Wet Footprints? Digital Watermarks: A Trail to the Copyright Infringer on the Internet

Abstract

"Hmm... this is a pretty good picture." With a few clicks of the mouse, John downloads the picture from the Internet to his computer. He quickly manipulates it to become the wallpaper or background on his computer screen. "Hmmm... my friends would surely love this background." With a few more keyboard strokes and mouse clicks, John sends this digital picture via e-mail to his numerous buddies, who also save a copy of the picture in their computers. In less than a day, Internet cruisers have posted the picture to various newsgroups with several thousands of people downloading and, then, transmitting it even further. What started as one person's desire to "own" a picture has turned into various copyright infringements.

This is the world of the Internet: an amalgamation of human thoughts, creativity, information, and opinions. However, unlike tangible objects, copyright infringement is possible with a few mouse clicks. These clicks create perfect copies within a fraction of the original time with a potential distribution to millions of people all over the world. On the other hand, the Internet has tremendously facilitated access to a plethora of available information. The Internet's library of information is massive and, unlike a regular library, contains no limitations imposed by physical space. A person can access information from any place in the world. This is the Internet-the haven of information and the garden of civil and criminal liability.

Part II of this Comment provides a background on current copyright laws. Part III discusses steganography, particularly digital watermarking, and encryption -tools that prevent copyright infringements. Part IV covers proposed amendments to the Copyright Act of 1976 (1976 Copyright Act) currently debated in Congress. Part V contains an analysis of these issues, followed by the conclusion in Part VI.

This Comment will also show that the advent of more sophisticated tools places the copyright owner in the best position to prevent copyright infringement on the Internet, and not the Internet Service Provider (ISP). However, this Comment does not propose that the burden of preventing infringements be bome solely by the copyright owner. Rather, it advocates ajoint endeavor-the copyright owner should implement technological devices with the support of legislation and ISPs should be liable when they do not respond to notice that an infringing work resides in their system.