- A July 25 letter sent to Attorney General John Ashcroft
by 19 American legislators asked him to devote more Justice Department
resources in the fight against peer-to-peer networks and users swapping
digital media without permission.
-
- Forget the fact that the FBI is neck-deep in an internal
crisis of confidence and competence, having a hard time recruiting and
keeping qualified agents, and shifting from a diverse federal law enforcement
entity to one in-line with the emerging threats to American society from
terrorism.
-
- No, it seems that one of the highest priorities for the
Justice Department - behind that simple task of securing America's Homeland
- should be copyright enforcement....at least in the eyes of the Recording
Industry Association of America. Of course, this is made all the easier
when "peer-to-peer" - a valuable technological architecture -
is interpreted and subsequently marketed by the RIAA as synonymous with
"pirating" and evil economic - potentially terrorist - activities
against the $40 billion entertainment industry. And, of course, Congress,
mental wizards they are, will believe whatever they're asked to believe,
provided the campaign contributions are the right type and amount.
-
- We have the "War on Drugs" and the "War
on AIDS" and the "War on Terror" -- does this mean we'll
see the "War on File Sharing" as the next great American undertaking
with the same effect as these other "Wars" over the years?
-
- When news of this bipartisan letter broke on Friday,
RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen, was, as always, quick to praise its contents, saying
that Ïmass copying off the Internet is illegal and deserves to be
a high priority for the Department of Justice.Ó One wonders if
she wears special shoes to be able to jump so quickly to applaud anything
that might in some - any - way lead to profit assurance for her constituent
record companies.
-
- It was only last month that Rosen was quick to applaud
the controversial P2P-hack bill introduced by one of their owned Congressman,
Rep. Howard Berman (D-CA). Among other things, the proposed bill (Register
article here) would create loopholes for cyber-criminals to potentially
escape from and also turn any authorized copyright holder into a potentially
legal hacker. While Rosen was more than happy to quickly jump in and praise
the proposal, Berman's bill was so controversial that even RosenÌs
evil counterpart, Jack Valenti of the Motion Picture Association, took
pause when the bill was introduced, noting that Ïthere are aspects
of the bill we believe need changing as it moves through the legislative
processÓ -- implying that the powers proposed in the Berman Bill
- legalizing electronic attacks and providing attacker immunity for liability
in copyright enforcement activities -- were intended to be only for the
large entertainment empires, not for any copyright holder no matter how
small.
-
- Both the RIAA and MPAA act like drug addicts.....desperately
begging and trying to get something - anything - to help their body's craving
for their addictive substances, but it's the RIAA that takes first prize
in the desperate-moves category. Declining sales of albums - and their
profits - have been equated to Napster, peer-to-peer file sharing, Webcasting,
MP3 file formats, and the fact all PCs now come with a CD burner as standard
issue.....anything but the fact that studios have produced less and less
quality music that folks want to buy, or that studios are more than happy
to negotiate ludicrous contracts with artists that only deliver mediocre
album sales (*cough* Mariah Carey) or one-hit wonders. They've happily
saturated the pop market with teen bands that look, dance, and sound so
alike it's impossible to tell them apart. They also forget that CD prices
have gone up steadily over the past decade - and that when the economy
takes a downturn, paying $20 for a song or two is not worth it to most
people. Further, their efforts so far in providing music over the Internet
- to 'compensate' for the loss of Napster - makes current Afghanistan politics
look like a utopian form of government.
-
- Granted, organized piracy (as opposed to individual copying
and/or sharing) has caused Hollywood some economic damage, but I don't
see Hilary, Jack, Lars, or studio executives standing on lines outside
soup kitchens. And the fact that someone copies or uses a CD under federal
fair-use laws doesn't present a significant economic impact to the entertainment
industry, either. If anything, casual and legal sharing of music helps
broaden an artist's publicity and generate "buzz" - much how
Microsoft software became so dominant in the marketplace -- not through
quality, but because everyone was using it and it became the de facto standard,
such that it is.
-
- Rosen says that piracy "ultimately hurts consumers
by undermining the creatorsÌ incentive to bring new works to the
market.Ó In her eyes - and in the eyes of her purchased lawmakers
- the only 'creators' that should be allowed to easily bring new works
to market are those under contract to RIAA's member companies. To RIAA,
you're either part of their cartel or you don't matter.
-
- Thus, we see proposals like Berman's bill, and the RIAA
suggesting that all blank compact disks (and possibly hard drives) be taxed
to compensate for piracy losses, even if such media are used for the backup
of software and user data, not entertainment content. Most sinister is
the recent proposal by Senator Fritz "Hollywood" Hollings that
would mandate copyright enforcement 'features' be part of any device that
can store electronic data, from computers and DVD players to microwaves,
garage door openers, and rectal thermometers. The Hollings proposal would
essentially force the interests of the $40 billion entertainment industry
on the $500 billion-plus technology and hardware industries in a variety
of industrial sectors. Talk about the mouse trying to own the elephant
herd.
-
- As users and customers (note I did not say "consumers"
- "customers" implies a mutually-beneficial two-way relationship),
we have every right to bemoan the obvious profiteering actions of these
entertainment cartels to squeeze every last dime from our wallets. Sure,
we will pay for quality music that's affordable, but we want a happy medium
where we have the flexibility to use the entertainment content legally
purchased and/or obtained in a manner consistent with the law and our expectations.
Yet the entertainment cartels are only too happy to lobby for laws and
technological controls that presume every customer a potential criminal
until it can be proven with certainty. That's to be expected from Industrial
Age business leaders - known otherwise as "The Greed Generation."
-
- However, that's not the problem with the whole copyright
enforcement debate. Sure, profits are involved, but there's much more at-stake
than what's being discussed in Congress or the online communities.
-
- Freedom of choice in how one is able to bring his content
to market means a greater chance of it reaching an audience. Up until Napster,
the entertainment industry alone decided what artist gets supported, promoted,
and published, and in what quantities. The Information Age threatens to
reverse this centralized control mechanism and profit stream, enabling
anyone to publish and promote their content around the world, cutting the
middleman - RIAA and major studios - out of the financial equation and
management process. Nobody in an established role likes to lose control,
be voted out of office, or see their authority and influence erode....yet
this is exactly what the Information Age is doing to the centralized entertainment
industry. This helps explain some of the goofy proposals mentioned earlier
-- like a Vegas gambler, the RIAA (and MPAA by extension) is hedging its
bets, trying to not only maintain control of the content and media industry,
but if it can't, get as much as it can through other methods, laws, and
charges.
-
- If you control the means to disseminate content, you
can subsequently control the public. If you can't afford - or are not willing
- to play by the 'established' means of control, you are typically left
to fend for yourself in local venues and audiences.
-
- Thanks to the Information Age, this is not the case anymore.
This harsh reality terrifies the entertainment industry that will stop
at nothing - no matter how ill-conceived - to keep its reign despite a
failing business model and changing economic and customer environment.
The copyright debate isn't only about profit, it's also about who controls
information, and ultimately, people and society.
-
-
- Article #2002-10 (c) 2002 Richard Forno Permission granted
to reproduce/republish in entirety with appropriate credit.
-
- http://www.infowarrior.org/articles/2002-10.html
|
