Back in the old days, people are known as who and what they are. Probably only comic superheroes have alter-egos and double identities. Apparently that whole DC comic revolution has taken over the whole world. Today, everyone is Clarke Kent, Bruce Wayne and Peter Parker when they’re offline.
The Internet has far affected the way humans live today, to the extent of letting people become what they otherwise would not be able to. Hiding behind their monitors and keyboards, online identity is created, constructed, and altered by the users whichever way they want it. Once an online identity is forged, it becomes unique to its own in the sense that people recognize that particular identity like how we would recognize individuals in real world. Adoption of pseudonyms for emails, IM and forums will always have to go through authorization to avoid different people using the same “name”. Thus, user IDs became their names, email addresses became their home addresses, and their identity, something they want the world to know them as.
Identity plays a key role in virtual communities. In communication, which is the primary activity, knowing the identity of those with whom you communicate is essential for understanding and evaluating an interaction. Yet in the disembodied world of the virtual community, identity is also ambiguous. Many of the basic cues about personality and social role we are accustomed to in the physical world are absent. [Donath, 1999] This makes it hard for people to tell if that person we are interacting with is really who and what he/she claims to be. While not everyone treats the internet as a form of escapism and see no point in lying about oneself, tons of others do just that. In the physical world there is an inherent unity to the self, for the body provides a compelling and convenient definition of identity… Though the self may be complex and mutable over time and circumstance, the body provides a stabilizing anchor. [Donath, 1999] With every identity comes a certain reputation, and in cases whereby physical manifestation does not exist, it is easy to create one. For example, apart from old folks who are totally foreign towards technology (and much less about the blogosphere), who else in Singapore does not know Xia Xue? In cyberspace, reputations can be easily made due to the high transfer of information. [Online Reputation, 2007] People who are actively involved in blogging and posting on forums will be recognized by other viewers for certain reasons, and they are often associated to the things they talk about. The more they talk about something, the more people associate them with that particular topic, and hence, reputation formed. As popularity increases, reputation tends to go up with it as there is tendency that recommendations towards that particular online entity would be made among viewers.
The very term "identity theft" is an oxymoron. Identity is not a possession that can be acquired or lost; it's not a thing at all. Someone's identity is the one thing about a person that cannot be stolen. The real crime here is fraud; more specifically, impersonation leading to fraud. [Schneier, 2005] The fact that online identity is so easy to assume poses a lot of problems for users. The fact that users with reputations be it in blogs, Friendster or MySpace will inevitably leak out very detailed personal information just do not help the situation. It is already very common today in social networking websites for people who are not so good-looking (no offence meant to anyone) themselves go around stealing other people’s pictures and putting them up on their own profiles, after which they will alter their personal particulars accordingly as well. When people who know the victims in person see this other profile with their photos on them, that is when the cat is out of the bag. In prevention to this problem, a lot of blog sites as well as social networking sites have stepped up security in attempt to protect their users. People can limit viewership by changing their account settings, i.e. to make it only viewable to selective individuals. But even this is not entirely secure as a lot of trust need to be placed upon the selective individuals, and trust is something that can be easily misused. Moreover, stealing of identity does not necessarily mean having to create a fake account. People who are capable enough can simply hack into the original accounts and make it their own. Just recently there have been people going around MySpace taking over people’s accounts, after which they forward vulgar messages to all the people in that account’s friends list. The administrator himself, Tom, has no other solutions for users but to try changing passwords from time to time.[Tom, 2006] Hence, as we can see, not only that the danger still exists, it is still pretty much a big issue to be dealt with.
Online identity has since empowered humans in many ways, but in the same manner it has handicapped us for the fact that it is very vulnerable. Moderation in how we use it is hence still the best possible solution in order for it to work for us, and not against us.
