In this modern day where the internet has become a potent tool of exchange of information and communication, the passage of law against freely expressing one’s thoughts online through various media, Internet has been very useful and its occurrence is seen as one of the most wonderful invention of all time. But as it widens, it became more useful to some opportunists. At some point, it has turned an entire generation of young people into criminals in the eyes of the law, in a futile attempt at stopping technological development. Yet file sharing has continued to grow exponentially. Neither proper inculcation nor ever harsher laws have been able to stop such development.


            Mr. Lawrence Lessig of Harvard Law School expressed his opinion relative to the evolution of the modern technology. Lessig started proposing shared values ​​and ideals on how to make culture accessible and world knowledge. In this regard, he said that “We share very little, we need to share more, both culturally and legally”, adding that much of what we share is illegal, concluding that “we have a long way to go”.

            Lessig shared some insights to illustrate this new form of global expression is remix culture. It follows the tradition of “call and response” in which a creator looking for a massive response from the public, which increasingly looks to new technologies that invite people to share as, for example, YouTube, particularly the Carly Rae Jepsen’s “Call me maybe”.

            Such argument referred to copyright as one of the issues that should be developed by defining how these laws are connected with the way in which our culture is changing. Lessig reiterated in his presentation that culture regulation is essential in areas where it makes sense and where there is not any good. However, as long as there are ways for citizens to communicate in private, they will be used to share copyrighted materials. Lessig even asks why promote rights to curb and discourage this creativity, what harm does the existence of creators working for the love of the activity rather than by money. That is why the fair use doctrine exists as provided for by the law, which allows limited use of copyrighted material without the need for further permission of the holders of such right.

            In an attempt to solve this problem, Mr. Lessig argued that Creative Commons, an organization that provides copyright licenses that offer the creator of a standardized way to grant permission to the general public to share and use their work under the terms and conditions of your choice, is not the solution, but this problem needs a real change in the law so that this freedom is assured.  Lessig explained that Creative Commons prepares us for the solution culture prepares for a solution to build and stimulate certain practices that show the world what the creators actually chosen, not their lawyers. Lessig proposed three steps as a first strategy in this fight inevitable remix increasing practice, defending it and eventually disturb those who resist change to do what is unreasonable now becomes sensible. It is the community who must drive this change.


            To begin with, the right conferred by law through copyright is a negative right. It began as a tool of censorship and later as an independent branch of law taken on different forms as times have changed but the fundamental quality remains the same. In the present time, the age of technology has reached a new intensity, as the aspects concerning such law affect as wide and diverse to the countries, individuals and even industries. Copyright has always depends on the ability to find an effective balance among the various social development, particularly in relative to scholarly, scientific, literary and artistic works. But it appears that there is a common ground among the violators involved in copyright issues, and many people warned us that the insufficiency of the copyright law is evident.

            Discovering new ways of thinking about the law drawn from the experience of jurisdictions that are, at least relative to the copyright law, is one that tends to elicit resistance in an international community dominated by attitudes of economically powerful countries such as United States, Japan, Great Britain and China.

            Copyright has become the legal face of Globalization as it has been pioneered by the latter. This specialization seems unlikely the candidate to lead a revolution in legal aspect. Nevertheless, it is fair to say that copyright has become to be identified with globalization. Technology, on the other hand, have intimate relationship between copyright law as the latter has become instrumental in protecting the creators of new technologies and as an important means of providing regulations relative to the intellectual creation in the modern societies, however, the main role which now occupies is the product of a definite process of development.

            To understand the new dimensions of the intricate relation between copyright and the modern technology, it is indispensable to explore the nature of copyright’s involvement and how this was also helped to delimit crisis of legitimacy in copyright law.

            Copyright has also played a role in securing the personal and cultural interests in the creative work. This is traditionally downplayed in our customary concept, but civil law countries concede great importance to the non-commercial characteristic of the copyright law.

            It is easy to say that there should be reformation of the copyright law, but come to think of it, there are lot of factors to be considered in our to justify an end to this issues concerning copyright reform. Thus, the following issues must be conformed and determined following the finality of such reformation.


            It is evident that for a law to be validly applied, one must not be in contravention with the existing laws not only within the jurisdiction of our locality, but also the existing and internationally accepted laws of the country as part of the international community.


            The right of every people whether or not within the jurisdiction of the country to express his or her views either from the state or from the particular individual. Freedom of creativity goes beyond the general notion that every person have the right to improve and develop his or her own capabilities for free and meaningful expression. Creative freedom has been recognized particularly in this present time, a contribution that is essentially democratic in a sense that it is extended those who have access to basic information and technological means such as but not limited to Internet and technological softwares available at large. What concerns about the availability of new technological development is the capacity it can contribute in interacting with creative works. Once a scientific, scholarly, literary and asrtistic work has been transformed into a digital format, it becomes possible to intervene directly in a work, making alterations and insertions of a new format that might never be consciously noticed by a person who subsequently experiences it.


