Inability of Analogous Copyright Laws to Work Well in the Classroom and Society of the Digital Age Traditional copyright protection laws have for sometime now been unable to give complete protection to the rights of those who 'own' various types of media, ranging from books and articles to photographs and music. In the opinion of some, this change has mostly been as a result of the absence of strict laws needed to improve such rights. As a consequence, a key matter of interest emerges from "Overwrought copyright: The inability of Analogous copyright laws to work well in the classroom and society of the Digital Age" One hugely unexamined area that is a central and important question, is the role the doctrine of 'first sale law' will play in the future of digital copyright laws. The requirement that those who hold copyright transfer the control power of many applications of a work's copy to a consumer after sale has been integral to the laws of copyright for over a century which both the Congress and the courts have upheld.

The doctrine of 'first sale law' is first and foremost completely disavowed by Congress due to the fact that both the simplicity of duplicating content digitally and the practice of sales had already been set aside by licensing. Therefore this could result in extortion to facilitate massive abuse of copyright laws. In her utterances, for instance, Pallente the Registrar correctly noted that the doctrine of first sale, which stipulates that those who hold copyrights transfer their authority to oversee many applications of a work's copy after transfer or sale to a consumer, had been integral to laws of copyright for over a century which both the Congress and the courts have upheld (Perzanowski & Schultz, 2014).

At most, the initial laws placed natural rights as a condition for interpreting intellectual property. Producers had a right to their work, which they could dispose of in the market of literary work just like those who produced other commodities. Ownership only belonged to them in so far as society deemed fair in as much as that law applied to them (Baldwin, 2014).

The copyright rules of analogue systems presently do not cater especially well for the next generation or contemporary creators of content remixing and their listeners. This is due to the fact that nearly all digital borrowing of any form of media can be interpreted by keen attorneys to be an infringement (McGrail & McGrail, 2010).

Examination of Copyright Laws in Relation to Digital and Analogue Society

In a past discussion from the essay 'Overwrought copyright: Why copyright law from the Analog Age does not work in the Digital Age's society and classroom', there is no gain saying that the main focus is on enforcing and changing from the old analogue system to the current era of digitalism. Old laws that applied to the analogue era work against the learner's or client's quantity or quality of artistry and their creative power, leading to traditional or archaic laws of copyright calling for total rewrites or flexibility due to ambiguity and lack of clarity or bias and being out of date. The freedom to collect, store, donate, curate, or give away as a bequest, a person's media also gives incentives and provisions for investing in legal means of acquisition. Books, movies, music and painting are gathered either for donation or reselling in a neo-digital environment, and in the event that consumers cannot satisfactorily meet their expectations and demands in a digitized world, they are prone to leap out of the legitimate market and acquire media illegally through downloads which are not paid for (Perzanowski & Schultz, 2014).

A lot of the discourses on the doctrines of first sale in a digital environment come as a consequence of two emerging trends in the market-sphere of copyrights that calls for new concepts in the exhaustion of copyrights. To start with, there is the move from the former central role of specific copies that could be identified in the distribution channels of works that are protected. Although since the beginning of copyright laws copies have been there, now there is a quick shift into a post-copy environment in which works that are digitized occur as flows of data that seldom remain as material objects for longer than a short period of transition, but leap into existence or out on an almost regular and consistent mode. Expecting rights holders, consumers, or those who regulate in such an environment to monitor particular copies is nearly as good as expecting fish to account for every raindrop that hits the oceans! Another emerging trend is the adoption of terms of licensing that presume to surpass...

However, the more works that were traditionally copyrighted shift to basic digitized means of distribution, and the more distributors of digitized media impose tougher regulations and conditions into their service terms, the more this method could produce tremendous impacts over the whole spectrum of the economy of copyright requirements (Perzanowski & Schultz, 2014).
Major Aspects Resulting into Differences in the Analogue-Digital Copyright Laws

Disparities in the classification of copyright laws result in unbalanced consideration of the processes for determining the royalty rates and the rates themselves. This means that the copyrights are an obstacle for distributors; this negatively impacts on the consumers by slowing down the spread of networks of fresh technologies. For instance, consumers from Europe reveled in the services of 'spotify' for almost three consecutive years way ahead of consumers from America. Copyright laws are continually an impediment to fresh technologies, and they prevent new inventions apart from limiting the choices consumers have. Taking music distribution as an example of an affected media, the sum of royalty requirements for traditional radios vary from about 5% of revenue to almost 70% of the revenue for streaming that is on-demand. The other forms of radio fall somewhere in between. Such huge differences in the royalty requirements which largely favor the firms who possess ancient technologies such as traditional radio and satellite are a threat to the emergence of contemporary technologies for the distribution of music (Dicola, 2013).

Furthermore, this introduces another major aspect of imbalance in matters regarding copyright. The field of play is tilted favorably for existing technologies as opposed to emerging ones. Consequently, certain investors, particularly those who operate their enterprises in line with the traditional or old platforms, have avoided the music sector at a time when chances for greater investment are favorable and new innovations are flourishing. Streaming services that are on-demand such as Spotify and webcasting services like Pandora which are very popular are presently operating without being sure of what the future holds for them in terms of royalty requirements in the same way that NetFlix is doing in the video sector. This was another matter that the laws relating to traditional copyright did not consider and this makes it hard for the media industry to update the necessary changes (Dicola, 2013).

It is not easy to trace the infringements that occur on the internet using traditional policies and copyright laws. But even so, a lot of grounds in tracking the offenders can be accomplished upon implementation of tougher digital regulations. For instance, a person who owns a copyright who believes their right has been violated by an another subscribing to an internet access service, or a person subscribing to an internet access service who permits a third party to use the service may in this case submit a complaint of infringement. The name of the person who owns the copyright, details of the nature of violation, evidence of the apparent violation that indicates the IP address of the subscriber, and the time of gathering the evidence can then be tracked (Mendis, 2013).

Despite this, it is a lengthy process that needs plenty of cooperation and support from the Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The legal wars on the ways of collecting the needed information have thrown spanners into the works of provision of safe harbor by bringing in extra layers and factors of analysis to the demands of the 19th statutes which create further complexities for the ISPSs, owners of copyrights, the lower courts, and the lawyers who try to unravel these complicated decisions by courts (Palma, 2014).

The intention of a U.S. Congress at a review reveals that its basic objective in promulgating the DMCA was to enact legal provisions that created and protected a platform for establishing the worldwide digital marketplace for works that are copyrighted online. The legal history behind the enactment of the DMCA shows a Congress that is forward-looking with a prediction that in the absence of laws to address the probable conflicts and disagreements between new technologies and owners of works traditionally copyrighted, technological innovations would be stifled. However, due to the enormous evolvement of the internet in the 15 years from the time the DMCA was enacted, time is now ripe for Congress to re-evaluate the provisions for the safe harbor (Palma, 2014).

The differences in the old copyrights is as a result of confusions in…