References:
Donath, J. M. (1996, Nov 12). Identity and deception in the virtual community. Retrieved February 22, 2007, from Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community Web site: http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html
Online Reputation. (2007). Online Reputation. In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved February 22, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_reputation
Schneier, Bruce (2005, April 15). Schneier on Security. Retrieved February 22, 2007, from Schneier on Security: Mitigating Identity Theft Web site: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/04/mitigating_iden.html
Tom (2006, October 19). Bulletins that you didn't post?. Retrieved February 22, 2007, from MySpace blog: http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=6221&MyToken=67b4335a-c8ba-435d-bb7d-e9969592d7c4ML
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Friday, February 9, 2007
QotW4: The Gift of Giving
It is amazing how, in this utterly selfish dog-eat-dog world of endless war, we can still find selfless individuals who are more than willing to share not only what they have, but also help you find what you want. That was exactly what ran through my mind the first time I started using Kerrazy Torrents.
Kerrazy Torrents does not work like any other Bit Torrent websites. Firstly, it operates as a forum in which trackers can put up the link to their torrents, and then the forum can be used to discuss anything related to the torrent itself, as well as other topics to be discussed, for example, requesting of other torrent files of similar nature. People can also post comments about what they think of the posted materials, whether they like it or not, or even do a short review for people to see. Secondly, unlike in other websites whereby torrent files are posted by people who downloaded them from others, the files posted on Kerrazy Torrents are often first hand. Trackers actually go out and BUY the music legally, rip them and share it to people requested for them on the forums at absolutely no cost at all! All these trackers ask for is for people to show their appreciation by saying “thank you” after each download in the forum itself. That was all that they ask for. Of course they would be more than happy if anyone out there can help them find what they could not, and wanted to have. Otherwise, it is alright for them as they do this out of their own willingness, and they do not expect anything in return at all. On top of it all, most of these trackers not only upload music on CD format which is very easy, they also convert Cassette Tapes as well as Vinyls into mp3 format. Very often these releases are extremely rare stuff that are no longer available in the market, and has since become collector’s items that could very well amount to hundreds and even thousands of dollars should they be auctioned on eBay or Yahoo! Auction. Downloaders know this fact very well, and this in turn triggers reciprocity. They want to contribute what they can to this community as well. For those who have what others are looking for, they try to upload those stuffs for these people. Most of them give priority to trackers who have been uploading a lot of stuff as a form of paying back their kindness. As for others who do not really have anything to offer, they simply leave their torrents active for as long as they can. Some would even leave their computers on for 24 hours and reseed all the torrents to other downloaders when trackers are no longer able to do so. To add on to how "Kerrazy" these providers and trackers can get, they do not only post their torrent files on Kerrazy Torrents alone! They also share it with users at other torrent websites, Rockbox being the most affiliated one. It is absolutely remarkable to me, going to such lengths just to help everyone out.
Sounds very much like a gift economy? It IS definitely one. Characteristically, providers of services here do not expect anything in return, or rather, have no guarantee that their service would be reciprocated. This is in line with the definition of a gift economy, which is an economic system in which the prevalent mode of exchange is for goods and services to be given without explicit agreement upon a quid pro quo. [Wikipedia, 2007] As mentioned by Lewis Hyde in his book, whatever we have been given is supposed to be given away not kept. Or, if it is kept, something of similar value should move in its stead… The gift may be given back to its original donor, but this is not essential… The only essential is this: the gift must always move. [Hyde, 1983] This is basically what happens in most filesharing system, the downloaded files are always on the move, distributed from one to another. Apart from reciprocity, this is also one of the motivations behind seeders at Kerrazy Torrents for seeding the torrent files: to keep it moving.
The relative or absolute anonymity of the recipient makes it all the more remarkable that individuals volunteer valuable information – one cannot realistically count on the reciprocity of the recipient in the future to balance the gift that has occurred. While a balanced reciprocity with a particular individual may not be possible, there is a sense in which a balance might occur within a group as a whole. [Kollock, 1999] This is also what runs behind Kerrazy Torrents. Other users who were initially just receiving passively soon realized what they have been taking for granted, and this in turn creates a sense of guilt for not reciprocating the favour in them. They then feel the urge to contribute something back to the community and become trackers themselves as well or at least act as seeders for other people. As more people are doing this, the give-and-take flow soon becomes a cycle, where almost everyone is contributing in some way or another. Of course not everyone will do this, there will always be those bunch of freeloaders who will just take everything and not give back anything in return. As Peter Kollock himself has put it, this system of sharing is both more generous and riskier than traditional gift exchange. It is more generous because an individual provides a benefit without the expectation of immediate reciprocation, but this is also the source of risk. There is the temptation is to gather valuable information and advice without contributing anything back. [Kollock, 1999]
Thus, in conclusion, as suggested by the different sources used as well as my own analysis, I am sure many will agree with me that Kerrazy Torrents is definitely an ideal example of a gift economy and how it functions as one.
