Learning How to Present 04/28/12

        The 2012 Spring Symposium of the Korean Institute Of Chemical Engineers was held in Jeju Island from April 25th to 27th. Even though the topic of the symposium was not as much related to my research project, I went to the meeting as the only high school student and the youngest person ever to be part of the  Korean Institute Of Chemical Engineers' symposium. The main objective of my travel to Jeju Island was to learn better ways on presenting one's research and findings.
        During many meetings, I have mainly focused on how the speakers presented their research. For example, I have compared and contrasted with other speakers on their PowerPoint, style of speaking, and interactions with the audience. One commonality I have seen with every speakers was the back ground of the PowerPoint templates. Even though good templates were mostly presented with big pictures and short bullet point words, every single PowerPoint had the white back ground -- different from what I was making for my presentation. It was clear that the white background made the audience focus more on the topic and not go sideways. In addition, I have learned from good speakers and presentations that I should never read my PowerPoint, not even glance at it, and just interact with my audience. I know it is a very hard way to present, but I believe if I master it with lots of practice I know I can give my audience the full knowledge of what I have learned during my research.

2011 Special 301 Report on Global State of Intellectual Property Rights 04/24/12

        During my research of the Free Trade Agreement between Korea and the United States, I have found the "Special 301" Report from the Office of the United States Trade Representative. The "Special 301" Report is an annual review of the global state of intellectual property rights protection and enforcement, which the Office of the United States Trade Representative conducts pursuant to the Trade Act of 1974 and the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988.
        According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the report reflects the Administration's resolve to encourage and maintain effective Intellectual Property Rights protection and enforcement worldwide. It identifies a wide range of concerns, including troubling "indigenous innovation" policies that may unfairly disadvantage U.S. rights holders in China, the continuing challenges of copyright piracy over the Internet in countries such as Canada, Spain, Italy and Russia, and the ongoing, systemic Intellectual Property Rights enforcement issues presented in many trading partners around the world.
        The United States Trade Representative states that "fighting Intellectual Property Rights theft in overseas market is critical to the livelihoods of the estimated 18 million Americans who work in intellectual property-intensive industries." I hope I learn many information on current issues of intellectual property right and what the government has to say about the problem. More importantly, this report will surely help me on focusing the market value and piracy issue of intellectual properties.

U.S. - South Korea Free Trade Agreement 04/23/12

        One of the most alarming news today in Korea, other than the North Korea's so-called "Space satellite mission," is the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Korea and the United States.  During my research on the intellectual property rights of Korea, I came across some notions about the inconvenient situation of Korea not accepting the copyright or the patent issued by the United States. Therefore, I decided to not only research about the difference between Korea's and the United States' intellectual property rights but also study about their agreements on intellectual property rights.
        According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Chapter of the U.S.-South Korea trade agreement contains state-of-the-art protections spanning all types of intellectual property, and requirements to join key multilateral IPR agreements: also containing strong enforcement provisions to ensure that American intellectual property rights are efficiently and effectively protected in South Korea.
        One of the key elements of the Free Trade Agreement is the Protection for Copyrighted Works in a Digital Economy. The agreement provides for several forms of IPR protection that are important in the digital environment, such as anti-circumvention provisions to prohibit tampering with technologies designed to prevent piracy and unauthorized distribution over the Internet; a framework for the limitation of liability of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) for copyright infringement, reflecting the balance struck in the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act between allowing for legitimate ISP activity and preventing the infringement of copyright; and enhancing the rights of copyright owners over digital copies of their works.
        I will continue on searching more about the agreement between Korea and the United States' intellectual property rights.

Intellectual Property Rights of Korea 04/20/12

        Since I have found and understood much of intellectual property law of the United States through legal documents, papers, and court cases, I have now decided to look over more on intellectual property rights of Korea. 

       I have studied the data provided by The National Assembly of the Republic of Korea on intellectual property rights. The data, however, was written in Korean with no translation. Therefore, I will use my own translation of the law on intellectual property of Korea.

        One thing that came to my interest was how the law was written at the beginning. For example, it started as:

1. "Works" shall mean a creative production belonging to the category of original literary, scientific of artistic works.

2. "Authors" shall mean the persons who create works.

3. "Performances" shall mean the presentation of a work to the public by acting, musical playing, singing, reciting, screening or by other means, and include the presentation of sound or visual recordings of performances, broadcasts or performances to the public.

        In addition, I have one article that is very similar to the United States law on intellectual property. the article 86 is stated as: The duration of authors' property rights shall continue to subsist for a period of fifty years after is is being made public; provided that, if it has not been made public within fifty years after its creation, it shall continue to subsist for a period of seventy years from its creation. This article made me question of the reason why both the United States and Korea agree on the duration of the right. To me, without knowing the reason behind it, the duration of the intellectual property rights seems to long for the efficiency of the society. Nonetheless, I will continue on researching more about intellectual property rights of Korea.

