Name someone who reads the license agreement from beginning to end before clicking 'I Accept' when downloading a movie, a song, a game or a program off the Internet.
Take your time.
A close read of the contracts Internet consumers enter into on a daily basis demonstrates how the online industry is already way ahead of the copyright curve.
Last month, the federal government wrapped up a nearly two-decade long struggle to update Canada's copyright legislation with Bill C-11 (the Copyright Modernization Act). Last week, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on several outstanding copyright issues.
"The reality in Canada and a lot of other places is that a lot of the issues get resolved outside of the courtroom," explained Dr. Teresa Scassa, who holds the Canada research chair in information law.
The Ottawa-based law professor said the end user license agreements that come along with digital products already limit their use apart from what copyright law dictates.
For example, when new format shifting provisions in Bill C-11 take effect, consumers will be allowed to legally make a copy of work they already purchased so they can enjoy it at their convenience, perhaps on a portable music player or tablet.
"But if you buy music on iTunes, your license agreement with iTunes will tell you that you can make five copies on different devices," Scassa said.
Another glance at the terms and conditions set out by the iTunes store reveals audio playlists can be burnt to a disc up to seven times, videos can be transferred but not burned and that some of the services "include security technology that limits your use of iTunes products..."
"There's industries or sectors of these economies that develop these norms for how they're going to handle certain things," Scassa added. "And people pretty much end up having to fall in line with it."
Scassa began her teaching career at the dawn of the Internet explosion, which got her interested in the questions surrounding intellectual property and information law.
"This is just a very dynamic, constantly changing, interesting area of law that's challenging," the University of Ottawa professor said.
Also in a state of flux is the world of computer science, which strikes a tenuous balance with the world of copyright.
Within the newest legislation, there is a nearly blanket restriction on breaking a digital lock on a copyrighted work with few exceptions.
Circumventing a protection measure is allowed if it's in the interest of national security or if someone is doing it for the sole purpose of making a computer program work with a given system.
But programmers and computer scientists are actually using the the laws already on the books to make their work more accessible.
Open source licenses allow software developers to work like musicians and artists, sampling the work of someone who came before them.
"Anybody can be a software engineer," said Daniel German, associate professor in the University of Victoria's computer science department. "Part of that is because the cost of entry is essentially having a computer."
Open source licenses allow a creator to make available the source code, the DNA of a program, so others can see how it works.
Those developers can then use that genetic material to create something new, but have to abide by any restrictions set out in the license.
The Open Source Initiative, a California-based organization that advocates for the open-source community, defines the guidelines approved licenses adhere to.
To keep with Apple, they developed an open source license for their Darwin operating system in 2003 which has pieces still identifiable in today's Mac operating systems.
The license requires users to include the original copyright, source and license information in any subsequent products, but doesn't allow them to use the Apple trademark for their development or hold Apple liable.
A breach of the license is subject to the the same litigation as other copyright infringement.
"The moment you discover that I did that, you have all the rights to sue me and you're probably going to win because I used something you created," German explained. "And perhaps that's the paradox of open source. Open source is using copyright law to work against the traditional restrictions of copyright law."