|
|
|
|---|
|
INFOSYS 296A-2 Syllabus |
Intellectual Property and the Future of the Information Society Peter Lyman Pam Samuelson
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Overview of Seminar Session Themes
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Seminar Readings | The readings for this seminar will be from two books and a coursepack. The books are Frank Webster, Theories of the Information Society (1995) and James Boyle, Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society (1996). Some readings in the coursepack are reproduced in full, even though assignments from them may be spread over several different sessions (e.g., the White Paper) or may be limited some portions of the work (in which case the extra material is recommended). For those who want to delve more deeply into the issues, we have provided citations to some additional readings not in the coursepack. Recommended readings may also be useful to facilitate research for your paper(s) for this seminar.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| January 19 |
The Need For A Social Theory of the Information Society To Underlie Copyright Law and Policy If the economy has become largely information-based, does that mean we live in an information society? What is an information society anyway? What role does law play in constructing an information society? In particular, what role does or should copyright law play in an information society? Readings (strongly recommended before the first class, but at least read them afterwards):
The first hour of the first session will begin the seminar’s consideration of the questions above. The second hour will be a tutorial on copyright law for those who do not already have a basic grounding in this subject.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| January 26 |
The NII Initiative As a Post-Industrial Policy When the Clinton Administration published its "Agenda for Action" in 1992 as part of the National Information Infrastructure (NII) initiative, it did not expressly embrace a theory of an information society, although it seemed implicitly to contain one. What theory of the information society do you perceive in the Agenda for Action? Is it a post-industrial policy? How might the policy directions of the Agenda have been different if it embraced a different conception of an information society? What other choices were there? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| February 2 |
One of the three "working groups" established by Clinton Administration as part of the NII initiative addressed intellectual property policy issues. In 1995 it published a "White Paper" entitled Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure which considered whether changes were needed to copyright law to enable it to adapt to digital networked environments. What conception of the information society does this document embody? Does it have the same or a different conception than the Agenda for Action? Does it advance the Agenda, or take it off in a different direction? Is the White Paper consistent with or different from Schiller’s theory of advanced capitalism? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| February 9 |
Global Information Flows: Castells and the Rise of the Network Society Global networks are enabling information to flow as never before. The implications of global information flows are vast. Among other things, they affect social and business organizations, ways in which commerce and communciations take place, governance systems, and the efficacy of national laws. In the emerging international political economy, intellectual property law has taken on a new importance. How would you describe this importance? How will this in turn affect the information society?
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| February 16 |
Global Information Flows and Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights The past five years have witnessed two important intellectual property developments that affect global information. The first was the successful conclusion in 1994 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) as an annex to the agreement establishing the World Trade Organization. It not only established detailed minimum standards for national copyright laws, but a new international enforcement system. The second was the successful conclusion in 1996 of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty which mainly deals with the challenges of digital technologies for copyright law. How will each of these agreements affect the ability of nations to configure their intellectual property laws to achieve societal goals? What vision of the information society do these agreements embody? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| February 23 |
Open and Closed Terrains of Speech Among the ways societies differ are: in how much terrain is open for public access and participation, which spaces are public and open and for what purposes and which are private and closed, and who gets to decide which terrains are open and closed. Although law is one determinant of open and closed terrains, architecture and the organization of production are other determinants. How does copyright law intersect with these dimensions? In what other ways do these open and closed terrains affect the contours of an society? Are they more or less important in an information society?
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| March 2 |
Copyright and Democratic Civil Society Recent scholarship has emphasized the significance of copyright policy as a way of promoting democratic values. How does it do so? How do policy choices made by courts and legislatures promote or hinder democratic values? What is the proper balance between the private property rights of copyright owners and the public interest in access to information? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| March 9 |
The Future of Libraries, Fair Use, and the Public Sphere Libraries have historically been important institutions in promoting broad public access to information and other democratic values. Because the "first sale" of a copy of a work "exhausts" the copyright owner’s right to control further distribution of that copy, libraries have been free to lend their books to patrons without fear of interference by the copyright owner. Copyright laws have also had special rules allowing libraries to make copies of works for archival and preservation purposes, as well as to facilitate information sharing in other ways (e.g., by providing photocopy machines to enable users to make fair use copies). How will the digital environment change the role of libraries and of fair use? In doing so, consider this statement from the White Paper: "Some participants have suggested that the United States is being divided into a nation of information ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’ and that this could be ameliorated by ensuring that the fair use defense is broadly generous in the NII context. The Working Group rejects the notion that copyright owners should be taxed, apart from all others, to facilitate the legitimate goal of ‘universal access.’"
