What's the Point of File Sharing?
-
It's to share some of your files that others want. Primarily MP3s, videos, and other entertainment items with your friends.
Illegally
At least that's what the entertainment industry would have you believe. In the US this week, the entertainment industry will go before the Supreme Court to argue that companies that operate peer to peer software networks have no purpose other than to facilities illegal activities.
It seems crazy, right? Maybe pleasure plane trips to Mexico and other points south of the US should be outlawed because their only purpose is bringing back drugs. Maybe we should prevent sales of fertilizer because it can be used in bomb making? Maybe we should stop selling electrical wiring and switches in retail stores because it will be used for unlicensed modifications to a structure?
I admit it seems the popular use of many peer to peer networks is copyright violation by sharing music and video files. But as with many other problems in society, we're attacking a side effect here, not the problem. If people are violating copyrights, then pursue them as violators. We don't prosecute the makers of radar detectors and in my mind, there is no legal reason to have them other than to make it easier to violate the law. Don't sue the bartender because the driver had one too many. Put the responsibility where it lies, with the individuals violating the copyrights.
Fair use is a tricky thing. I admit it and as an author and publisher, it's a balance that I struggle with constantly. Ever since cassette tapes and VCRs, balancing the rights of the individual to make use of their media with the rights of the copyright holders to be compensated is a very fine line to draw.
As a consumer, if I purchase something, be it a book, CD, or any other type of media, I'd like to be able to snip down sections for my own use. Even for the use of my family. Copying a CD or DVD onto a disc for play in the car, so my kids don't ruin my investment, is fundamentally no different from making a copy on a cassette. Which is no different than my rewriting the words in a book. It's just an easier mechanism. Granted that as a producer I might say the low prices are due to the difficulties inherent in copying something, but then raise prices. Don't entice people to buy with low prices and then complain of the side effect.
Movie revenue was up last year, though there is an argument that less people went to the movies. CD sales rose and iTunes, which is a completely digital download services, had incredible numbers. The entertainment industry is getting caught up in their own numbers and searching for ways to squeeze more money from each of us in a method that is not core to their business. They're hoeing litigation will help them make each item more profitable rather than sticking to what they do well. Generate new media that we enjoy and you will make more revenue.
So as a Windows guy, a DBA, can you think of any uses for peer to peer software that make sense? Linux makes their code and binaries available using bitTorrent. Can anyone say SP4?
Steve Jones
-
Service packs, technical webcasts that can be downloaded quickly for viewing use later, sharing of large but nonsensitive databases of test data, such as for verifying good stored procedure support in MySQL 5.0. The possibilities for peer to peer sharing are endless.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
I too, am concerned about Government intrusion and regulation based on a lukewarm excuse.
For example, I don't want ISPs forced to monitor all client traffic because some users illegally share copyrighted material. However, that IS what happens at the borders, i.e. all traffic is monitored and much of it searched in order to stop the flow of illegal goods, including humans and drugs. It is hard to buy fertilizer now (I cannot find potassium permanganate to refill my iron filter!).
Further, as a software writer who depends on the laws to protect my works from theft, I am offended by those in my very own industry who pretend file sharing of copyrighted materials is reasonable, and fair. Don't be one of them.
Copyright laws are our only protection against theft of our intellectual property. Even open source users 'sign' a contract to respect the works they have been given, and do not become the owners of them.
So we can't have it both ways. If I write a program that represents my efforts over a significant period of time, I expect the laws to assist me in protecting it from theft so I can sell at least a few copies. So I cannot complain loudly about the entertainment industry having the same expectation, regardless of whatever excuses I contrive about how much money they already have.
-
I look at it this way...
For years I-95 served as a major artery to get drugs into the US (I haven't heard anything recently but I'm sure this hasn't changed). However, I-95 also serves as a big aid for normal travellers not doing anything illegal. Because I-95 is being used to ferry drugs, should it be shut down? No.
File sharing networks like BitTorrent aren't the problem. It's the criminal use of them that is. Therefore, don't go after the network, go after the people. I know the RIAA has and it has gotten some deservedly bad press for this (their methods of identification were rather primitive, even after industry groups told them such methods weren't very good). But that's the way to go. Don't shut down the highway because some folks are doing the wrong things. Keep it for those who are using it in a legal way.
K. Brian Kelley
@kbriankelley -
Yes, exactly. Go after and publicly punish those who spam, emit viruses and worms, and share copyrighted material.
I have great concerns about some proposed legislation here in canada that will have ISPs inspecting the traffic. That's like asking the phone companies to monitor the conversations.
Only the threat of public ridicule and punishment can stop Spam, Illegal Sharing and Viruses.
-
> "...They're hoeing litigation ..."
Maybe a typo, but it reads pretty humerously this way, too
TroyK
-
You mention something very close to the point in mentioning VCR's. Why is it that for many years the networks have not had a problem with recording their soap operas, etc during the day? The main reason is the business model -- TV networks get their revenue from advertising sales, not media sales.
It is entirely possible for the music/media companies to use this business model. I'm sure that an advertisement in the middle of your music would not be too much if you got it for free.
Seriously, it would be possible to sell complete albums this way.Regards,
joe
Joe Johnson
NETDIO,LLC. -
Joe,
It's possible, but the main complaint with the digital world is the ease of stripping that stuff out. I think there still could be some type of advertising, but no one seems to want to give it a try.
-
No method of securing digital material will remain secure. At some point all security technologies will be hacked period! It is only a matter of when not if. Because of this the media giants should look at how best to get users to purchase their product illegally. Continuing to make it difficult for persons who legal purchase product to use that product will only encourage more to say the heck with it and engage in illegal activitys. I for one have no problem with paying for a DVD so long as it is reasonably priced and I have the option to produce a backup of it so that in the event it is damaged I do not have to buy it again. Prveenting consumers from creating backups of the already fragile media is just another way of the music & movie industry making it harder not easier on the consumer. I say reasonably priced because the media industry has kept prices artificailly high for a long time. How is it possible for the CD media to come down in price as it did in the 90's and yet the price of music CD's not only remained high but actually went up? The music industry was intentionally keeping the prices high even after the cost of the media went down simply because they knew that most users did not have an alternative. Once CD burners were within the reach of the average user the music industry got scared and rightfully so. I for one was more then willing to give some back to the music industry for over charging me for many years. If they had not been so greedy and kept the cost of the music CD in line with the cost of the storage I believe they would have seen far fewer consumers engage in the illegal dupoication of CD's. I worked as a manager of a music store for a national chain for several years. I heard from many customers how they felt the music industry was taking advantage of them when it came to CD's. When it is possible to buy a CD for a dollar or less why does a CD version of an album cost %50 more (or higher) then the cassette tape equivelant?
The decissions that the record industry made were just plain bad and now they are paying for those decissions. While I don't condone the illegal activity of pirating media I also have little pitty for the music industry as they are reaping what they sowed.
Ed
Kindest Regards,
Just say No to Facebook! -
The real danger is when legitimate products become the target of the lawyers (and possibly the lawmakers). This is a serious threat to the potential of the internet.
Example of what is obviously intended at legitimate use is now a target of the entertainment biz:
http://www.politechbot.com/2005/04/13/entertainment-industry-doesnt/
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply