DTC 201 — Essay on Copyright, Repatriation, and Restitution
Alice Christine Kerr
July 2026
Copyright law was created to protect artists, writers, and creators by giving them control over how their work is used and to stage-set compensation. In the digital age, the Internet complicates these protections. Digital content can be copied, reposted, or remixed instantly, without the creator’s knowledge. This ease of access creates confusion about ownership and responsibility. My position is clear: it is not acceptable to freely share copyrighted material online without permission. People should cite their sources properly, and if they use copyrighted work for profit, they should compensate the creator. The Internet does not erase ownership; it just makes it easier to devalue copyright laws.
Ruth Gregory’s Connections Overview (2020) explains that digital culture is built on networks of sharing, remixing, and collaboration. Gregory emphasizes that digital media flows through systems where copying is effortless and nearly invisible. This environment causes users to feel (and behave) as though digital content belongs to everyone. But Gregory also stresses that connection requires acknowledgment. When people share without attribution, they break the chain of connection that honors the original creator’s labor. In other words, the Internet expands access, but it does not eliminate the need for ethical behavior.
The Copyright Basics video from Copyright Clearance Center reinforces this point by explaining how copyright law functions in digital environments. The video clarifies that copyright protects creators by granting them exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and profit from their work. It also explains that simply because something is easy to copy online does not mean it is legal or ethical to do so. The CCC video highlights that users must understand the difference between fair use, licensed use, and infringement.
The Sustainable Heritage Network’s page Intellectual Property Law: Why It Matters adds to this discussion by focusing on cultural materials. The page explains that digital reproduction can lead to “loss of control” over creative and cultural works. When users share cultural materials without permission or context, they contribute to ongoing patterns of erasure. This source reminds us that copyright is not only about individual creators—it is also about protecting culture and identity.
As a savant and an author, I feel these issues personally. My writing comes from intuition, lived experience, and intellectual labor. When someone copies my work without credit, it feels like a piece of my identity has been taken. The Internet makes this theft easier. A sentence can be copied, a paragraph can be reposted, and suddenly my work is circulating without my name attached. Proper citation is a form of respect. It acknowledges that creativity has a source and that creators deserve recognition.
The question of whether it is “OK” to freely share things online that are not your property depends on context. Sharing can fall under fair use, especially when the user cites the original source. But deliberate theft and discrediting also take place. If someone uses copyrighted material to make money—they should pay the creator a percentage or licensing fee. This aligns with the purpose of copyright: ensuring that creators benefit from their own work.
Remix culture complicates this further. Many digital creators build on existing media—memes, fan edits, mashups, and transformative works. These practices can be creative and valuable, but they still require ethical grounding. Gregory’s video highlights that digital culture thrives on connection, not extraction. Remixing should involve crediting the original creator and acknowledging the lineage of the work.
Ultimately, the Internet does not change the core principle of copyright: creators deserve recognition and compensation. Because digital sharing is easy, ethical sharing must be intentional. People should cite their sources, respect ownership, and pay creators when their work generates profit.
Works Cited
Copyright Clearance Center. Copyright Basics. CCC. https://www.copyright.com/resource-library/videos/copyright-basics/
Gregory, Ruth. Connections Overview. Washington State University, 2020.
“Intellectual Property Law: Why It Matters.” Sustainable Heritage Network. https://sustainableheritagenetwork.org/digital-heritage/intellectual-property-law-why-it-matters
Gregory, R. (2026). Course materials and lectures for DTC 201: Methods for Digital Technology. Washington State University.
Mudd, P. (2026). Course materials and lectures for DTC 201: Methods for Digital Technology. Washington State University.