Posts Tagged: Internet Piracy

This weeks questions were:

1. What consitutes “free” in our time?

2. Does the word “free” connote effective change?

3. What are the long term effects of Utilitarian and substitute based marketing initiatives?

In an attempt to answer these questions I looked to the work of Chris Anderson to explain the meaning of free in our time and the connotations it has with piracy. In the countries of China and Brazil the issue of piracy has become a secondary issue when it came to satisfying the demand of the public for various issues. Whether it be luxury items or subsidized prescription drugs, the fact of a grossly fluctuating market has forced many world govenrments to consider secondary options to benefit from piracy.

For example in China, nearly 95 percent of the music that is listened to by the average person is pirated. Music is considered both an unnecessary expenditure of the middle class and something that is trivialized. Instead of wasting annual dividends on court costs, the Chinese have made their revenue from the artists themselves using talent for commercials, radio spots and merchandise sponsorship. Also, in regards to luxury items such as designer wear, the Chinese have adopted the custom of purchasing an authentic item while supplementing the rest of their wardrobe with knockoffs. It is with the inclusion of this fact that Anderson talks about the concept of Induced Obsolescence.

This concept is basically the copying of registered and trademarked goods, often in reproductions of inferior quality. This allows a mercantile economy to move trends from the elite to the masses within a short span of time. In Brazil This has become the absolute norm. In the “Bad Copy” documentary we saw techno brega musicians copy American songs and remix them with very loud and Bass oriented techno lyrics for “big sound system” concerts. Why? Mere promotional campaigns. In a heavily subsidized economy like Brazil, the average citizen does not have the income to support such luxuries. The same applies to the health care system of the country. Years ago, Brazil experienced an alarming AIDS epidemic that could have only been countered by widespread distribution of retro viral drugs. The ability to sustain the demand of such drugs was not economically feasible and as such the Brazilian government issued an ultimatum to the pharmaceutical giants to lower their prices on AZT medicines, or risk the consequences of allowing the disease to spread. Today Brazil is the largest manufacturer of royalty free prescription medication.

The concept of “free” does promote effective change in market dynamics and social welfare. It has also lead to a large substitute based market where the average consumer can readily afford what was previously only available to the financially well off. The issue with piracy is not the artists/manufacturers rights. The real issue is the consumer industries not having the foresight to create new methods to satisfy a growing demand in a stagnant market economy.

In light of Wednesday’s discussion, I wanted to create a response that continued addressing some of the questions brought up by my classmates (instead of just answering my three questions).

One of the most interesting aspects of Wednesday’s class was the idea of amateurism versus professionalism and looking at Lessig’s model for who should be paid and who should be copyrighted. I thought the chart brought up some interesting questions such as:

1. If you are an amateur, using this model, how will you ever make money?

2. What defines a professional versus amateur?

3. Using Lessig’s model will this influence the piracy of copyrighted materials?

I feel like Lessig’s model is a good start to further investigate the idea of copyright, payment and professional versus amateur; however, I also think that it’s not detailed enough (hence the questions above) to be put into action. I do appreciate the thought process though, and believe that this model is the first step in the right direction when it comes to redefining the laws of copyrighted materials.

Another issue brought up in class has to do with copyright laws and how as society we have outgrown the ones currently in place. With technology quickly evolving at a speed in which policymakers and researchers can’t keep up, the idea that copyright laws don’t fit our digital society makes since. Since copyright laws are outdated for current digital innovations, it then raises the question of piracy and how illegal is it really? During class discussion someone compared piracy to prohibition – making it illegal won’t stop it from happening and in fact may help grow the piracy business (as it did during the prohibition-era). I agree that copyright laws need to be adjusted based on current technology, but that will be a long road that we’ve just started traveling down. In the mean time, I think it’s important to educate artists about their rights and give them the opportunity to share and tag their work in ways that they deem most beneficial. Some artists like Radiohead or GirlTalk have released albums for free and asked only for donations or for fans to attend shows. I think the idea of creating a loyal fan-base who finds meaning in spending money on an artist will be more beneficial in the long-term rather than artists refusing to share their work unless they paid a price (it makes it seem more about the monetary issues rather than sharing their creative work).

Our class discussions brought up a lot of good points and issues to think about this week. I found it extremely helpful to have a more open forum where we were able to set the agenda and talk about the aspects that interested us most.

Ok the questions that I have this week are:

1. In terms of Intellectual Property Law- who is really aggrieved?

2. Is Internet Piracy a violation of criminal or civil law? Where does the jurisdiction for such crimes end?

3. Where do we draw the line between defamation and parody?