Copyright Court Cases 04/18/12

        All this studying and examining documents about copyright law is sometimes very frustrating and boring for me, and I believe it is the same for my viewers: listening to what I have to say about gaining from those documents. Therefore, inspired by my history teacher Ms. Grzybowski, I have searched couple of famous court cases dealing with the copyright law in order to better understand the decisions made by the court and also to find some different opinions of the justices.
        The first Supreme Court case I came across was the "Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, LTD." case. This particular case started in October, 2004 and the United States Supreme Court decided in June 27, 2005. The MGM Studios along with 28 other companies sued Grokster company for distributing free software that allows computer users to share electronic files through peer-to-peer networks. This software didn't have a problem if the users used the software in a righteous matter, but since the "recipients of respondents' software have mostly used them to share copyrighted music and video files without authorization" it became a lawsuit. During their oral argument, the Supreme Court justices were divided between the need to protect new technologies and the need to provide remedies against copyright infringement.
        Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the court saying, "The question is under what circumstances the distributor of a product capable of both lawful and unlawful use is liable for acts of copyright infringement by third parties using the product. We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmatives steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties."
        Justice Ginsburg, with the Chief Justice and Justice Kennedy, wrote the concurring. He said, "I concur in the Coutis decision, which vacates in full the judgment of the Court of Appeals... and write separately to clarify why I conclude that the Court of Appeals misperceived, and hence misapplied, our holding in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc."
        It seemed that the opposing party of justices who do not think Grokster is to be guilty for the cause of copyright infringement due to the disagreement faced on the previous case of Sony Corporation v. Universal City Studios. Therefore, I would research about the case of Sony Corporation v. Universal City Studios. On the other hand, it was a great example to see the conflicts between our Chief justices and their reasons, which makes us, or at least me, think about our opinions on this case.

Justice on Intellectual Property 04/13/12

        I have once read Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? by Micheal Sandel and recently finished reading the book again. When I first read the book by Sandel, to be honest, I was only interested in learning about his philosophy and teachings on what he thinks it is justice. It was a very interesting book but rather than my expectations only my questions grew further. However, just like what he said during his lecture at Harvard University, can be seen in YouTube, the risk of learning and talking about philosophy of justice is that there is no right answer and we come to a dilemma of questioning what we already know or what we think that we already know. I, too, had this experience while reading his book, watching his lectures and trying to answer his hypothetical situations. Even though I had my own thoughts about what is right and just, I soon began to realize that my thoughts can be uncertain. On the other hand, some of my uncertainties became clear when I applied those logic to my study of intellectual property. By writing this post, I seek to share my opinions with my viewers, listen to other point of views, be enlightened, clear my thoughts on the right of intellectual property, and talk about different views of justice. 

One of his lecture can be seen @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBdfcR-8hEY&feature=relmfu

        During his book, talking about Utilitarian views, Sandel made a hypothetical situation of is it just or right to kill one person to save five people. According to Sandnel, Utilitarians believe "it is the greatest good to the greatest number of people which is the measure of right and wrong," quoted from Jeremy Bentham who is the father of Utilitarianism. I easily answered the question as it is morally wrong to kill one person to save five people. But, when the number of people I can save grew to about thousands of people, I had the uncertainty of still keeping my answer. On the other hand, when I read that passage again and reflected with my study of intellectual property rights, it became clear that it is wrong to kill a person but given the circumstances is okay to kill a innocent person for the greater number people. However, I also realized that the question is wrong to ask to reflect what utilitarians believe or should I say that Utilitarianism is wrong. My reason is that the hypothetical question was a situation in which I had no choice but to kill someone, but in a situation where I am in a boat with three other people lost in the middle of an ocean and one is almost dying, I believe it is wrong to kill that one person for me and the others. I believe so, because I have the choice to choose to kill or not instead of not having the choice of not killing anyone.

        It is quite similar, in my point of view, with the question of intellectual property rights. In the views of Utilitarianism, the rights can and should be violated and sacrificed or in a sense not a right because not having the right can provide greater good for greater number of people. For example, in the view of an Utilitarian songs should be given freely because if it's free more utility can be given to more number of people. But then if we think about the artist, the songwriter, the producer, how would they get paid for their work? That is why I believe the idea of right or wrong can be decided by the greater number of pleasure for the greater number of people is wrong due to some unalienable rights.

        More on other views about justice will be posted.

        

Video Clip of My Music Talk Show at "A Submarine Boarding Sparrows" 04/10/12

        

        To share one of my most exciting and special moments of my life, I have decided to share the edited version of the video that I had from my music talk show at "A Submarine Boarding Sparrows". Most part of my show is spoke in Korean, so many or almost all of my viewers would not understand a single word I said on the video. Nonetheless, as stated in my previous post about my experience of being a host on this music talk show, I would like to say this again. 
        The theme of my show was telling the audience of the songs that helped me go through tough situations in life and help to become a bigger person: songs that made me who I am now. This experience not only gave me a closer step towards getting to know other artists for my project but also being on stage where lots of famous song writers started their music careers and somewhat be in there shoe.

        The songs that helped me become stronger were: "A Watchful Guardian" by Hans Zimmer, "Vienna" by Billy Joel, "Time" by Badelt, "Running" by SES, "He's a Pirate" by Hans Zimmer, and "Blessings" by Laura Story.

        I hope my viewers consider that the video is in low resolution due to the its original big memory size.