Nov 17

Pirates and The Man

Assignments ICM 501 Add Comment (1)

Maybe I’ve been forever tainted by my business leanings and selling out to The Man has made me unable to sympathize with those trying to fight “him,” but I take issues with so-called pirates.   Removing the whole business argument from the scenario, I’d liken the realization of piracy’s ill effects to common sense.  I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument from my peers convincing me that paying for media is fundamentally wrong and stealing it is simply the only way to go.  Having been a part of the whole Napster craze (now some 10 years ago, shockingly enough), I’m able to see both sides of the argument fairly lucidly.  I certainly wouldn’t call it atonement, but shortly after the collapse of Napster I changed my ways and have legitimately purchased my media (CD’s and DVD’s, primarily) ever since.

Fail.

Perhaps much to the chagrin of those tasking themselves with fighting the DMCA, my reasons for “going legit’” were largely fear-based, but also had at least something to do with morals.  However empty the threats may have been, I had little interest in facing any legal repercussions for something as insignificant as downloading music.  Interestingly enough, though, my reasons for avoiding piracy have become more logical and less visceral in nature.  Surely, six years of business school played a part in helping me realize the folly of my ways, but in reality, I think I was simply able to mature and generate a more informed picture of how the world works.

Chalk it up to childhood naivety if you like, but the intricacies of piracy either didn’t occur to or seemingly effect me back then.  Now that doesn’t necessarily mean I’m equating piracy to childish ignorance (I don’t know, maybe I am), but rather that this was the evolution my personal outlook had taken.  Currently, I have the ability to look at the bigger picture, realizing that it’s not as simple and insignificant as downloading a single song or movie and sticking it to those Fascist record companies in the process.  There are many finer detail that go into the economy of creative works (referring to music and film specifically).  Judging from anecdotal evidence, many people take the “my vote doesn’t count” approach and see their individual piracy as a proverbial drop in the bucket.

Today, rather than use any moral guidelines to drive my decision making, I operate under more of a merit-based system.   If there is a particular artist that I happen to like, I purchase their CD as a sign of support.   Likewise, if I like a particular actor or director or actor, I’ll purchase their film as a sort of thank-you for creating content of interest to me.   I’ve heard the argument that the revenue from these purchases goes not to the talent, but rather to the monolithic record and production companies.   My only response to that is that these people obviously have no concept of supply and demand and its effect on the contractual talent market.   The sales of a given artist’s CD or movie will affect their ability to receive a more or less lucrative contract in the future (I’d compare it to the MLB free agent market, but I digress).  It’s as simple as that.

I find it hard to believe those taking part in media piracy can create this illusion of righteousness, bringing down the machine.  Take, for example, the upcoming major motion picture release of Jame’s Cameron’s Avatar.  Surely, there will be an effort to pirate this movie almost immediately, and presumably for some, it will be seen as counter-culture act of defiance.  The CG-heavy movie, while being of little interest to me, cost upward of half a billion dollars to create.  Now how do the pirates (likely square within the demographic interested in this movie) expect such epic films to continue to be produced if not for the revenue needed to keep film companies running?  Irrespective of the thousands of employees who also depend on that money for their pay, the argument can be boiled down to the inevitable collapse of the major motion picture.

Of course, this whole issue is wrapped up in the legal implications of piracy and copyrighted materials.  The MPAA makes no qualms about its willingness to bring alleged criminals to justice (or the ability for law enforcers to do so).  There now comes a time, however, when those who pirate must realize that they can either accept the current business model of the recording and film industries or attempt to subvert and hope a new one emerges.  Certainly, industries have undergone radical changes in the past only to find success and profit, such as a number of radio personalities who were forced to adapt to the advent of television.  It now remains to be seen whether these industries can survive on currently existing revenue streams (such as musicians and touring), create entirely new revenue streams, or perish.

These same legal (and potentially ethical) implications are relevant when considered my proposed website.  With such a heavy emphasis on user commentary and contribution, the matters of copyright and user privacy certainly come into play.  In the event of copyrighted material uploaded by users, the site administrators would inevitably make use of a robust terms of use policy as well as the safe harbor provision.  In terms of privacy, there would be redundant assurances throughout the site that the commentary and contributions of users would remain their own, as well as the user information provided upon registration.  With little use for the information of individual users, this would pose little threat to the viability of the website.