Legal Realities
In today’s world the notion of uniqueness carries far less weight than it did 50 years ago. Most great artists and writers frequently draw on other works for inspiration and in doing so can quite easily and sometimes without being aware adopt styles of the works they admire. In the abstract I think that everyone on some level is guilty of copyright infringement. However I do understand the need for this kind of tort. If people are not allowed ownership of their work than there is little incentive to push the boundaries of conventional reality. While the law is certainly an important consideration in any publishing venture I think that people must hold themselves to an even higher authority, their own morals and ethics. One quote that has stuck with me seems appropriate in this situation, rhetoric, defined as making an argument in the public sphere, is the act of “the good person speaking well.” If we are to be taken seriously for our thoughts and convictions then we as originators of content must be comfortable that we meet our own standards for judging credible material. It seems to me that printing a libelous comment will not only earn you trouble with the law but would in many ways undermine the intended goal of a blog meant to address social concerns of our day.
Closely related to this and as mentioned in the book, common sense can be a strong ally in preventing law enforcement personnel from knocking down your door. The American citizen in most ways is absent of any common sense which is why in my opinion such torts and concepts need to explicitly stated in the law. A reasonable running dialog that synthesizes many points of view is the backbone of our democracy and if can temper this notion with a bit of common sense it will most likely be a lot easier to act within the boundaries of law. After all libel law and mass media law is actually a very small part of an attorneys legal knowledge. It is said that most judge’s will never here this kind of case during their tenure on the bench.
Questions:
1) In what ways do you think ambiguity of internet publishing will re-shape tort reform in the United States? In other words do you think there will be a tightening or loosening of legal statutes and why?
2) Do you think publishing tools/providers like wordpress should be held responsible for user generated content in the eyes of the law?
