|
Copyright Infringement |
|
The same
type of hypocrisy we see with recreational drugs |
| |
| |
The Generational Divide in Copyright
Morality
Ive been doing a good deal of speaking recently. And in one
of my talks, I tell an anecdote about a lesson I learned from my own
readers.
NY Times Blogs /
Original article
20th Dec, 2007
It was early in 2005, and a little hackware program called PyMusique was
making the rounds of the Internet. PyMusique was written for one reason
only: to strip the copy protection off of songs from the iTunes music store.
The programs existence had triggered an online controversy about the pros,
cons and implications of copy protection. But to me, there wasnt much gray
area. To me, its obvious that PyMusique is designed to facilitate illegal
song-swapping online, I wrote. And therefore, its wrong to use it.
Readers fired back with an amazingly intelligent array of counterexamples:
situations where duplicating a CD or DVD may be illegal, but isnt
necessarily *wrong.* They led me down a garden path of exceptions, proving
that what seemed so black-and-white to me is a spectrum of grays.
I was so impressed that I incorporated their examples into a little
demonstration in this particular talk. I tell the audience: Im going to
describe some scenarios to you. Raise your hand if you think what Im
describing is wrong.
Then I lead them down the same garden path:
I borrow a CD from the library. Who thinks thats wrong? (No hands go up.)
I own a certain CD, but it got scratched. So I borrow the same CD from the
library and rip it to my computer. (A couple of hands.)
I have 2,000 vinyl records. So I borrow some of the same albums on CD from
the library and rip those.
I buy a DVD. But Im worried about its longevity; I have a three-year-old.
So I make a safety copy.
With each question, more hands go up; more people think what Im describing
is wrong.
Then I try another tack:
I record a movie off of HBO using my DVD burner. Who thinks thats wrong?
(No hands go up. Of course not; time-shifting is not only morally O.K., its
actually legal.)
I *meant* to record an HBO movie, but my recorder malfunctioned. But my
buddy recorded it. Can I copy his DVD? (A few hands.)
I meant to record an HBO movie, but my recorder malfunctioned and I dont
have a buddy who recorded it. So I rent the movie from Blockbuster and copy
that. (More hands.)
And so on.
The exercise is intended, of course, to illustrate how many shades of
wrongness there are, and how many different opinions. Almost always, theres
a lot of murmuring, raised eyebrows and chuckling.
Recently, however, I spoke at a college. It was the first time Id ever
addressed an audience of 100 percent young people. And the demonstration
bombed.
In an auditorium of 500, no matter how far my questions went down that
garden path, maybe two hands went up. I just could not find a spot on the
spectrum that would trigger these kids morality alarm. They listened to
each example, looking at me like I was nuts.
Finally, with mock exasperation, I said, O.K., lets try one thats a
little less complicated: You want a movie or an album. You dont want to pay
for it. So you download it.
There it was: the bald-faced, worst-case example, without any nuance or
mitigating factors whatsoever.
Who thinks that might be wrong?
Two hands out of 500.
Now, maybe there was some peer pressure involved; nobody wants to look like
a goody-goody.
Maybe all this is obvious to you, and maybe you could have predicted it. But
to see this vivid demonstration of the generational divide, in person, blew
me away.
I dont pretend to know what the solution to the file-sharing issue is.
(Although Im increasingly convinced that copy protection isnt it.)
I do know, though, that the TV, movie and record companies problems have
only just begun. Right now, the customers who cant even *see* why file
sharing might be wrong are still young. But 10, 20, 30 years from now, that
crowd will be *everybody*. What will happen then? |
| |
| Responses: |
| |
December 20th, 2007
1:30 pm
Look at a CD today. How is it different from the CDs you purchased 20 years
ago? There isnt any difference. Its still a flimsy disc that gets easily
scratched.
Its in a CD case that gets scratched and broken in next to no time (this
case hasnt changed in the slightest after 20 years of existence). The case
is wrapped in cellophane that is still a nightmare to remove (same as 20
years ago). The printed material inside the case is, at best, average
quality fare with microscopic printing of the lyrics. The CD is only very
occasionally enhanced i.e. with (if youre lucky) an average resolution
AVI of the main titles video clip.
The difference in material cost between a CD and a DVD is peanuts, yet the
studios still havent transferred music CD to DVD, which would allow them to
considerably enrich the content at very low additional cost. That would
increase dramatically the gigabyte count, which would already tend to
decrease the appeal of music downloading.
The tactile experience of handling CDs and DVDs is a pretty dim one. The
music and film industries dont have research/engineering departments (it
seems) to look into this side of things. You still have to press down on the
raised nipple at the center of the DVD and then wait with baited breath to
see what will happen will it spring out and land on the floor? or will it
slip and scratch? how hard will you have to push? it varies a lot doesnt
it?
The full price of a newly released DVD is outrageously expensive yet the
majors still believe they have a divine right to demand this price in the
market place. 99% of consumers are sending the message that its too much to
pay, and the majors still arent hearing them.
The power brokers in the film industry are 50 year olds who have been in the
same industry for donkeys years; they came up through the ranks during the
heyday of the music CD and became accustomed to a market place of captive
consumers; a segment that stayed unbelievably profitable for an inordinate
length of time. Until, of course, disruptive technology (the Internet) came
along. And what did those fat cats do? They cried foul. Well, of course they
did. Theyve been shielded from the realities of real competition for too
long; they just dont have that business experience.
In the meantime, going to the movies or listening to music is no longer
the only form of entertainment for young people, or old people for that
matter. The competition for our time now includes video games (already a
larger industry than the movie industry), mobile telephony (talk or text),
cheap airline travel, Internet surfing and chatting all these things have
eroded the original total market available to cinema-going and
music-listening. Yet the fat cats are still convinced that ONLY piracy is to
blame for their difficulties.
How blind can they get? The solution for them is to make the CD/DVD purchase
and use experience about 100 times more attractive than it is at the moment.
Starting with reasonably priced, easy-to-open, disc always pops out in the
same way, case is classy non-scratch and pleasant to hold and feel (would
you sell chocolates in these shitty cases?), disc is new generation
non-scratch (except for maybe a diamond), content is twice as rich as
currently etc etc. In other words, no longer treat the consumer like a
second class citizen.
I could go on
Posted by paul
9.December 20th, 2007
1:34 pm
Part of the problem, Im sure, is that your college audience sees the record
companies, the movie studios, the RIAA, the MPAA, etc. as the enemy. They
believe that the industry that produces the entertainment that they desire
is nothing more than an unreasonable greed machine that is out to rip them
off in any and every way that it can. A parallel, in their minds, might be
the idea of stealing from the burglar who stole from them. Is this wrong?
They dont think so. Are they justified in their feeling? Partly. The
industry has, especially in the early years of digital media, overreacted
and made their customers feel like thieves by default. If the industry had
shown trust, they wouldnt have fostered the feeling that now exists.
An example of where a company has fostered trust is the book publisher Baen.
All of their books are available as ebooks. None of their books have DRM.
Heck, I can even download their books in RTF format and do what I please
with them. They even give away a large number of books to get you hooked.
According to Baen, this entire program has been incredibly successful in
the midst of another industry that is otherwise stumbling due to its fear of
its own customers.
This is not to say that those who download with abandon are blameless, in
many ways they actually contribute the problems they rile against, but it
does, in some small degree, demonstrate whats wrong here and why you got
the reaction you got: treat people like they have no morals and pretty soon,
you get people with no morals.
Posted by Jay |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|