It is up to the copyright holder to enforce the law - e.g. Maaya's official site. International copyright law says that things can be used if the original owner is stated and no profit is made then unless the original copyright owner says something, then the pictures can stay. A cease and disist order has to be followed if issued by the lawyers etc. If Sangye's says who the original owner is and links etc. and if she does not make a profit - then her website is not violating copright law.
I don't actually have a point. I think we should change the title to a discussion of copyright since there are lots of webmasters on this page :lol:
I don't know really, I think it all depends on whether it is detrimental to profit, or to the image of the artist.
If for example, scans of a manga stopped the manga from selling, and there was a notable drop in sales, then it would be quite reasonable to ask all scans, translated and original, to be removed from the internet.
But if (for example) a little known manga was leaked online and gave awareness to international fans and increased sales, then nobody would mind.
It all depends on the context of what is being taken.
I don't like it when webmasters copy large amounts of text and interviews written by other people though, unless it is copied from a magazine that isn't readily available, but taking from other webmasters is totally unacceptable.
Tricky subject really. Failed it in my multimedia course. :roll:
I think copyrights can be enforced within reason. I also think it depends on the origin of the copyrighted material. For example, the distribution of Japanese originated media is in violation of copyright, but without it, I highly doubt there'd be anybody who would care about something in Japan. I certainly wouldnt have bought 80% of my DVD collection or 95% of my music collection if it werent for fansubs or internet downloads. There are obviously variations on that theme tho. Lots of people download to no end and never buy anything legally. There are various reasons for that, lack of money, inability to order stuff online, etc. I guess the worse mindset would be a person who never buys anything legally because they think "hell i got it for free anyway, why should i buy it".
As far as local stuff is concerned (In the United States), it seems reasonable that there's a big crack down on copyright infringement. P2P programs are a bit out of control, but then again I think there's reasons for the excess of illegal sharing. First off, most of the stuff that comes out in the US is crap. Unoriginal bands who dont write their own music, who were picked from some studio big shot who thought they'd look good on a CD cover. There are exceptions of course, but people are buying those CDs. I dont think Coldplay is complaining about the gazillions of albums they've sold or the record numbers for the Switchfoot albums.
There are lots of artists who would be nothing without piracy and violation of copyright.
Some great examples I can think of are
1) Joanna Newsom - she herself stated that she doesn't mind people downloading her music, because it gives her a chance to tour and do what she loves best - playing harp and writing songs.
2) Regina Spektor - Released a whole video anthology online just for internet fans. Circulation grew and grew and now she is even being picked up by Microsoft for their launch of their internet clone of iTunes (zune)
3) Arctic Monkeys - Everybody knows this one. From nothing to biggest selling band of recent history, virtually all due to music sharing online.
4) Snakes on a Plane - Not an artist, but a film, using internet sharing to distribute photos, fan material, script ideas and posters, becoming one of the most anticipated B movies of 2006 (although its opening day wasn't that good, it would be nothing without internet).
5) Boards of Canada - Their album took off from a Pitchfork review, with people swapping material, reaching millions of downloads. By the time 'campfire headphase' was released, it became a huge seller - thanks to file sharing.
6) NizLopi - After a flash video was made of their song JCB, downloads went crazy. Soon, everybody knew of the band, and they quickly became notorious in the indie scene.
7) Yoko Kanno - Lets face it, how many of us would have known about Yoko Kanno if it wasn't for the internet? My first taste of Kanno was from a file share, and I quickly became hooked, seeking out source material. Now, due to internet sharing, she has become a Collector's dream, with those with money seeking out all her material from Japan, a pricy, but worthwhile pasttime.
I could go on for hours. The same goes for music videos - Utada Hikaru, Ayumi Hamasaki, Shinhwa, and silly things like YATTA!
People take it too far, when source material is readily available, such as Britney Spears, Coldplay etc, there is no reason to not purchase. Those who download material from lesser known artists and enjoy it are more likely to support the artist by collecting their albums and EPs, or releasing on iTunes.
But internet sharing definitely spreads the word, through file sharing, downloads of photos and translation of foreign material.
I also think that most artists do not lose money through file sharing, because people wouldn't know about them without the sharing, and therefore wouldn't purchase anything from them. Depends where you've seen it really. Whats the point of hearing Lily Allen on top Of The Pops and downloading her album on the internet, when you can listen to it in HMV and buy it if you like it?
