DRM,
Copyright,
Blogging,
Corruption
Tuesday, August 5, 2008 at 07:53AM William Patry has shut down his personal blog, The Patry Copyright Blog. The reasons are that it is increasingly difficult to separate his personal views from his day job at Google, and the current state of copyright law. Here’s what he says about the latter:
Copyright law has abandoned its reason for being: to encourage learning and the creation of new works. Instead, its principal functions now are to preserve existing failed business models, to suppress new business models and technologies, and to obtain, if possible, enormous windfall profits from activity that not only causes no harm, but which is beneficial to copyright owners. Like Humpty-Dumpty, the copyright law we used to know can never be put back together again: multilateral and trade agreements have ensured that, and quite deliberately.
This mirrors my thinking. When I started blogging in earnest several years ago, I was passionately interested in copyright. This went back to my early years as a graduate student and researcher when I had the privilege of participating in and managing several national and international research projects dealing with copyright, photocopying, database sharing, and copyright formalities. I moved on after deciding that to make it in copyright required a law degree and I was already suffering from graduate school fatigue.
I picked the interest back up when DRM — digital rights management — was being used in earnest by the recorded music industry. As Patry notes in the quote I’ve provided above, though, copyright law no longer serves to encourage the creation of new works but is used by large businesses via lawsuits and lobbying to promote existing or outmoded business models. So while I still believe in the importance of protecting intellectual property rights, the realities of the marketplace and politics have prevailed. Patry will be missed.
There is another significance to his shutting down his blog. This has to do with the difficulty he experienced in keeping separate his business interests and his personal professional interests. This is a problem that many professionals face every day but it can be exacerbated by personal blogging. When personal and professional loyalties and values are parallel, things can run smoothly. If these interests diverge and are publicized in some way, problems can arise. It’s a fine balance and we’re still working out the details of how to manage the overlap between personal and professional interests.
Reader Comments (4)
The best thing to do is always take a step back and review your content before going live. Have an unbiased observer have a quick read. Just be careful and think beyond just your employer when writing.
Thanks for commenting!
Dennis
* Will the IP of an idea conceived during my personal time belong to my employer? (Samatha's point about influence)
* When I leave an organization, could a non-compete extend to IP developed by me during the non-compete period?
* How will the subtle differences in content and context delivered across different social media types change the definition of IP?
I believe that the definition and treatment of IP (and copyright infringement) will play out in the courts.
I agree these issues are very complex, and that many will have to "play out in the courts." There is a school of thought, though, that the very questions you raise place such strain on traditional notions of copyright and IP "ownership" that traditional notions of copyright have become obsolete and that the only people to benefit from continued stretching of these notions are the large content owners and attorneys.
I'm not in complete agreement with that view, though. But I am saddened that issues of authorship and creativity -- which are the things that initially interested me in copyright -- tend to get lost in esoteric legal arguments that are only understandable to attorneys and the people who can afford them and the lobbying power to impact legislation.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment!
Dennis