Forum - View topicNEWS: Man Arrested for Uploading Gundam UC #3 on Nico Nico
Goto page Previous 1, 2 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
Author | Message | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lightning Leo
Posts: 311 Location: Earth |
|
|||||||||||
Owners of warez sites in the U.S. have been indicted, convicted, and imprisoned many times. The N.E.T. law was passed following the La Macchia case specifically to make criminal provisions for just such cases of willful infringement resulting in significant plaintiff financial losses. That the majority of cases are conducted civilly and not criminally is more a matter of prosecutorial discretion, and shouldn't be considered an indictment on the criminality of infringement. Willful copyright infringement can, in addition to civil statutory penalties, result in criminal penalties, including imprisonment of up to 5 years in prison and fines up to $250,000 per offense. So I'm unsure how this situation, involving a man who uploaded an episode of Gundam on a major media outlet and was subsequently arrested, differs substantially from U.S. law. For those who don't know: civil cases are filed lawsuits between two parties (plaintiff/defendant), whereas criminal cases are conducted between the state and an accused lawbreaker (prosecutor/defendant). For the same crime a separate civil and criminal case may be opened, simultaneously satisfying a debt to the victim and a debt to society.
Artists and animators are for-hire subcontractors, so unless otherwise specified contractually they don't hold copyright in the final products. However, the production company that employs them does (which includes directors, subdirectors, producers, etc.). These people/entities are the ones who take initiative in and responsibility for the creation of an anime production. Financial backers and broadcasting companies that distribute the works also often hold copyright ownership. This isn't even to mention mangaka, for whom which anime often represents derivative works, who may hold copyright ownership pursuant to their contractual agreements. Or even the musicians/composers that make music for show op/ends. So yeah, I'd say copyright laws do protect craftsmen, by protecting the original creators, financial backers, and other entities that contract them in developing independently owned intellectual property.
In addition to financial restitution, plaintiffs get the comfort knowing our society safeguards their intellectual property by calling infringement what it is: unlawful, criminal theft of creator property, i.e., the creator's right to control the reproduction of their works. By uploading the creator's works, uploaders take away the creator's copyright and give it to themselves. They also essentially devalue the work to $0 by giving it away for free, but really, the aim of a justice system shouldn't be whether or not sales are improved by imprisoning criminals, but whether our moral rights and legal privileges are preserved. |
||||||||||||
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
||
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group