References
Gift Economy. (2007, February 4). Gift Economy. In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved February 10, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy#_note-mustmove
Hyde L. (1983) The Gift. Imagination and the Erotic Life of Property. New York: Random House; 1983.
Kollock, P. (1999). The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace. Retreived on February 10, 2007 from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/economies.htm
Kerrazy Torrents does not work like any other Bit Torrent websites. Firstly, it operates as a forum in which trackers can put up the link to their torrents, and then the forum can be used to discuss anything related to the torrent itself, as well as other topics to be discussed, for example, requesting of other torrent files of similar nature. People can also post comments about what they think of the posted materials, whether they like it or not, or even do a short review for people to see. Secondly, unlike in other websites whereby torrent files are posted by people who downloaded them from others, the files posted on Kerrazy Torrents are often first hand. Trackers actually go out and BUY the music legally, rip them and share it to people requested for them on the forums at absolutely no cost at all! All these trackers ask for is for people to show their appreciation by saying “thank you” after each download in the forum itself. That was all that they ask for. Of course they would be more than happy if anyone out there can help them find what they could not, and wanted to have. Otherwise, it is alright for them as they do this out of their own willingness, and they do not expect anything in return at all. On top of it all, most of these trackers not only upload music on CD format which is very easy, they also convert Cassette Tapes as well as Vinyls into mp3 format. Very often these releases are extremely rare stuff that are no longer available in the market, and has since become collector’s items that could very well amount to hundreds and even thousands of dollars should they be auctioned on eBay or Yahoo! Auction. Downloaders know this fact very well, and this in turn triggers reciprocity. They want to contribute what they can to this community as well. For those who have what others are looking for, they try to upload those stuffs for these people. Most of them give priority to trackers who have been uploading a lot of stuff as a form of paying back their kindness. As for others who do not really have anything to offer, they simply leave their torrents active for as long as they can. Some would even leave their computers on for 24 hours and reseed all the torrents to other downloaders when trackers are no longer able to do so. To add on to how "Kerrazy" these providers and trackers can get, they do not only post their torrent files on Kerrazy Torrents alone! They also share it with users at other torrent websites, Rockbox being the most affiliated one. It is absolutely remarkable to me, going to such lengths just to help everyone out.
Sounds very much like a gift economy? It IS definitely one. Characteristically, providers of services here do not expect anything in return, or rather, have no guarantee that their service would be reciprocated. This is in line with the definition of a gift economy, which is an economic system in which the prevalent mode of exchange is for goods and services to be given without explicit agreement upon a quid pro quo. [Wikipedia, 2007] As mentioned by Lewis Hyde in his book, whatever we have been given is supposed to be given away not kept. Or, if it is kept, something of similar value should move in its stead… The gift may be given back to its original donor, but this is not essential… The only essential is this: the gift must always move. [Hyde, 1983] This is basically what happens in most filesharing system, the downloaded files are always on the move, distributed from one to another. Apart from reciprocity, this is also one of the motivations behind seeders at Kerrazy Torrents for seeding the torrent files: to keep it moving.
The relative or absolute anonymity of the recipient makes it all the more remarkable that individuals volunteer valuable information – one cannot realistically count on the reciprocity of the recipient in the future to balance the gift that has occurred. While a balanced reciprocity with a particular individual may not be possible, there is a sense in which a balance might occur within a group as a whole. [Kollock, 1999] This is also what runs behind Kerrazy Torrents. Other users who were initially just receiving passively soon realized what they have been taking for granted, and this in turn creates a sense of guilt for not reciprocating the favour in them. They then feel the urge to contribute something back to the community and become trackers themselves as well or at least act as seeders for other people. As more people are doing this, the give-and-take flow soon becomes a cycle, where almost everyone is contributing in some way or another. Of course not everyone will do this, there will always be those bunch of freeloaders who will just take everything and not give back anything in return. As Peter Kollock himself has put it, this system of sharing is both more generous and riskier than traditional gift exchange. It is more generous because an individual provides a benefit without the expectation of immediate reciprocation, but this is also the source of risk. There is the temptation is to gather valuable information and advice without contributing anything back. [Kollock, 1999]
Thus, in conclusion, as suggested by the different sources used as well as my own analysis, I am sure many will agree with me that Kerrazy Torrents is definitely an ideal example of a gift economy and how it functions as one.
