Wednesday, August 26. 2009Copyright Theft Brings Us One Step Closer.....John Linton .....to the dreaded surveillance society and all of the doom and gloom that George Orwell predicted. I had intended to see what impact the UK Government's copyright protection policies had on the two ISPs I have contacts with while I was in the UK but the flurry of articles that appeared overnight about the apparent toughening of the UK government stance as in this article: http://techdirt.com/articles/20090825/1021095995.shtml makes that redundant. When I was in the UK around this time last year the UK had just brought in the agreement with the major ISPS to send warning letters to users when authorised agents for various media companies issued them to the ISPs with the possibility that, like the legislation the Irish government was enacting, disconnection for persistent offenders could be considered. The early claims I subsequently read, and I can't remember when that was, were that by sending the letters piracy had reduced by 15% - but my memory could well be playing me tricks. One thing that has always intrigued me about copyright theft is the brazen attitude of both the people who do it and the people who speak out on the public record about it - like the person who wrote this article. His derisive reference to "the media industry lobbyists" and "the movie and recording industries" shows his, and everyone like him, belief that "how dare they try and get the government to try and stop us stealing their property". I really just don't "get it". What sort of society do we live in where people not only think it's perfectly OK to steal property but actually think it's so 'OK' that they publicly get offended if the owners of the property approach their respective governments to actually 'police' the theft better? "I think it's just fine for me to steal your property and how dare you attempt to stop me from doing that". As a kid I remember that I, and many kids I knew, stole magazines and paper backs and other easily concealable articles from the local newsagent and book store. To my eternal shame I remember that on probably more than one occasion I stole money from my mother's purse. Those acts were pure theft and I was never under any misapprehension that 1) I was committing a criminal offence, 2) it was wrong to deprive people of their property and 3) there was some chance I would get caught and suffer the consequences. While I would prefer to think that I stopped doing those things because of an increasing awareness of the wrong of it - it was almost certainly the fear of 3) that eventuated in my ceasing those anti-social activities. Not so the people who, each, now steal property worth hundreds if not thousands of dollars a year and then turn round and vehemently declare, publicly, that it's completely "OK".....because there is little to no chance that they will have to face any consequences of their actions. So now in Ireland, and if the overnight articles are to be believed, in the UK in the not too distant future, copyright theft will now be taken more seriously in terms of the law and there may be an attempt to stop people who illegally download copyright protected material using the internet. The public yellers and screamers about 'fascist music and movie industry' are unlikely to be deterred from their on going thieving by these actions - but a proportion will be: parents whose children cause the family internet to be disconnected, flat mates who cause their other flat mates to lose internet connection when assignments, left to the last minute are due, wives whose husbands cause the children to lose the ability to do their home work and a dozen more scenarios that immediately come to mind. The brazen thieves won't be bothered - they will believe they can continue stealing by just changing their ISP...and so they can unless the third mooted stage of the process is put into place. It has been suggested that to address the 'hard core' thieves a register is kept of the telephone numbers that have had the internet disconnected for persistent copy breach and that all ISPs will be required to build into their provisioning systems the requirement to check that register before activating a new internet service. All very 'fascist' and a sad commentary on the 'surveillance society' The problem is crime is reaching such proportions in so many aspects of daily life that there is an increasing rationale for such surveillance. I am always amused at the people who speak out on this subject vociferously claiming that it's "illegal" for a copyright infringement notice to be sent because it hasn't been proven in a "court of law" that the offence has actually taken place. What complete hypocrites these people are to, knowing that they constantly steal other people's property (they break the law) and then rant excessively when their ELECTED government seeks to put more laws in place to prevent copyright theft via the internet. Personally I have no view on this matter other than the need for Exetel to obey all and any laws that apply to its business operations and (as in the recent AFACT campaign to find a bunny to prosecute) to protect the company from unnecessary costs of operation by being stupid. What does surprise me, and continues to surprise me to a greater extent as it continues, is the number of people who seem so ethically and morally bankrupt that they publicly condone widespread property theft so publicly. It seems, at least to me, that the societies we now live in have regressed more than a little over the decades I have been aware of right and wrong. Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Yes, you're right, Michael. It is a strategy to 'piss people off'. That's kind of the point of a deterrent.
Comment (1)
My objection on 'three strikes' as a law is that it assumes you're guilty upon accusation, rather than upon conviction. If it's law, then due process must be followed. It's not good enough that the assumed copyright holder can pronounce sentencing, with no right of appeal by the accused.
