Rights policies and copyright laws have always been controversial, providing legal “ownership” over information (text, mechanical processes, ingredient formulae) to individuals or organizations, despite that information being of use to others. They are designed to provide a commercial value to the production of new types of information (creative new directions in language usage, technical inventions, medical research and innovation), but they can also impede the free flow of information where it is most needed.

The “fair use” doctrine was brought into copyright law as a response to this problem. Where the use of copyrighted material is of inherent value to society, it need not be considered an infringement of the commercial rights or interests of the copyright holder: these uses tend to related to educational uses of fragments of text, informational reproductions of copyright-protected materials that either provide context or background for a review or report relating to that content or a field discussed by it.

But digital technologies, which allow the easy, speedy reproduction of huge amounts of copyrighted material (whole books, detailed technical documents, musical recordings and feature films), have raised entirely new ethical questions about fair use and strict licensing policies. “Viral” marketing and content distribution has helped organizations large and small spread their message and their commercial reach across a global network of content-seekers, but has also threatened to erode the royalty-generating potential of some content.

Now, we face unprecedented challenges to the right of people everywhere to access information intended for public consumption. Repressive governments are building state-of-the-art censorship , tracking and filtering mechanisms (the ‘Great Firewall of China’, for example), and internet service providers (ISP) are seeking to establish profit-dr… that limit users’ access to certain websites or content-producers.

And efforts by media giants to control the distribution and use of content through strict licensing policies, some of which propose or implement by-the-word fee schedules, now threaten to undermine the very concept of a free and independent press whose job description includes speeding reliable information to the public without legal or technical impediments, wherever possible.

How can major content providers, including trade guilds and press cooperatives like the Associated Press or the AFP, protect their revenue stream and funding portfolio, without actively countering the free flow of information among free people?

• Join the discussion on The Hot Spring Network

   Send article as PDF