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| March 16 |
Will Contract Displace Copyright in the Information Society? Digital information is often made available commercially on a licensing basis, rather than being "sold" as print copies of information typically have been. Some of these are individually negotiated licenses, but increasingly common are "shrinkwrap" or "click-through" licenses which purport to bind mass market users to stated terms and conditions if the user loads the information onto her computer or clicks on a button saying "I agree." How would ubiquitous licensing affect the way information is used? Will mass market licenses make more or less information available to the public? How will it intersect with copyright law and policy? How will it affect fair use and the public domain? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| March 30 |
Will Technology Displace Copyright in the Information Society? The White Paper as a Post-Fordist Strategy A variety of technical systems—some hardware, some software—are being deployed or are under consideration as a way for copyright owners to protect their works from piracy. Some commentators view these technologies as benign and effective facilitators of commerce in information, while others view them as deeply threatening to important social values. These technologies might make copyright law obsolete, or at least change its function. Would this be a good thing or a bad thing? Do you expect the widespread deployment of technically protected content? What impediments might there be to deployment of such systems? How will society be affected by these technologies? Recent legislation outlaws tampering with these technical protection systems, but provides a two year moratorium on this ban to enable the Librarian of Congress to determine how such a ban would affect fair uses. What should the Librarian conclude? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| April 6 |
Copyright Management Systems and the Surveillance Society Anthony Giddens is among the scholars who conceive of the information society as a surveillance society. More and more information is collected on individuals. Many uses of this information are benign, but some can be harmful (e.g., paparazzi). Until recently, publishers of information products have generally not had a direct relationship with users of their works and could not keep track of what uses were being made of their works, for how long, and for what purposes. Although some intermediary institutions, such as libraries, have kept information of this sort, they have generally had strict policies against revealing the identity of patrons and what they have been reading (unless, as with Ted Kazinski, police authorities obtain a court order to reveal them). Many technologists are working to develop automated copyright management systems to control and monitor uses of copyrighted works in digital form. Should copyright owners be required to build anonymizing technologies into such systems to protect user privacy, or are concerns about user privacy overblown? What other social consequences may flow from widespread deployment of copyright management systems? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| April 13 |
Surveillance Responsibilities of Online Service Providers The Clinton Administration’s White Paper would have imposed strict liability on online service providers and other intermediaries for infringements by users of the service. This would have required online service providers to make substantial investments in the development and deployment of monitoring technologies. Should online service providers have such responsibilities merely because they are in the best position to monitor and prevent infringement? If Congress decided against a strict liability standard now because monitoring for technologies are immature, does this mean that monitoring responsibilities should be greater if and when technology improves? Are there other social values that counterbalance the dangers of infringement? What are those dangers? How much weight should be given to them? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| April 20 |
Code As Code: Technology As a Form of Social Control Technology sometimes seems like a neutral force in society (e.g., "guns don’t kill people; people kill people"). Even if technology can be used for beneficial or harmful purposes, it doesn’t dictate these uses. Adopting this sort of attitude toward technology ignores ways in which technologies embody policy choices and shape social institutions and behaviors. Professor Lessig coined the term "code as code" to discuss the capacity of computer program code to operate as a governance system. Should society simply leave programmers free to engage in private social ordering, or should it insist that certain social values be encoded into computer programs and networks? If so, which ones and why? If not, why not? Readings:
Recommended Reading:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| April 27 |
Does Silicon Valley Have Theory of the Information Society (or of Intellectual Property)? Frank Webster identifies seven theories of the information society, but perhaps because he’s British and perhaps because he wrote his book before Silcon Valley became anywhere near the phenomenon it now is, he says nothing about Silicon Valley, the Internet, or the World Wide Web. In view of the fact that these phenomena are part of the American experience of an information society, it is worth asking whether there is a distinctive social theory of an information society emerging in Silicon Valley or on the Internet or the Web. What might be the characteristics of such a social theory? How does it compare to other social theories we’ve studied? How might a Silicon Valley theory of intellectual property differ from other theories of copyright we have studied this term? Required:
Recommended:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| May 6 |
New Visions of an Information Society: Virtual Communities and Collaboratories Digital networks make it possible for people to form virtual communities for the exchange information, ideas, and experiences. While many of the virtual communities formed on the Internet are social in nature, some organizers of virtual communities look to these communities as a natural environment in which to make marketplaces for goods and services as well as for ideas. When communities collaborate in the development of an information resource, interesting questions arise as to ownership and sharing. Required:
Recommended:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
feedback to webmaster ~ updated Feb. 9, 1999 |