            File sharing, in particular is one of the most important factor in the determination of whether copyright reform will prosper. As long as there are means and methods for an individual to communicate in private, copyrighted materials can be a subject of modern crime.  File sharing of private individuals institutes pirates to conduct unconsented copies against the author/ creator of a finished work. It is commendable that fair use doctrine, should not be done in order to contradict with the existing laws relative to copyright and other intellectual property rights. The passing of the legislative measures to provide prohibitions, limitations or even implication of a right must be made in consideration for the improvement of our copyright law. However, it is easy for us to say that private communication must be increasingly regulated but that truth is, total or partial as the case may be, might be vital against the other constitutional rights of an individual.  

The new copyright regime has been controversial from the very beginning as it suddenly perceived to threaten freedom of speech. Free speech is not only at risk in the international community but also the technologically advanced countries that are directly responsible for the development of the copyright are affected.

            DUE PROCESS

            It is important to determine what will be the fundamentals concerning the procedure that must be implemented to prove the infringement against the person allegedly violate such right or to challenge it. It is true that our country had an existing procedures relating to different laws of our country, however, are the existing procedures applicable for the implementation of the said law or will it be in conflict with the reformed law in totality. Moreover, it is also important to determine what will be the jurisdiction and who are those persons to decide on wheter there is evidently a violation or it is just in consonance of a valid action.


The structure of the copyright signifies a standard shift in the nature of copyright. Concepts, norma, customs, traditions, principles as well international conventions underlying protection under copyright such as those of scientific, scholarly, literary and artistic works. However, the changing concept does not reflect a new application of copyright knowledge and its principles in this present time but rather, the field of ideas is narrowing. Copyright is anchored with social and modern ideals and is rooted in culture and creativity representing the ideas of our society.

In view of the foregoing, it can be understood that the question of alternatives to copyright is difficult since the answers must be in consonance with the characteristic of the latter, to wit:

  1. Technological Aspect
  2. Political Aspect
  3. Conceptual Aspect
  4. Economic Aspect

The international application of copyright is built on political and economic aspect and the term idea of harmonization has come to distinguish the process by which copyright law develops. However, it is somehow distorted when it is used to determine the degree of synchronization between copyright and its political and economic aspects. Technological aspect on the other hand, in itself is neutral. It finds forced into the inconsistent position of giving its support to politics through the development of right pertaining to the control of copying.

The international community needs alternative approach to IP rights, particularly copyright law. The new means and methods for thinking which will, at least, allow observers to create an effective criticism of the said right. The attempt to accomplish change within the system by using dispute or settlement mechanism to resolve conflict or replacement of a new framework can be made, however, such alternatives must be recognized for what it is something beyond a mere contributing force in copyright matters.


Reconciliation may be described as the juxtaposition of the disparate. The enjoyment of harmonizing the two different nature but can be easily determined which is one from the other. One of the most difficult problems that can be presented is the possibility of finding reliable alternatives to the legal and intellectual aspect of the copyright reformation. The domain of the copyright is diverse enough as it will entail different interpretations that could lead to inconsistent and unreliable source in determining the alternative method in cases when the primary solution is inviable. Whatever approach one may initiate, the fundamental problems remain identical. Where can alternative views on copyright be found or how will its influence will ultimately brought to bear on the developments between laws relating Copyright.


In many Instances, copyright represent a very important break not only in the present but also in our past and definitely the future of the copyright. At the end of the day, copyright law still achieves the objective of conferring on the creators of literary, scientific, scholarly and artistic works the right to enjoy the economic benefits derived from their work. Protection also covers the development of lucrative industries within commerce of work. Technological changes create a dramatic relief of the idea of copyright as artifice. It is a restriction that imposes on the use of knowledge exist purely in law while due to the advancement of technology, very few restrictions operate in practice. More than ever, copyright reveals to be susceptible to psychological, moral and ethical concerns that fall outside the realm of the law. Hence, without appropriate justification that can achieve public support, protection will no longer be applied

Copyright Reform may not be obvious as it may seem at first glance, but lawyers may be comfortable with the thought that developing countries lag behind the industrialized world relative to the legal aspect of the subject matter which is evident in the field of Intellectual Property rights. Copyright issues bring countries into conflict with one another becoming part of the sensitive areas that must be considered. The opinion made by Mr. Lawrence Lessig has achieved an impressive ideological harmony over copyright system. It is more compelling because of the underlying alternatives to the new view of copyright law, even if the capabilities of our government is limited with respect to the overgrowing changes in our social and technological development but, nevertheless, the latter is directly responsible for bringing a new urgency copyright reform.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s