File Sharing: Morally Justifiable
“We live in a world with ‘free content’, and this freedom is not an imperfection….The fact that content at a particular time may be free tells us nothing about whether using that content is theft.”
-Lawrence Lessig, Wired Magazine
Where They Stand
Those who support file sharing offer a variety of arguments for its justification. Advocates do not see it as a moral wrong, but rather as a natural outgrowth of the Internet's vast communciation network and a way for artists to spread their music to individuals who previously would not have been able to access it. Many proponents of file sharing point to the tremendous amount of people who engage in the action and wonder how such an activity can be considered a "moral wrong." Indeed, John Snyder and Ben Snyder, in their article, 'Embrace file sharing, or die', ask"how can 50 million people (over 200 million worldwide) be wrong?"
The January 2001 release of ''I Did It'' to Napster made the Dave Matthews Band the first major-label act to put a song on the file-sharing service with its label's permission.
Mason Treadwell, a 36-year-old Kansas City fast-food restaurant manager, agrees. In an interview with the student newspaper of Washington University in St. Louis, Treadwell, who uses Kazaa to download music, stated "If I'm a criminal then there's no hope for this country. 'Cause I got news for you. We've got a whole nation of criminals. My grandfather's a criminal. My 8-year-old niece is a criminal. I just don't feel like millions of people are criminals" (See Treadwell).
Are little kids like this the future criminals of America? Mason Treadwell doesnt't think so...
In addition, supporters
of file sharing argue that file sharing actually benefits artists by spreading
their music across the digital community. Tim O'Reilly, founder and president
of O'Reilly & Associates, noted that his 19 year old daughter and her
friends "sample countless bands on Napster and Kazaa and, enthusiastic
for their music, go out to purchase cds. My daughter now owns more CDs than
I have collected in a lifetime of less exploratory listening" (see'Embrace
file sharing, or die'). Thus,
rather than viewing file sharing as a moral wrong, advocates see it as an
opportunity for artists to expose their fans to more music and, ultimately,
encourage them to go out and buy the albums.
What Is Being Done
Advocates of file sharing are currently taking a number of steps to further their cause. One group who has vigorously defended file sharing and is working to make it a legitimate activity is the Electronic Frontier Foundation. According to their website, the EFF supports offering fans a legal way to use P2P programs while ensuring that artists get paid. Recently, their main objective has been to combat the wave of lawsuits the RIAA has filed against a number of individuals accused of file sharing. Indeed, the EFF notes that "suing fans doesn't pay artists. Neither does threatening every Internet user's civil liberties."
John Perry Barlow, Co-Founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has been an instrumenal advocate of file sharing and, more generally, freedom of expression in digital media.
Apple Corporation has forged a path for others to follow with the successful launch of their iTunes website in the spring of 2003. In only a week, Apple had sold over a million songs and, according to Steve Jobs, "had become the largest online music company in the world." Jobs went on to say that "Apple had created the first complete solution for the digital music age." Although iTunes has done exceptionally well since it's launch, not everyone is convinced it is the way of the future. For example, many still believe the 99 cents per song download fee is too high. Nevertheless, the launch of iTunes represents one of many actions that could provide a long term solution to the question of file sharing.
Future Implications
If advocates get their way, file sharing will become embedded into the Internet landscape well into the future. This would not only force the recording industry to adapt to the presence of file sharing networks, but it would also require society to re-examine the nature and scope of intelletcual property rights. Here, many argue that one of the central questions is not "whether technologies such as peer-to-peer file sharing will undermine the role of the creative artist or the publisher, but how creative artists can leverage new technologies to increase the visibility of their work."
With this in mind, file sharing will certainly create new business opportunities for those willing to take advantage of it. Numerous polls and studies (including our own!!) have shown that consumers would be will to pay for a "cheap, but legal alternative" to file sharing. Unraveling the intricacies of this operation, however, are easier said than done, and will certainly be a topic of debate for years to come. According to John and Ben Snyder, unless "subscription services offer a broad range of music and no digital rights management schemes, and properly labeled high-quality files, at a reasonable price and fast downloads", they won't have a chance to compete against "free" file sharing.
One thing seems certain, however-that as long as record companies continue to battle against the consumer and "support intrusive, overreaching legislation" they will be acting precisely against their best interests. The continued growth presence of file sharing in future society implies that the recording industry will be forced to adapt to the changes, or, continue to suffer.
Check out the Opposing View HERE