February 06, 2012
Bill Keller tells readers that Congress should pass laws that require intermediaries like Google and Wikipedia to take responsibility for helping to enforce copyrights. It is interesting to see how he thinks the wording of the Article 1, Section 8:
“To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries”
which gives Congress the power to grant copyright and patent monopolies, also authorizes Congress to require that individuals and companies assist others in enforcement of their copyrights. Can Congress require that people help me make a profit on my hotdog stand?
If the development of technology makes copyright and inefficient way to “promote the progress of science and useful arts,” then the constitutional route for dealing with the situation would be to find more efficient mechanisms to serve this purpose.
This might be difficult in the United States. There have been numerous news stories and columns decrying the shortage of workers with the necessary skills. In this case, the skill in short supply is the ability to think creatively about an effective response to developments in technology.
Anyhow, it is perverse response to the development of technology to grant the government ever greater powers of repression in order to ensure that an archaic social institution can still be used to generate profits for a small group of powerful corporations and individuals.
Comments