Placeholder Image

字幕列表 影片播放

  • Hi, I'm Stan Muller. This is Crash Course and today we begin our miniseries on Intellectual Property

    嗨,我是Stan Muller。您現在收看的是Crash Course,而我們今天要從智慧財產權開始我的系列單元。

  • Hey, isn't the entire concept of Intellectual Property illegitimate?

    嘿,智慧財產權的整體概念難道不是不合理的嗎?

  • I mean, how can we justify locking up the world of science and arts so corporations, publishing houses

    我是說,我們怎麼可以將自然與藝術的世界整個封鎖,使公司、出版企業

  • and other gatekeepers can control what we know and what we think!

    和其他的守門人可以控制我們的知識和意見!

  • Information wants to be free, man!

    資訊渴望自由啊,兄弟!

  • Hey, me from the past! There's a Stan from the past! This is great!

    嘿,過去的我耶!有一個過去的Stan耶!真棒!

  • Anyway. I can tell by looking at your vacant and bloodshot eyes that you've been up all night downloading Chumbawamba records over dialogue connection.

    總之呢,從你空洞又布滿血絲的眼睛,我可以想見你整個晚上都在下載Chumbawamba(英國樂團)的專輯歌曲,

  • I remember those days and I remember you desperately trying to cling to any ethos that justified your rampant copyright infringement.

    我還記得那些時候,我極度渴望歸屬於那種思潮:為自己猖獗的版權侵害作辯解的思潮。

  • That is if you ever participated in such activities. And even if you had participated in said infringing activities,

    我是指,如果你曾經做過這樣的事。而如果你確實曾經做過這種侵犯別人的事,

  • the statute of limitations has likely run out. I don't even know what LimeWire is!

    訴訟時效很可能已經過了。我連什麼是LimeWire都不知道!

  • I like how this is getting started, because Stan from the past raises some interesting points!

    我蠻喜歡這樣的開頭,因為過去的Stan提出了很好的幾點!

  • There's a good chance that he, and a lot of you watching this video, might think

    他,或者很多再看這支影片的你們,很有可能會想,

  • about aspects of Intellectual Property as outdated and pretty much irrelevant. Maybe

    許多智慧財產的面向都已經過時,不然就是沒什麼關係了。

  • lots of you don't think of it at all!

    再不然,你們很多人根本不會去想!

  • That line, "Information wants to be free", has been used to argue that current intellectual

    這句話「資訊渴望自由」,往往用來爭辯現行的智慧財產權法令

  • properly laws are outdated, over-broad and generally awful.

    已經過時,過於寬泛,且大部分立法不良。

  • The quotation is attributed to Stewart Brand and he said this to a group of computer programmers in 1984.

    這句名言來自Stewart Brand,1984年,他對一群電腦工程師說了這句話。

  • "On the one hand Information wants to be expensive,

    「一方面,資訊希望抬高自己的身價,

  • because it's so valuable. The right information in the right place just changes your life.

    因為它實在太有價值的。正確的資訊出現在正確的地方,可以扭轉你的人生。

  • On the other hand, information wants to be free, because the cost of getting it out is

    另一方面,資訊又渴望自由,因為讓資訊自由的成本

  • getting lower and lower all the time. So you have these two fighting against each other."

    隨著時間越來越低了。因此,這兩方面就產生了衝突。」

  • The full quote, which you hardly ever hear,

    你可能沒聽過這段話,但是

  • actually spells out the major tension between intellectual property and technology quite well.

    其實挺清楚的說明了智慧財產和科技間的緊張關係。

  • And it did it more than 30 years ago, when the digital age was just beginning. As information

    而事實上在超過30年前,數位時代剛起步時,就已經存在這樣的現象。資訊

  • technology becomes more and more pervasive and important in our day-to-day lives in the information society

    科技越來越廣泛,生活在資訊社會裡的我們,對資訊的依賴日益加深,

  • , information itself becomes exponentially more important and more valuable.

    資訊本身的重要性和價值更以倍數增長著。

  • Paradoxically, as our information technology improves, and as our computers and connections

    矛盾的是,隨著我們資訊科技的進步、電腦網絡的運算

  • get better and faster, and sharing becomes easier, we're less able to control the copying

    更優質迅速、分享資訊也相對容易許多,對抄襲

  • and dissemination of this incredibly valuable information. The law of supply and demand

    、散播這些極有價值資訊的情況,我們的掌握度卻降低了。供需法則

  • pushes down the information's value. This tension is nothing new.

