the idea.2 The first form of international intellectual property protection came in 1886 ... ... Accessed on November 16th, 2004Taylor, Chris. Invasion of the Movie Snatchers. Time Online Edition. November 2004. http//www.time.com/time/insidebiz/article/0,9171,1101041011-709042,00.html . accessed on November 16th, 2004 Jardin, Xeni. P2P in the Legal Crosshairs. WIRED March, 2004. http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62665,00.html . accessed on November 16th 2004Dean, Katie. Film Piracy Steals the Show. WIRED. December 2003 http//www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,61673,00.html . accessed Nov. 16, 20041 MSNBC, November 16th/20042 Attallah, Shade. 20023 Attallah, Shade. 20024 Attallah, Shade. 20025 Chris Taylor, TIME Oct. 20046 Taylor, 20047 Xeni Jardin, WIRED, may 20048 Taylor, 20049 Straubhaar, Media Now, 200210 Seradini, Video Age International, 200211 Dean, Wired, 2003