Copyrights

The United States Copyright act protect its author or creator for any infringement. The Social Network company operates the exchange of widgets created by its users. It also allows its users to create and customize and modify widgets within the website. This can be problematic without the knowledge of different copyright laws. Knowledge of the copyright law will inform the Social Network’s users about the incentives of protecting their creation with the Copyright laws. Ferrera explains the original creative work as The “literary works, dramatic, musical, pantomimes/ choreographic, pictorial, graphic and sculptural works, motion pictures and audiovisual work, sound recordings and architectural works“ (Ferrera, et al, 2004). The Copyright Act ensures that the self-developed widgets, user’s photographs, personal profile information, and other creative written work are protected against any infringement. One of the four rights within a Copyright Act discusses the right of the creator to reproduce their work. Similarly with the rights within the United States Copyright Act, one of the rights found also in the Canadian context “[f]or the purposes of this Act, “copyright,” in relation to a work, means the sole right to produce or reproduce the work or any substantial part thereof in any material form” (Canadian Copyright Act, Part 1, sec. 3). Membership in the Social Network company’s online community involves sharing their personal information, photographs, journal entries, notes, video blogs and more to other members within the online community. The Social Network company need to familiarize on the ease of copying content. The company need to ensure that they are prepared against any infringement practices on the website. U nder the United States //Copyright Act//, another exclusive right of the author or developer of a creative work is the right to sell, rent, lease, or otherwise distribute copies of the copyrighted work to the public ( Ferrera, et al, 2004). This particular act prevents infringement practices of other people who try to sell other people’s creative works. Technological advancements have created easier methods for one to copy a work posted on a website and publish it as one's own. Since data of the company’s users are posted on the website, it will be the Social Network’s company’s jurisdiction to sell, rent, or lease that copyrighted information. The social networking company needs to ensure that the users have a clear understanding that the company is not responsible for the actions of other users in the website who may try to reproduce a user's original, published, creative work. Also, they have to inform the public that the company is not liable on any acts of copyright infringement against a member/s using the social networking website to publish infringed original creative work/s. A current case of copyright infringement, //Playboy Enterprise// against Frena, involves the violation of two of the copyright owner's rights, according to the United States //Copyright // Act. The defendant in the case was an operator of a computer bulletin board service that, unknown to the defendant, distributed unauthorized copies of //Playboy Enterprises, Inc.//’s (PEI) copyrighted photographs, (Mark E. Harrington, June 4, 2009). In this case, Frena, the defendant, is been accused by //Playboy Enterprises Inc//. of infringing on their right to reproduce the copyrighted work and the right to sell, rent, or lease the copyrighted work. Frena argued about fair use but lost because the court found that Frena’s actions in distributing the photos were commercial in nature. Although the fair use doctrine allows a person to reproduce an original copy without permission in certain circumstances, based on the nature and amount of the copyrighted work being used for his/her own, personal purposes, in this case this doctrine does not apply as Frena gained in //Playboy//’s expense. Gaining financially through Frena’s advertisers violates the copyright act to sell creative works because //Playboy// did not receive any profit from this particular website published by Frena. It will be a common activity for the social networking company’s users to reproduce content found from other member’s profiles. The company needs to ensure preventive measures are established to help reduce the reproduction of illegal copies. Blocking access to copy pictures or content from the website may help prevent copyright infringement. The company should establish a “no-right click” option to limit the accessibility of the users within the website. Also, it would be advantageous for the company to ensure content published through the website is protected through the use of watermarks or other forms of technological designs, as a form of recognition that the creative works are published through the social networking company. Easier access to contact information and information about the copyright laws on how to gain access on copyrighted works will benefit the company and aid in ensuring their users are informed about this particular online law. This tactic can help discourage copyright infringement. The third right within the