- The severity of intellectual property charges can lead to tragedies Aaron Swartz
- This does not mean the government is responsible however
- Intellectual property laws are not obeyed by most people
- Intellectual property is ideas that have commercial value
In January of 2011 Aaron Swartz, an Internet activist and technological guru, was arrested for downloading online journals from a database. Acting on his beliefs of open access, he chose to log on as a guest in MIT's network and download many journals from JSTOR. This act meant that Swartz faced felony charges. However, he was never convicted because he took his own life just two years after being arrested. This tragedy poses the dilemma of intellectual property penalties and if they are too severe for the crime.The US government should not be held responsible for Swartz's suicide
Although Swartz took his own life while awaiting trial, it cannot be known for sure what led him to do this. He did not leave behind a note specifically blaming the government for his death or saying that he felt bullied by them. Even though it was likely the stress of his impending trial that eventually became too much for Swartz to handle, the government technically did not do anything wrong. They were properly following the law by arresting Swartz and pressing charges.
To many, it may seem that the government was too hard on Swartz and that the punishment they sought for him was too great compared to the crime. However, it is the government's job to deter the public from committing crime. They were probably making an example out of Swartz since he was so well known in the technology field. The government is not to blame in this case, but the punishment was still too severe.
Penalties for intellectual property infringement in the US are too severe
For his crimes, Swartz faced thirty-five years in prison and a fine of one million dollars. This punishment was for a seemingly minuscule crime. In this day and age, technology has allowed people to easily violate current intellectual property laws. Considering that so many people do not obey the laws, the penalty should be less severe.
Current penalties for violating intellectual properties demonstrate how severe the punishments really are. A report done by Brian Yeh lays out different violations and their penalties. For example, bootleg recording of a live musical can result in a criminal conviction of imprisonment for up to five years for the first offense. The same punishment can be given for copyright infringement for profit. Most likely, these are acts that many people commit on a regular basis along with the other violations in the report. It seems harsh that people can be imprisoned for filming a performance. Many people would agree that the punishment for violating intellectual property does not fit the crime.
Experts believe most people don't follow intellectual property laws
A well renowned psychologist Tom Tyler discusses the psychology behind intellectual property laws and why most people do not follow them in his article "Compliance with Intellectual Property Laws: A Psychological Perspective". He mentions that people do not obey by the laws not only in the United States but around the world. He cites a study done by Solomon and O'Brien which found that over half of students in college use illegally downloaded software. Another study done by Taylor and Shim found the same thing to be true in business faculties and executives. Actions that are so widely disobeyed should not be punished as harshly as they currently are.
What is intellectual property and what is it's purpose?
To understand the overall dilemma here, one needs to understand what intellectual property is. According to our book, intellectual property is "ideas that have commercial value, such as literary or artistic works, patents, business methods, and industrial processes". It includes copyrights, patents, and trademarks all which aim to protect creativity and innovation.
The idea behind intellectual property laws is to protect the creations of people while promoting an economically fair system. However, technology has changed and downloading illegal music or software and things of the sort is much more simple. Additionally, tracking intellectual property can be very difficult, so often times, people will not get caught doing the illegal activities. To continue to protect intellectual property, a new type of system needs to be implemented.
How to change the system behind intellectual property
Aaron Swartz's case demonstrates that what seems like a simple breaking of the law can result in disastrous circumstances. Swartz was a well known figurehead in the technological world, but was still not immune from the law. He is an example that the penalties for intellectual property infringement are too strict. The world has changed and technology has advanced. Intellectual property laws need to change to catch up with current times.
I enjoyed reading your post about property infringement laws, and the information you provided as to why these laws are too severe. First, your title was explanatory, and I was able to tell what this article would be about before reading, Your bullet points and subheads throughout your post were very helpful, and makes it easy for readers to scan quickly through and still understand your information. I also thought that your subheads were explanatory, and that the information that followed was appropriate. You had good placement of your media, and it fit well with your post. I liked how you used so many short paragraphs, which made your article easy to read. Your links within the post were helpful and in the right places to connect us to your sources.
ReplyDeleteI would suggest double checking your work to avoid grammatical errors. I also think that your subhead about the definition of intellectual property and its purpose would be better placed in the beginning of your post as opposed to the end. Saying that the government should not be held responsible for Swartz's death was a little contradictory to your overall argument that the laws are too harsh. Other than these things, I enjoyed your article and learned a lot from it!