by Brian Caterino

THE POLITICS OF the Internet often defy conventional classification. Take the Napster dispute. Supporting the large media conglomerates is the heavy-metal rock group Metallica. They oppose free music distribution because it deprives musicians of sales and royalties. Representing the last gasp of garage-band anarchism, Courtney Love posts free MP3 files of her band Hole in an attempt to bypass corporate control and forge a more direct relationship with her audience.

While both parties to the dispute defend the freedom of intellectual property, two distinct conceptions of the connection between freedom and property are at work here. One view sees property largely as a possession, an economic good that can and should be exchanged for profit. The second view sees property primarily as a requirement for intellectual and creative development. Similar issues of intellectual property are not as far off the radar screen of academia as you might think. Copyright attorney Dan Reidy notes, "The intellectual property owned by authors is no different that music owned by songwriters or images owned by photographers." The debut of a new web service in July, Contentville.com, illustrates the significance of intellectual property issues. Contentville.com's practices have resulted in a firestorm of protest over the unauthorized use of material belonging to free-lance writers and academics.

Welcome! The article you'd like to read is available to Adjunct Advocate subscribers, or to non-subscribers for purchase with AdjunctNationCredits. Your AdjunctNationCredit purchases compensate the writers directly!

If you like, please register then visit our secure online store to purchase AdjunctNationCredits or subscribe. PLEASE NOTE: If you're already registered, you don't need to register again to read the article! You need to login, go to our secure online store, and purchase AdjunctNationCredits.