United States //Copyright Act// is the right of the author to prepare derivative works. These are creative works that are based on the original content and ideas of a published work. According to the //Copyright Act//, a derivative work is defined as “a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed or adopted,” (Ferrera, et al, 2004). In the age of Photoshop use for photographs, it is important for the social networking company to discuss with its prospective users about their rights and limitations on modifying the creative works of another user. Also, since the social networking company allows users to modify widgets originally created, the company will have to ensure that the rights of the original creator are not infringed. A legal risk that they may encounter may be that one of the users modifies another user's original content and sells it to the public without the original author or creator’s consent. This can be avoided by limiting access to other users on a creative published work without consent. Also, the social networking company needs to inform its users that publishing their creative work or widgets online does not guarantee them that their content will not be reproduced or modified by other users. The last right within the United States //Copyright Act// is the right of the author to display a copyrighted work publicly. Ferrera states that a public performance “[a]lso includes a semipublic place or any place where substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of family and its social acquaintances” (Ferrera, pg.94). This is relevant with the social networking company, since they allow the sharing of information with other members of the community; the website and its users need to take precautions on what they share online. The company needs to carefully communicate to its users about infringement in relation to displaying copyrighted work such as other member’s information, journal notes, written work, photographs and videos through the use of the website. Regarding the //Playboy// case of copyright infringement discussed earlier, it violates //Playboy Enterprise Inc.'s// right to display copyrighted work. In this particular case, the “Defendant's display of PEI's copyrighted photographs to subscribers was a public display. Though limited to subscribers, the audience consisted of "a substantial number of persons outside of a normal circle of family and its social acquaintances” (Bitlaw, 1996-2008). The defendant lost the case because it violated the plaintiff’s copyright right on displaying its creative work in public. Since there was no permission received from //Playboy Enterprises Inc.// the defendant had no right to publish the photographs in public through the defendant’s website. The defendant was deemed liable by the court because of its reproduction of copies available to the public on his bulletin board website. To prevent legal complications, the social networking company needs to ensure proper terms and conditions are listed for the user and that the company has a policy regarding reproduction of creative work for display in public. This should include the reproduction for display on a user’s photographs, written work and the widgets. The social networking company needs to establish a form where users are able to communicate with other members of the website to send requests to permit reproduction of creative work online. This communication will allow the website and the author of the creative work to track people who made requests to reproduce these creative works to avoid legal issues. Adding a terms and conditions page that provides a detailed explanation on the policies on reproducing and publishing content in public without permission will avoid confusion regarding this type of copyright infringement.

"Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Frena (M.D. Fla. 1993) (BitLaw)." __BitLaw: A Resource on Technology Law__. 1996- 2008. <[|__http://www.bitlaw.com/source/cases/copyright/frena.html__]>. Referenced on April 11, 2009. Mark Harrington, On-line Copyright Infringement Liability for Internet Service Providers: Context, Cases & Recently Enacted Legislation: B.C. Intell. Prop. & Tech. 1999<[|__http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/articles/content/ 1999060401.html__]> Referenced on April 10, 2009 Canada. Canadian Copyright Act. 9 January 2009. 26 January 2009 < [|__http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-42/index.html__] >. Referenced on April 11, 2009 Ferrera, Gerald R., Stephen D. Lichtenstein, Margo E.K. Reder, Robert C. Bird, and Ferrera, William T. Schiano. __CyberLaw:Text and Cases__. 2 ed. United States: Thomson Corporation, 2004. Ofcom, Consumer complaint against UK Online about unfair contract terms, May 2006 <[|__http://www.ofcom.org.uk/bulletins/comp_bull_index/comp_bull_ccases/closed_all/cw_887/__]> Referenced on April 10, 2009 CBS Frontpage Denmark, The Principles of European Contract Law, 1999([|__http://frontpage.cbs.dk/law/commission_on_european_contract_law/PECL__] __[|%20engelsk/] [|engelsk_partI_og_II.htm]__ ). Referenced on April 10, 2009.
 * Sources for both O.C and Copyright**