Question

When she was in college, Kiersten Walburg wrote a case study on Grokster, an online peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network, and knew that it was shut down because its services were illegal. Several years later, Montgomery Records, Inc., which owned the copyrights to a large number of music recordings, discovered that "tereastarr", a user name associated with Walburg's Internet protocol address, had made twenty-four songs available for distribution on another P2P network. Montgomery notified Walburg that she had been identified as engaging in the unauthorized trading of music. She replaced the hard drive on her computer with a new drive that did not contain the songs in dispute. Is Walburg liable for copyright infringement?
1. Making material available on a P2P network or through the cloud is called Select (file-sharing/ obtaining copyright protection)
2. Is file-sharing always prohibited? Select (Yes/ No)
3. File sharing is prohibited Select (when it is used to download and store copyrighted music/when it is used to listen to music)
4. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a person who file-shares Select (can/ cannot) use the fair use doctrine to justify the file-sharing.
5. Montgomery notified Walburg that she had been identified as engaging in the unauthorized trading of music. She replaced the hard drive on her computer with a new drive that did not contain the songs in dispute. Walburg Select (can/ cannot) remedy her wrongful conduct by replacing her hard drive?
6. Why or why not? The illegal file sharing Select (was/ was not) already done.
7. Who is an innocent infringer? A person who Select (is/ is not) aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted copyright infringement.
8. Walburg likely Select (was/ was not) an innocent infringer.
9. Why? She had written a case study on Napster and knew file sharing was Select (right/ wrong)
10. It is Select (likely/ not likely) that Walburg replaced her hard drive to conceal her acts.
11. If that is true, Walburg's act of replacing her hard drive Select (was / was not) ethical.
12. If Walburg did commit an illegal act in sharing copyrighted material without earning a profit, she Select (can/ can not) face criminal sanctions
13. A court likely Select (would/ would not) find Walburg liable for copyright infringement.

Answer 1

Answer:

File-Sharing and Copyrights

1. Making material available on a P2P network or through the cloud is called Select (file-sharing/ obtaining copyright protection) .

2. Is file-sharing always prohibited? Select (Yes/ No) .

3. File sharing is prohibited Select (when it is used to download and store copyrighted music/when it is used to listen to music) .

4. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a person who file-shares Select (can/ cannot) use the fair use doctrine to justify the file-sharing.

5. Montgomery notified Walburg that she had been identified as engaging in the unauthorized trading of music. She replaced the hard drive on her computer with a new drive that did not contain the songs in dispute. Walburg Select (can/ cannot) remedy her wrongful conduct by replacing her hard drive?

6. Why or why not? The illegal file sharing Select (was/ was not) already done.

7. Who is an innocent infringer? A person who Select (is/ is not) aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted copyright infringement.

8. Walburg likely Select (was/ was not) an innocent infringer.

9. Why? She had written a case study on Napster and knew file sharing was Select (right/ wrong) .

10. It is Select (likely/ not likely) that Walburg replaced her hard drive to conceal her acts.

11. If that is true, Walburg's act of replacing her hard drive Select (was / was not) ethical.

12. If Walburg did commit an illegal act in sharing copyrighted material without earning a profit, she Select (can/ can not) face criminal sanctions .

13. A court likely Select (would/ would not) find Walburg liable for copyright infringement.

Explanation:

Copyright infringement is like plagiarism.  It is the wrongful use of another person's copyrighted works or words, as if they were their own and without obtaining copyright permission from the copyright owner.  It is illegal while plagiarism is unethical.