While more and more time is spent on the Internet and television in the near future of this technologically younger system will be overhauled, it does not necessarily mean that less TV content consumed, but rather the nature of where and how to consume, alter . The future user moves away from purely passive consumption towards the active action. He decides what, when and where he sees his favorite program. Either on a PC, a lot of interaction and operation permits, or on portable devices with or comfortable in the living room with the TV: the so-called “Three Screens”. Linear television with a fixed program will diminish but not disappear. Above all, societal live events and news will continue to attach great importance attributed to the TV. The future user wants to choose where he sees his favorite programs and it will take effect only problems: Because of the complex structures of the territorial boundaries of copyright and related license rights slow down the user is that the desired content can consume anywhere. Can he not, the desired content, which has in recent years, through other means worried. The demand for online content was, and is therefore given, but by the content provider is not satisfied. This fact and the fact that the digitization lossless copying of media content has become possible, in my opinion is a major reason why file-sharing systems like Napster and Kazaa have become so popular. The success of these platforms is not so much to see that they have offered free content and services, that is, if a pleasant side effect, but rather that they satisfy the general demand, a huge range available (regardless what niche) and extremely easy to use. Legale platforms often do not follow suit, if only for reasons of rights clearance, so-called “illegal” or their platforms, however, users will not only continue to copyrights. Still must be noted that legal platforms only far too late are entered, as an exception to Apple's iTunes is here mentioned, which the online distribution of music and videos on the Internet also made legally acceptable. It needs new licensing schemes and a new understanding of the law if you proceed against illegal platforms and provide them with legal platforms defy wants. The complaints of the music and film industries against Fileshare and their platforms are understandable, since those only to them by law to protect rights and to secure their income, but even here the story has shown that, once a platform by a court ruling had concluded, in the background the user is already on new, improved platforms had worked (for example: Bit Torrent) and finally and finally by the media attention much could attract more users than the previous models. The issue of debt in mind Leaving is a very clear fact: By Pirate Bay can copyrighted works actually very easy to be obtained. The operators of the site deny any illegal activity, even on Pirate Bay is no illegal content hosted. The contents of the application by February 2009 was thus also “only”: aid to serious copyright violation (see Section 5.5). If the charges against the Pirate Bay, but with all the consequences follow, we should also sue Google, which in fact does not store data directly, rather through these links. One step further is Google's subsidiary YouTube. Here, very probably copyrighted works stored, and the history shows: Before we deal with industry Primus Google and its affiliates invest verbrüdert you prefer. So have some major record labels their lawsuits against YouTube and set against advertising models exchanged. The label Universal earned in 2008 with the video streaming approximately 100 million U.S. dollars. Most of this comes from the collaboration with YouTube. It is clear that increased use of content more money can be earned. So for example, Universal deserves not only to YouTube, even if they are videos available, but also when users upload their material, it is universal in the revenue involved. This additional revenue for Universal are considerable and this without any additional work for the label itself, it seems to be able to accomplish this cooperation, an example: The collaboration between Universal and YouTube users is the current legal situation per se prohibited, but is paradoxically tolerated and poses the basic question: On what basis does the existing law is still make sense? Or is this a reformation and assimilation to the new circumstances required? Gerfried Stocker, director of the Ars Electronica in Linz, summarizes the development of very aptly as follows: “One summary can say that both extreme positions are not tenable. Neither is that we now so a new turbo-capitalism around information, such as the Internet, but also the very different position as “all free, all for free” is obviously just not tenable. Both have their hereinbewegen Poland into a center, a viable platform can only be because both can happen. Namely, that the cultural Value, the intellectual value increases, and that we also favor an economy can develop, which is in a position that our society forward in its prosperity and preserve. “ [1] next

Be Sociable, Share!

•