I prefer the way that Exetel handles it. Three strikes, automatically handled, and we're not your ISP any more. The accused can deny the charges. Comment (1)
Hi John,
I don't think your views are out of date on this issue -- in fact, I agree with them -- but I do think you're using inappropriate words to convey them. If you're actually interested in the difference between the terms, a google search for "copyright theft infringement" brings up many, many links that much more eloquently (and legally) distinguish between "copyright infringement" and "theft". The wikipedia link -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement -- is an especially good read about the history of the topic although, like most Wikipedia articles, must be read with a 'grain of salt' concerning its complete accuracy! (I hadn't realised that the term 'pirate' -- or 'pyrate' -- had such a distinguished history.) Please don't get me wrong. I wholeheartedly agree with your and Exetel's stance on copyright infringement, and as an Exetel customer am happy with your following through on this stance's implementation (forwarding of infringement messages and suspending Internet access until the message is acknowledged by the end user). But please don't muddy the water by confusing theft with other infringement of rights; theft has a specific definition commonly accepted in our society, including our legal system, and copyright infringement doesn't fall under that definition. Anyone can, of course, make up whatever definition they want for whatever term they choose. That tends to make communication difficult, however, and given that some people are so passionate about this topic, using the already accepted definitions really does make discussions about it so much more useful. Comment (1)
without excusing it, i think the attitude has gone generationally cultural.
you grow up downloading mp3s along with all your friends and nothing happens and it's seen as 'normal'. the law has failed to keep up with the issue and the technology and the generation(s?) in question are so far ahead technologically it doesn't even register as a legal let alone moral issue anymore. re-education camps? Comment (1)
I wonder will they have to up the anti with technology to control the problem, proposals such as those from Copyrouter may gain acceptance to help stem the problem http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/mp3s/from-foe-to-friend-kazaa-founder-turns-music-piracy-crime-fighter-20090821-etgj.html
Comment (1)
Some paraphrased quotes which sum up my current feelings on the copyright/piracy debate...
Many people feel digital "piracy" is legitimate act of civil disobedience against the corruption of intellectual property law. For example: A band recorded a beautiful song with Robert Frost's 1928 poem "Fire and Ice" as the lyrics. Only "pirated" copies are available to their U.S. fans because, even though the poem was over 60 years old, and its author had died more than 20 years ago, Henry Holt & Co. has a state-granted monopoly on Frost's literary estate, and wouldn't release the rights for a price the band was willing to pay. Lets say you or someone in your family gets caught having downloaded that song. The idea that a corporation such as Disney or Sony should be able to bankrupt a family or completely disconnect them from the internet for doing what comes naturally, sharing mankind's culture, should be properly recognised as abhorrent, let alone an injustice. We buy things because they have value to us, not because they have value to the seller, and that's why I have said that copyright isn't fairy dust magically imbuing copyright owners with economic value. It is only consumers that can give goods economic value by buying them and that's why I have argued copyright owners should stop focusing on what they want to sell and focus on what consumers want to buy. Comments (2)
Everyone has the right think as they choose to.
However you can't just take other people's property simply because you think that is something you should be able to do it. By all means use all the fancy excuses you choose to - it doesn't change a thing - breaching copyright makes you an unprincipled thief.The fact that you can almost always get away with it doesn't change the fact that when you look in a mirror you see a thief with a thief;s moral code. There simply is no other way of looking at it. Comments (3)
Copyright by definition is not the same thing as a physical property right.
Remember copyright gives the author of an original work exclusive right for a certain time period in relation to that work, including its publication, distribution and adaptation, after which time the work is said to enter the public domain. Put another way it's an artificial government mandated monopoly that gives you temporary control over the distribution of an intellectual work. As with any monopoly supply will be constricted, the price will go up, and total utility will go down. If remix your song and use it in the background of my youtube video, by definition it's not theft. For a start you still have your original work! I may have infringed on your copyright but then there's an entire other argument about what constitutes fair use of a work. Copyright has been extended now to 70 years and doesn't expire when an author dies anymore. It's being used to prop up distribution based business models that the internet revolution has made redundant. People know the marginal cost of production for an mp3 is almost nothing. Digital copies are not scarce they are infinite goods. What do you think a consumer would pay for non scarce good with a marginal cost of production of 0 in a free market... Well you're seeing it right now with the explosion of p2p filesharing and infringement of copyright. People are (illegally) downloading tons of mp3's yet they are going to more live concerts that ever and buying more offical t-shirts than ever. No business model lasts forever, distribution middlemen have had their day. Comments (2)
When you look in the mirror you see a juvenile, immoral thief.
Comments (3)
|
Calendar
QuicksearchArchivesCategoriesBlog AdministrationExternal PHP Application |