Mapping information policy frames: The politics of the digital millennium copyright act

Abstract

Passage of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was a significant milestone in congressional information policy legislation. However, the results were widely criticized in some circles as providing too much power to certain stakeholder groups. This paper uses computerbased content analysis and a theoretical taxonomy of information policy values to analyze congressional hearing testimony. The results of document coding were then analyzed using a variety of statistical tools to map how different stakeholders framed issues in the debate and determine if congressional value statements about the legislation conformed more closely to certain stakeholders. Results of the analysis indicate that significant differences in the use of information policy terms occurred across stakeholders, and showed varying degrees of convergence between congressional or other stakeholders when framing information policy issues.

Who posts DeCSS and why?: A content analysis of Web sites posting DVD circumvention software

“…It is too early to judge the significance of DeCSS in this regard. Future research should track the development of frames across copyright‐related political action (Maxwell, 2004). 18…”

“…17 It is too early to judge the significance of DeCSS in this regard. Future research should track the development of frames across copyright-related political action (Maxwell, 2004). 18 15 EFF also participated in the DeCSS Bunner case (DVD Copy Control Association v. Bunner, 2003).…”

“…Concerned that unauthorized copying and distribution of digital works would increase, representatives of large copyright holders such as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) lobbied Congress to change U.S. copyright law to provide legal protection for copyright protection tools sometimes known as digital rights management systems (DRM) (Litman, 2001; Maxwell, 2004). Copyright holders use DRM to guard their works from unauthorized access or use.…”

Parsing the public domain

“…By using a previously developed information policy taxonomy (Maxwell, 2004), the terms identified though deductive analysis were organized into six categories (the unbordered areas in Table 2) representing their location in a two‐dimensional space. This theoretical construct consists of two columns representing different perceptions of the obligations required of effective information policies (communal and individual) and of four rows indicating the primary realms in which information is created, used, produced, and disseminated.…”

Políticas de información: el amplio espectro de la investigación

“…Los veinte largos años que van de 1984 (Trauth) al 2004 (Maxwell), no nos permiten aseverar que son éstos los únicos métodos para obtener datos y así fortalecer los estudios en esta temática . Sin embargo cada una de las propuestas descritas por Braman (1990Braman ( , 1993Braman ( , 1995, Browne (1997), Burgoyne (1994), Eisenschitz (1993, 1998, Lindblom (1968Lindblom ( ,1991, Marjchrzak (1984), Maxwell (2004), McClure, Moen, Bertot (1999, Overman y Cahill (1990), Rowlands (1996,1998, 2003 y Trauth (1986), presentan diferente estrategias para la obtención de datos.…”