Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The future of blogs

Posted by Lakshmi Chaudhry at 2:39 PM on December 15, 2005.


One expert worries that the blogosphere's liberal interpretation of copyright laws may make them vulnerable to lawsuits.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get The L-Files in your
mailbox!

 

Daniel Solove, a George Washington U professor, points to a potential threat to the future of blogs: copyright laws:

I think that it is a fair generalization to say that the use of copyrighted material is much more liberal in the blogosphere than in regular print publications. If I were writing something in print, for example, I would be much more cautious about the extent to which I’m quoting and using images. But I feel more emboldened on the Internet. Why?

The reason is that the blogosphere has developed a set of copyright norms in an area where there is very little enforcement. These norms about the use of copyrighted material are probably at odds with existing copyright law. The mainstream media and other websites have not been going after bloggers for copyright violations all that much. Although the music and movie industries have been on the copyright offensive, beyond them, the enforcement of copyright on the Internet has been rather laid back. [Concurring Opinions via Boing Boing]

Solove points out that this rather liberal interpretation of "fair use" is not borne out by past court rulings. And stock photography companies like Getty Images Inc. and Corbis Corp are already planning to crack down on offenders who 'borrow' their images.

So is a wave of lawsuits looming on the horizon? His conclusion: Yes, if blogging becomes too powerful and more importantly highly profitable.

Digg!

Lakshmi Chaudhry is a senior editor at In These Times, and the former senior editor of AlterNet. You can write to her at lakshmi@alternet.org.


So long, farewell
Sadly, it's time to say goodbye to this blog.
Post by Lakshmi Chaudhry. January 9, 2006.
Happy holidays
Lakshmi Chaudhry is taking a much-needed computer-free vacation. She'll resume blogging sex, life and politics when the new year rolls around.
Post by Lakshmi Chaudhry. December 16, 2005.
Jimmy Carter goes X-Files
The former prez offers up tales of the bizarre.
Post by Lakshmi Chaudhry. December 16, 2005.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Free speech vs. Ripping off songs
Posted by: lamar on Dec 15, 2005 3:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The difference is that nobody can claim freedom of speech when ripping off a copyrighted song. When you cite to an article or image in furtherance of political discussion, you have a much better case (assuming you aren't making money from it).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]