Written in the virtual and hardcopies of history has been the ongoing battle between copyright and internet. This clash between copyright and the internet has been incessant in order to regulate piracy. Accordingly, the outright winner has not emerged, as the reason of the symbiotic relationship between intellectual property “which copyright handles and the internet”. The symbiotic relation exhibits itself through the fact that the internet is vital to distribution of the intellectual property. The United States, European Union, Australia and many other nations have been on the forefront in mitigating this. Limelight has mostly been on the United States in the advent of the acts pertaining the online piracy and protection of personal intellectual property. As a subject of reference, these acts have shown the emergence of a new era on the internet regulation. Hence, the question to ponder on most ombudsmen is whether or not the regulated internet will prevent piracy or copyright claims. This question, pertaining to the regulation of the internet is an ongoing debate that various parties have pointed out at the pros and cons of regulation. Consequently, this article will detail the reasons for or against the regulation of the internet thanks to essaysmasters https://essaysmasters.com/ help.

Firstly, exploitation of talent and financial losses to inventors and intellects is the major reason to the regulation of internet. Copyright is vital, because it gives an inventor or innovator an opportunity to enjoy the sole rights of reaping benefits and distributing his or her work to the public. Hence, the inventor is able to reap the various economic benefits that ensue from his works. Thus, change in welfare is most prominently palpable. However, the stipulations of the copyright dictate that no other individual can reproduce or distribute the works. Admittedly, internet plays a hand in hand duty in securing the creator’s opportunity to have his or her works known in the global scale. Conversely, the contrary happens, due to individuals who prefer the easy way out by reproducing the works of the inventor once posted in the internet. Music, software, books and so forth, which are the works of the creators, are thus reproduced at huge masses. Moreover, they are sold to people at a cheaper price hence denying the inventor’s or creator’s chance of reaping financial gains. This dynamism of events stemming from uploading of one’s works on the internet leads to losses of the inventor. These financial losses are coupled to exploitation of one’s intellect at the expense of his consent. Thus through internet regulation, measures to ensure that reproduction or illegal distribution of intellectual property is put into consideration. Regulation will involve the colluding of the legislative and private internet players in order to curb the menace of exploitation and financial losses that befall the innovators.

Secondly, internet regulation is the best way to go in order to promote creativity among the people. As stated by Wirten, in a society that information is always available, shortcuts have become a societal norm; replication of literal works is one of the issues that are gradually eroding the creativity in the society. The internet is forming a base for accessing information that enjoys copyright law. The particular information when in need, most of the individuals resort to copying it, as opposed to other measures. These other measures include retrieving the essential information from the copyrighted works and forming better ways of improving on the information obtained. Through this initiative, creativity will increase. Accordingly, ingenuity leads to inventions, which in turn expand their tentacles of benefit to the society as a whole. Thus through internet regulation, information will only be limited to minimal access, which is essential to further creativity.

Thirdly and lastly, regulation of the internet is advisable to the minimization of copyright cases that are congesting the judiciary system. Each year, many analysts state that these copyright cases are increasing at a 150% rate. Continuously, the percentage of cases spells out another point of concern; this is the low levels of compensation and lack of compensation. The lack of compensation is mainly to the inventors or creators due to the expenses in the cases that they have to file and pay for legal redress. Most of the copyright cases fizzle out in the course of litigation with some plaintiffs becoming bankrupt. The financial hurdles that they fact may also result to death or even sale of their intellectual property at a cheap price. This saddening fact hence needs internet regulation to stem the litigation cases to an enormous percentage. In accordance to Bowrey, measures to tighten internet regulation will cause a downfall of cases in a colossal way. For this reason, internet regulation will aim at ensuring that social and financial problems that may result are minimal.

From the above reasons for the internet regulation, most pundits believe that copyright claims and piracy will dwindle drastically. However, on the opposite side of thought, many of the individuals claim that internet regulation is not the path. Some of the reasons put against internet regulation are the following: infringement of the citizen rights, lack of accountability and inflexibility of the various bodies charged to handle regulation and the crumbling of the distribution approach of the internet.

First and foremost, internet regulations, as stated by the many critics, are the intrusion of personal privacy. In the world of laws and rights that safeguard the life and social interaction of human beings, freedom of privacy and expression is highly related to internet regulation. In many of the countries, the freedom of privacy extends to the internet. Individualized research, web browsing, downloads and other aspects that come to the internet should not be intruded. Consequently, many view the introduction of internet regulation as an infringement; since the regulators will be able to monitor your activities, whether private or government. Downloads, copies of work made and even businesses run online will be under scrutiny. The thought of scrutiny to the myriads of individuals is a path of breaking the fundamental stating of the freedom of privacy.

As the second rationale against internet regulation, lack of accountability of the body charged with regulation has raised eyebrows. Government, as the first option for the regulatory duty, is highly capricious. The basis to the volatility nature of the government is accountability, which will be an issue in the day to day lives of internet users. Accountability is the issue of unpredictability, because the government apart from copyright claims, may also regulate internet users due to other reasons. Security and impending risks are some of the solid grounds that the government may use to regulate the internet. Hence, the accountability in the form of reason and prior knowledge before regulating the internet will not be forthcoming. These instances of regulation, without accountability from the regulatory body, may cause major losses to the various businesses. E-commerce businesses will be dealing with internet regulation concerns, especially when overall regulations are done instantly. Furthermore, reproach and litigation cases on the regulatory body will be on the rise as a result of the lack of accountability on their part.

Lastly, the internet from its onset, has borrowed on the principle of centrality in operation. This principle arises from the fact that information integral as it may be arises from the internet then reaches the users. The introduction of a regulator breaks pattern. Henceforth, it introduces and creates various hurdles that have to be overcome when implementing the regulation procedures. Firstly, many advocates state that this internalization of a regulatory body introduces and tampers with property rights of the internet. This tampering as stated is due to the fact that the strategy in place in terms of distribution of the internet are distorted. Added to this is the criticism from the internet producers that view this as a grip on the information that they can provide to the users. As many of the skeptics’ affirm, a regulation on the internet will only cause rebellion from the providers. The rebellion will emerge as a result of the ongoing competition among the various internet providers who will result to shady measures. Nevertheless, a profound way should be construed to ensure that this approach of regulation does not interfere with the property rights of the internet.

All in all, internet regulation in ensuring that the key obstacles or parties that are escalating piracy and copyright claims is a significant move. Prevention of exploitation, financial losses, copyright cases and enhancing creativity are some of the reasons for it. Nevertheless, the regulatory bodies should be at the forefront in facing the various reasons put forth against regulation. Lack of accountability, infringement cases and distortion of the distribution approach of the internet are critical to the analysis. Formulation of a way forward in handling these issues is an uphill task though the essentiality of internet regulation is evident. Hence, policy formation and direction forward should be intertwined with unity and contribution by the industry players.