    貶低了資訊的價值。這窘境一點也不新奇。

  • Technology, especially in the context of copyright law, has always presented challenges.

    科技,特別是在著作權法的領域裡,總是代表著挑戰。

  • Socrates's and Plato's 'Phaedrus' bemoaned the advent of books, arguing that they "will

    蘇格拉底和柏拉圖的著作「菲德洛斯」為書本的出現哀悼,辯稱書本「會

  • implant forgetfulness in [human beings'] souls; they will cease to exercise memory because

    將遺忘的習性深植在人類的靈魂中;人們將會停止運作記憶,因為

  • they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves,

    他們將依賴白紙黑字,不再由自己深處取得、

  • but by means of external marks."

    而是經由外界符號來喚回記憶。」

  • One way that humans have attempted to deal with these new technologies, with varying success , is by passing laws.

    人們成功處理這些新科技的方法之一,便是透過立法。

  • The scourge of the piano roll was contemplated in the 1909 Copyright Act,

    1909年的著作權法將鋼琴納入考量

  • the photocopier in 1976, and the Internet was covered in the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

    1976年的相片複印機和網路在1998年都被納入數位千禧著作權法。

  • But we're going to try to avoid this simplified intellectual property versus technology binary.

    但對智慧財產權及二次元科技間的競爭,我們得嘗試避免過於簡化的討論。

  • The idea that we have to choose between devaluing the fruits of intellectual talent and labor,

    這種要我們選擇不是貶低智財勞力、

  • or devaluing the revolutionary information sharing capacity of our networks, is wrong-headed.

    就是貶低網路上革命性資訊分享能力的概念,是不對的。

  • The more interesting and more difficult question is how we can strike a balance; how we can

    更有趣也更困難的問題是,我們如何取得平衡?我們如何

  • incentivize and promote this revolution in the way we share information, while at the

    用分享資訊的方式,激勵、提升這樣的革新,同時也

  • same time incentivizing and promoting the production of creative works and inventions

    激勵有創意的作品和發明不斷產生,

  • by having respect for the human beings that actually created them.

    尊敬這些創造它們的人們?

  • The difference between today's debates and those that took place 100 years ago is that

    時至今日的爭論與百年前相異之處在於,

  • intellectual property pervades our lives more and more every day.

    智慧財產在我們的生活中日漸擴大瀰漫。

  • This is especially true for anyone viewing this video. I know that about 90% of you view

    特別是任何正在觀看這支影片的人,我知道你們有90%都用

  • Crash Course in a web browser, so consider the layers of IP in this very YouTube page.

    網路瀏覽器看Crash Course,從YouTube的IP位址就可以得知。

  • A lot of what you're looking at is covered by copyright. This video, for example, is

    你觀看的影片大多數都有著作權保護。以這支影片為例,

  • covered as a motion picture work. The website itself is considered a literary work.

    它是由動態的影像作品所呈現。而網站本身被歸納為文字作品。

  • The Thought Bubble, the theme song, and the video you watched right before this one, all

    思想泡泡、主題曲、還有你在這部影片前看的影片,

  • have copyright protection. The software that streams the video is also a literary work.

    全部都有著作權。播放影片的軟體也算是文字作品。

  • The web browser you're using is most likely registered as a computer program, as is the

    你所使用的網路瀏覽器,最有可能登記為電腦程式,

  • operating system. Lest you Linux weirdos think that you don't have a copyright on your OS:

    運作系統亦同。唯恐那些發明Linux的怪胎覺得自己的操作系統沒有著作權──

  • You do. You're just not enforcing it.

    其實你有的。你只是沒有主張罷了。

  • Even your comments could be covered by copyright. That haiku you just posted:

    甚至你的評論也有著作權。就連你剛剛發布的短句:

  • "Who is this person? What happened to Mr. Green?

    「這傢伙是誰?格林先生跑去哪了?

  • Dislike. Unsubscribe."

    不喜歡。取消訂閱。」

  • That's copyright-able!

    這也是具有著作性質的!

  • When you agreed to this (image of YouTube user agreement), you granted YouTube a worldwide,

    當你同意了這個(YouTube使用者同意書),你已經給了YouTube一個全球性、

  • perpetual, non-exclusive license to use your content in any way they see fit.

    永久且非排他性的許可,去以任何他們認為適當的方式使用你的評論。

  • There are also patents in play here. There's proprietary video streaming technology, and

    專利也在其中扮演了重要角色。影片傳載技術所有權、

  • many of the components in your computer are patented.

