The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 gives creators of copyright material the right to control the ways in which the copyright material can be used. In this regard, it is important to lay emphasis on the fact that the copyright arises when an individual or organization creates a work and applies to the work if it is regarded as original, and exhibits a degree of labor, skill or judgment. At this point, it is worth mentioning the fact that normally the copyright attributes fully to the creator of the copyright material or work, but, in terms of contract, the work can be produced as a part of the employment. In such a situation, the copyright belongs to the individual or organization than hired the employee, who has created the copyright work. For instance, a writer can write a book for a publishing house or a singer can record an album in terms of contract with a recording company, which gives the copyright to the recording company. In such a way, the copyright is a broad concept which involves not only individuals, creators but also entire organizations.

Another important issue defined by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 is the duration of the copyright. For literary, musical, dramatic or artistic works the copyright term is 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies, or the work is made available to the public by authorized performance, broadcast, exhibition, etc. . Furthermore, the duration rights for sound records and broadcasts constitute 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies, or the work is made available to the public . The copyright for typographical arrangements of published editions lasts for 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 refers to several types of work, including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, typographical arrangement of published editions, sound recordings, and films .

Obviously, the copyright law protects owners of the copyright and creators of the copyright materials from the violation of their copyright. At the same time, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 raises a severe criticism from the part of specialists . They argue that the existing copyright law prevents individuals from free use of information available to them. In other words, the existing copyright law limits the access of individuals to information. In response to criticism, British legislators have started to develop legislative amendments which can improve the existing copyright law and introduce changes that will meet interests of both the public and the creators of copyright materials.

In this respect, a public right to copy is one of the major concerns of critics of the existing copyright law. The public right to copy implies copying for personal use solely. This implies that the copied material will be used by individuals personally for non-profit goals. In this regard, British legislators suggest making copying music from a CD to a home computer legal . In such a way, the concept of public copying right can be applied to CDs. At this point, it is quite noteworthy to point out the fact that many British agree that copying for personal use should be legal.

The emergence of information technologies, internet and modern telecommunication systems raises a number of challenges, which legislators have to overcome to protect copyright and intellectual property rights. In this regard, the development of the contemporary legislation, namely the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 reveals the full extent to which the current legislation is imperfect. At any rate, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 as well as other legal norms in the field of copyright and intellectual property rights do not meet the contemporary technological environment. This means that the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 fails to match requirements to the development of copyright and intellectual property rights is imperfect and do not take into consideration new challenges imposed on the legislation by the contemporary technologies.

In this regard, the emergence of internet is one of the most challenging technologies for copyright and intellectual property rights legislation. In actuality, specialists () distinguish different visions for how intellectual property law should regulate the internet’s software infrastructure. One vision, suggests that the internet should be an “information commons” built on open source technologies. Resisting this call for a categorical commitment to openness, others champion a proprietary development model along the lines of Microsoft’s role in the computer operating systems market (). In such a context, legislators should develop legal norms and regulations that would meet interests of both consumers and intellectual property rights holders. In fact, neither of the aforementioned visions for the further development of the copyright and intellectual property rights is perfect. The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 is imperfect too because the act was implemented more than two decades ago and fails to match contemporary technological requirements.

At this point, internet and its further progress raise the problem of the inability of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 to provide the efficient control and regulation of intellectual property rights protection. In this regard, the under-regulation of e-business and sharing information and transmission of data via internet is particularly challenging because today data may be transferred via internet, while copyright and intellectual property rights remain unaware of using their products or services. Instead, the intellectual rights are violated because of the under-regulation of e-business and information sharing via internet at the legislative level opens wide opportunities for manipulation with existing legal norms defined in terms of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 and related laws. In such a situation, internet is the field, where users can conduct operations, such as sharing music or video without their authors’ consent because of the poor legal regulations.

At this point, it is worth mentioning the introduction of new technologies and devices, such as iPod, stimulates the wider sharing of music and other materials, which are subjects to the regulation of the intellectual property rights laws and the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. The emergence of new devices that use new technologies and which use internet as medium for sharing information makes the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 vulnerable to the misuse of existing legal norms and exploitation of the imperfectness of the Act by users of internet, who use modern devices to share information and to misuse copyright and intellectual property rights.

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988fails to regulate copyright and intellectual property rights in internet effectively because internet progress faster than existing legislation, while the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act was implemented in 1988, when internet was not fully developed. Moreover, since the implementation of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 a number of new devices and technologies have been implemented, which have changed the technological environment consistently making many of the norms established by the Act irrelevant to the application in the contemporary technological setting. Moreover, unlike the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, which was implemented over two decades ago and a few amendments have been introduced since that time, internet and other technologies progress fast, at the unparalleled rate. For instance, the internet was booming in the late 1990s and its progress carries on today. Therefore, internet and modern technologies progress fast, while the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 and the copyright and intellectual property rights legislation are stumbling. No wonder, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 is just out of date for it cannot regulate the fields, which did not exist in the time of the implementation of the Act.

