copyright
One of the most interesting aspects to the copyright issue and the web is that of increased responsibility as both the author and publisher. In the chapter of Digital History on “owning the past”, Rosenzweig and Cohen discuss how the web changes issues of copyright. Accessiblity is one angle which I didn’t think about, especially from the standpoint of an author. You hear about issues of plagerism and how the internet has made it easier for students or authors to plagerize. On the flip side, it is also true that the internet makes it easier to track instances of plagerism. But I never really considered how copyright issues were blurred, not just changed. The authors mention that while passing out copies of a poem in class is a violation of copyright, the consequences are much more severe if that same posting is noticed on the internet. Is the violation worse only because it can be traced? Or because it is much more accessible?
Additionally, Rosenzweig and Cohen mention that the responsibility falls heavier on one who publishes on the web. There are no lawyers run interference. That extra responsibility is a scary thought! However, I’m glad there are some “loopholes”, as you could call them. The flexibility of the web allows an author to run a few more risks, or toe the line more closely, because changes can be made quickly and easily. This arguement about the “ease” of solving copyright issues makes me feel a little better about my project! Additionally, as the book points out, our sites are not really targets because of their small scale. I guess I’ll worry more about these issues should I decide to tackle larger projects. It’s nice to have to knowledge at least!