    還有你電腦裡其他眾多的元件都有專利。

  • But wait! There's more!

    但等等!還有呢!

  • YouTube is a registered trademark, and if you saw an ad before this video, there was

    YouTube是個經登記的商標,而如果你在這影片前看到了一支廣告,

  • most likely a trademark in there. This is a trademark

    裡面非常有可能也有商標。這是一個商標,

  • and under this sticker is an image of a piece of fruit, also a trademark.

    這貼紙下,有個水果(指蘋果電腦),也是商標。

  • And behind the camera, our most precious and valuable mark, Mark Olsen. Mark Olsen, everybody!

    而在這鏡頭後面,是我們最珍貴也最有價值的mark(商標,取同音):Mark Olsen。各位!Mark Olsen!

  • The search algorithm that got you here? That's a trade secret. My appearance in this video,

    把你帶來這的搜尋引擎計算呢?那是個商業秘密。我在這影片中的模樣,

  • and subsequent marketing of commemorative mugs with my likeness fixed on each one- that

    還有隨後為了行銷而製造,每個都印上我圖樣的馬克杯,

  • implicates my right of publicity.

    則關係到我個人的公開權。

  • If you're watching this on an iPhone or an Android, there's a whole other world of copyrights

    如果你是用iPhone或安卓系統觀看這支影片,背後的應用更是有整個

  • and patents that apply.

    關乎著作和專利的世界。

  • When you start to deconstruct it like this, it's dizzying. But despite all this complexity,

    當你開始如此地解構它,會感到十分暈頭轉向。但儘管複雜,

  • most of the time the system moves along with a fluidity that sometimes makes it easy to

    大部分時間,這體系隨著有時容易被遺忘的流動性

  • put it out of your mind. Kind of like the internal functioning of your digestive tract.

    前進著。有點像是某些你消化系統部分的內部運作。

  • But it's there. Always there. Gurgling and churning and functioning. Did anybody order lunch?

    但它就是在那兒,一直都在,咕嚕嚕地翻攪、運作著。有人訂午餐了嗎?

  • Now most of this fluidity and seamlessness is borne on the back of hundreds or thousands

    而這些不著痕跡、理所當然運作著的一切,大多數是從數以百萬計的

  • of lawsuits, many of them against Google, thousands of pages of intricately complex

    訴訟中孕育而生;這些訴訟多半針對Google、千百頁紛雜的

  • contracts, and hundreds of millions of take down notices.

    契約、以及數百萬則移除通知。

  • The point is that none of us, or very few of us, can go about our daily lives without

    重點是,我們之中沒有任何人,或者,任何人都可能可以在不受

  • being impacted by intellectual property. It's only when it hits home, like when you receive

    智慧財產任何影響下照常度日。總是要等到這些事對你侵門踏戶了,比如你因為開設

  • a cease-and-desist letter from a trademark attorney for opening a restaurant called Burger Queen,

    「漢堡后」餐廳,而收到一封來自商標法律事務所的、要求「停用」的律師函,

  • or digital rights management software stops you from listening to your iTunes downloads on your Zune.

    或者數位版權管理軟體阻止你繼續用播放器聽從iTunes下載來的曲目。

  • Maybe your YouTube video gets taken down because of that T-Swizzie song in the background (that's

    或許你的YouTube影片因為用T-Swizzie的歌當背景音樂而遭到移除

  • what the kids call Taylor Swift).

    (那是屁孩用來對泰勒絲的暱稱)。

  • Maybe you get a letter from your internet service provider, informing you that someone

    也或許你從你的網路提供業者那收到一封信,提醒你有人

  • using your account has downloaded every episode of Game of Thrones and that if it keeps up

    用你的帳號下載了每一集的「冰與火之歌:權力遊戲」,而且如果沒有停止的話,

  • you may be fined or imprisoned- or beheaded! That's when it flares up.

    你很有可能遭裁罰、或逮捕、或被殺頭!星火燎原的話就是這樣啦。

  • Flare up! God, are we still on the digestive tract metaphor? Somebody get me a Tums. Tums,

    星火燎原!天哪,我們還在用比喻喔?有人拿個Tums(抗酸消化劑品牌)給我吧。Tums,

  • by the way, registered trademark of the GlaxoSmithKline group of companies.