The internet boom occurred a decade later after the introduction of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. Today, technologies have outpaced consistently the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 norms because modern technologies were virtually unthinkable in the time of the implementation of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. Therefore, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 cannot match the current technological environment, while legislative norms are out of date and legislators should close the gap.

The introduction of new legal norms is essential to enhance the copyright law and protect intellectual property rights, while the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988suffer from technological backwardness. The technological and legal backwardness, including the backwardness of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 may lead to disastrous results because it may lead to the mass violation of intellectual property rights and copyright. The systematic violation of the copyright and intellectual property rights may lead to their devaluation. In actuality, copyright and intellectual property rights lay the foundation to the contemporary business and the violation of these rights leads to the deterioration of business relations and substantial financial losses of copyright and intellectual property rights holders. To put it in simple words, if copyright and intellectual property rights are devaluated, companies and individuals operating in different fields, whose business is grounded on copyright or intellectual property rights will suffer from substantial financial losses, while many businesses may run bankrupt. In such a way, the degradation of the existing legislation, namely the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, compared to the development of internet and other technologies may undermine fundamental principles and norms of the contemporary business. The violation of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 because of the under-regulation of copyright and intellectual property rights in internet may lead to the growth of the misuse of copyright and intellectual property rights by means of internet and internet-related technologies.

Nevertheless, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 is not absolutely out of any value. In stark contrast, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 has laid the foundation to the copyright and intellectual property rights law. The problem is that the Act is ineffective today because it cannot catch up with new technologies, namely internet. However, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 has fundamental principles, which guarantee the protection of copyright and intellectual property rights to the rights holders. Therefore, the new legislation has to be developed on the ground of the principles of the protection of copyright and intellectual property rights. On the other hand, the new legislation should not limit the access of the public to information. Such a balance is essential for the development of effective laws, but the main point is to keep the legislation up to date to meet challenges imposed on technologies on the copyright and intellectual property rights legislation.

Thus, taking into account all above mentioned, it is important to place emphasis on the fact that the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 is important in terms of the protection of copyright and intellectual property rights. Historically, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 has played an important part in the development of copyright and intellectual property rights legislation. However, the progress of technologies and internet, in particular, has revealed the inconsistency of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 in regard to the protection of copyright and intellectual property rights from their misuse in internet. The Act is out of date because it was implemented over two decades ago. In that time, technologies were quite different and the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 could not meet new requirements imposed on the legislation by new technologies. In fact, the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 could not regulated issues related to the protection or use of copyright and intellectual property rights in internet, because the Act was implemented in the time when internet was under-developed. Therefore, consistent legislative changes are needed to enhance the regulation of copyright and intellectual property rights.

Works Cited:

Cole, D. and J.X. Dempsey. Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security. 2nd ed. London: W. W. Norton & Co., 2002.

“Copying CDs could be made legal.” BBC News. 2008Retrieved on November 26, 2011 from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7176538.stm

Gantz, J. and J.B. Rochester. Pirates of the Digital Millennium. Liverpool: Prentice Hall, 2005.

Lindsey, M. Copyright Law on Campus. Oxford University Press, 2003.

Lyman, R. P. Copyright in Historical Perspective. Cambridge University Press, 1998.

Mailman, S. et al. (). Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA Patriot Act) Act of 2001: An Analysis. London: Matthew Bender & Co., Inc., 2002.

Marson, I. “Shakeup of ‘absurd’ copyright law demanded.” ZDNet. 2006. Retrieved on November 26, 2011 from http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2006/05/11/shakeup-of-absurd-copyright-law-demanded-39268337/

Michaels, C. W. No Greater Threat: America since September 11 and the Rise of the National Security State. Algora Publishing, 2002.

Mallor, J.P. et al. Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and E-Commerce Environment, London: McGraw-Hill, 2007.

Moores, S. March of the Spiders: Policy Challenges for Copyright in the Digital Publishing Environment. Manchester: Touchstone, 2005.

Nimmer, M. and D. Nimmer. Nimmer on Copyright. Liverpool: Random House, 1997.

UK Copyright Law: A Summary. 2010. Retrieved on November 26, 2011from http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/uk_law_summary

Van Bergen, J. The Twilight of Democracy: The Bush Plan for America. London: Common Courage Press, 2004.

Viardot, E. Successful Marketing Strategy for High-Tech Firms. London: New Publishers, 2001.