    喔對了,登記為葛蘭素史克股份有限公司的商標。

  • Most of us encounter IP only on its borders. We hear horror stories about the motion picture

    我們大多數人只會從側面了解智財。我們耳聞電影

  • and recording industry suing grandmothers. We watch those unskippable FBI messages warning

    和唱片行業向老奶奶們提告的故事。我們眼見那些聯邦探員發來不可忽略的訊息,

  • us about the consequences of copyright infringement, or we complain about paying thousands of dollars

    警告我們侵害著作權的可能後果,又或者我們會抱怨,

  • per pill for medicine.

    為那極少量的藥劑支付大筆花費。

  • We tend to encounter intellectual property law in places where we, as users, are basically

    我們更容易在那些身為使用者、而被告知「不可以這樣做」時,才會面對到智慧財產權。

  • being told 'no'. And being told 'no' over and over again is irritating, especially when

    不斷地被禁止、說「不可以這樣做」,是很惱人的,特別是當

  • these "no's" don't seem to make any sense. And they're really irritating when they come

    這些「不可以」似乎一點道理都沒有。而當它們包含

  • with threats of fines or imprisonment.

    罰款及坐牢的威脅時,就更加惱人。

  • So in this course we're going to focus less on enforcement and the "no's" and more on

    因此,在這個課程裡,我們會比較少專注於那些強制、「不可以」

  • the part of intellectual property that often says 'yes', 'sometimes', 'maybe', 'it is certain',

    並且多從「可以」、「有時」、「可能」、「可以確定地」

  • or even 'ask again later'.

    或甚至是「稍後詢問」等面向來談智慧財產權。

  • I'm speaking, of course, of the "Liquid filled die agitator containing a die having raised indicia on the facets thereof",

    我在說的當然是指,「某面含有一凸起標誌之液體注入的骰狀攪拌模型」,

  • registered as patent US 3119621, which you might know as the Magic 8-Ball.

    登記為美國的3119621號專利,就是你可能知道的「神奇八號球」。

  • Before we get too far, we should probably define intellectual property. This is going

    在我們深談以前,得先定義智慧財產。這會

  • to get pretty abstract, so let's go to the Thought Bubble.

    有點抽象,所以我們請思考泡泡出來一下吧。

  • The theoretical definition of intellectual property would begin by saying that it is:

    智慧財產權在學理上的定義,可以這麼開始:

  • "Nonphysical property that stems from, is identified as, and whose value is based on

    「以非物理性質的財產為本質,並且從一或多個思考、發想上

  • an idea or some ideas."

    建構它的身分及價值。」

  • There has to be some element of novelty; the thing that we describe as intellectual property

    它必須要有某程度的創新;我們所說的智慧財產權

  • can't be commonplace, or generally known, in the society where it's created, at the

    不能是常識,或它在社會上被創造、成為財產時,

  • time that it becomes property. You can't claim that you invented the wheel or that you wrote Moby Dick.

    不能夠已經為公眾所周知。你不能聲稱你發明了輪胎,或你寫了白鯨記。

  • Even though the source material for all IP is social -- the inputs are our education, our

    即便所有智財的資源都來自於社會──我們教育的輸入、我們

  • human interactions, and basically all the sensory data around us that we take in -- the

    人類的互動、且基本上所有微繞我們吸收的感官訊息──

  • thing that we call 'IP' is the product of us putting together all these social inputs

    所謂的「智財」,是將所有我們接收的社會訊息,統合而成的產物,

  • into something that we're gonna call "the idea".

    成為一種我們叫作「發想」的東西。

  • "Only the concrete, tangible, or physical embodiments of the idea are protected by intellectual property law."

    「只有實體的、有形的、或經過具體化的發想才會受到智慧財產權法的保障。」

  • The idea has to be fixed into a form and location in which humans have access to it. That could

    這個發想必須要被製作成一種固定形態、且放置在人們可以取得的地方。它可以是

  • be a novel, or a logo, or a liquid filled die agitator containing a die having raised indicia on the facets thereof.

    一本小說、一個商標、或者某面含有一凸起標誌之液體注入的骰狀攪拌模型。

  • Thanks, Thought Bubble.

    謝啦,思想泡泡,

  • So in its purest and best form, IP is the propertization of intellectual effort and talent.

    所以,智財最純粹、良好的形式,便是努力和天分的產物。

  • In its most corrupt and worst form, intellectual property can be, and has been

    但最腐敗、最糟形式的智慧財產,可以是、或曾經是

  • used by the propertied and powerful to protect concentrated markets and broken business models.

    資產階級和權力核心,用來袒護集中市場、破敗的工商模式的一種手段。

  • At its very worst, it can be used a censorship tool.

    而最糟的,便是用來審核的工具。

  • Intellectual property differs somewhat from real property like cars or houses because

    智慧財產某種程度,和車、房這樣的實體財產是不太一樣的,

  • it's limited in duration and scope. For example, copyrights last for the life of the author plus 70 years.

    原因來自於它持久性及範圍的限制。例如,著作權的永續期間是作者生命期間再加上死後70年。

  • Copyrighted works can be copied under the fair use exception for certain personal or

    著作權作品可以為了特定的私人或公共利益而例外地在

  • publicly beneficial uses. Let's say a book reviewer quotes long passages of a novel,

    合理範圍內被複製。舉個例,有個書評引用了某小說中的長篇,

  • then pans the book. It's likely the author of the book wouldn't grant permission for

    並從中獲利。原書作者很有可能不願授權

  • this type of use. But we want to encourage informed public discourse. So there's a good

    給這樣形式的使用。但我們希望可以鼓勵大眾知的論辯,所以這很可能

  • chance it would be found to be a fair use.

    被認定屬於合理使用的範疇。

  • Patent laws carved out a limited experimental use exception that permits minimal use of

    專利法中例外地敘明,為滿足娛樂、想像及好奇心、或嚴謹的哲學需求,

  • a patent for amusement, to satisfy idle curiosity, or for strictly philosophical inquiry. Again,

    允許在實驗性質上,對專利最小的合理使用。同樣地,

  • the patent owner probably wouldn't like this, but the law wants to encourage individual tinkering.

    專利所有權人一定不能認同,但法律希望能激發個人的能力再造。

  • Both these limitations exist to serve the primary objective of intellectual property:

    這兩項限制,都是為了智慧財產權最主要的目的而存在:

  • that's to promote the progress of science and useful arts by increasing our stock of knowledge.

    擴增我們的知識存量,以促進科學及實用藝術的進步。

  • So in this series, we're going to focus on the 3 main branches of intellectual property:

    所以在這個系列裡,我們將會專注在智慧財產權三個主要的分類上:

  • copyrights, patents, and trademarks. We won't have time to get into some of the lesser cousins of the family

    著作權、專利權及商標權。我們沒有時間去細究其他這個系統中的分類,

  • like trade secrets or the right of publicity, but all of these are included

    比如商業機密或公開權,但它們全都包含在

  • under the umbrella of intellectual property.

    智慧財產權撐起的保護傘下。

  • So in the coming weeks we're going to try to get at some of the nuts and bolt of what intellectual property is,

    因此在接下來的幾週,我們會試著從具體面象來了解智慧財產權。

  • because like it or not, IP is only going to become more and

    因為不管你喜不喜歡它,智慧財產權將會因為

  • more relevant as our lives become more and more digital.

    我們生活的日漸數位化而越發盛行。

  • So regardless of what or how you feel about any aspect of IP, it's probably a good idea

    所以姑且不論你從任何面向、怎麼認定智財,建構一些基礎知識

  • to have some basic knowledge of it. It doesn't matter if you're a consumer or a creator of protected content or both

    應該是個好主意。而你究竟是受保護內容的消費者、創作者、或二者皆是,並不重要。

  • . Is understanding IP going to help you?

    了解智財真的會幫助你嗎?

  • You may rely on it. See you next week.

    你會需要它的。下週見了。

  • Crash Course: Intellectual Property is filmed

    Crash Course:智慧財產權篇是在

  • in the Chad and Stacey Emigholz studio here in sunny Indianapolis, Indiana, and

    查德及史黛西耶米格茲的影棚拍攝,位在陽光普照的印第安納州的印第安納波利茲,

  • it's made with the help of all of these nice workers for hire.

    且由這裡所有可愛的工作夥伴們協助製作。

  • If you'd like to help us make Crash Course in a monetary way that doesn't imply any ownership in the final work,

    若您想以資金助我們製作Crash Course,並不對成品聲明任何所有權,

  • you can subscribe at Patreon, a voluntary subscription service where you can support

    您可以到Patreon(一個以志願性質為支持的捐款服務)上捐獻給Crash Course

  • CrashCourse and help make it free for everyone forever. You can get great perks,

    並讓它永遠對任何人不必收費。您會獲得一些回饋,

  • but