References
Gift Economy. (2007, February 4). Gift Economy. In Wikipedia [Web]. Retrieved February 10, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy#_note-mustmove
Hyde L. (1983) The Gift. Imagination and the Erotic Life of Property. New York: Random House; 1983.
Kollock, P. (1999). The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace. Retreived on February 10, 2007 from http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/economies.htm
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Web 2.0 is Us/ing us?
This is a video response to the original Web 2.0 video. It's so damn good, I just have to put it up. It's one hell of a cool video seriously. Be sure to check this out. Awesome stuff. Really well done.
Friday, February 2, 2007
QotW3: Is a balance possible between content creators and public good?
Introduction
Decades ago when you heard the news about your favourite artists making new releases, what you would have done was to save up and wait patiently. Today, people look for advance promos through bit torrents, and sample the entire album months before the actual release. Those who still possess a tinge of integrity in them choose to buy upon the official release of the record while the rest stick to what they already have, despite knowing the possible consequences that they might have to bear should they be prosecuted by the authority.
Metallica, in their early days, used to encourage their fans to make bootlegs and spread it everywhere to everyone in the underground. Then, after commercializing and selling out, they complained about piracy and sued Napster. Thus began the war against piracy, which suddenly created a worldwide awareness among the public about issues regarding copyright and ownership of intellectual property. On the other hand, Killswitch Engage did nothing when their signature riff in their hit song “End of Heartache” was ripped off in its exact, identical format by As I Lay Dying for their own hit song “94 Hours” (although both songs are ultimately very different from each other). With such polarized reactions among artists, one would wonder just how much do copyright really matter to artists. Is it still a form of protection or just a barrier against possible expansion of creativity?
Copyright vs. Filesharing: Problems and Issues
It is indeed true that copyright has helped artists in various ways. It “encourages the creation and mass dissemination of a wide variety of works” [Litman, 2003], and that it “allows creators to benefit financially from their creations which should provide them an incentive to continue creating” [Ovalle, 2005]. However, the table has since been turned now that copyright is actually limiting what it is supposed to magnify. From my own personal experience as a musician, this particular issue has been quite a hassle. Whenever a new song is written, I will have to make sure that they are totally original and none of the riffs in the songs sound like something other bands have played. It is especially irritating when you know that you came up with those tunes first, but because someone else beat you to submitting their work for official release, the rights are given to them and as a result, you have to modify your work, hence, affecting the original quality of it. There are only so many notes, scales and patterns in music and the fact that we belong to a new generation of musicians, it simply does not help. A lot of what musicians do today is in fact a recycle of what had been done by the pioneers in the past. Creativity no longer guarantees originality like it used to.
Besides that, doing cover songs has also become yet another problem. The reason behind doing cover songs is to pay homage and tribute to that band who is an inspiration to the artist involved, and in doing so, the artist who is doing the cover is actually helping to promote the band that is being covered. By right, the artist should be the one being paid. Not only that this does not happen, but instead, the covering artist will have to pay royalties to the band being covered.
As of 2004, the number of lawsuits pertaining to illegal downloading has actually reached up to 4,208 cases [Lohmann, 2004]. “The campaign appears to have hit its stride, with the Recording Industry Association of America announcing roughly 500 new suits each month” [Lohmann, 2004]. Are consumers really to blame for breaching of law concerning intellectual property? I am afraid not. A lot of record labels have the tendency to release promo versions of albums that have yet to be released for distributors so that their customers could sample them. They should have known better that once promo versions are released, there are bound to be people ripping them into their computers and then uploading them for filesharing. It is a risk that record labels should have taken into account instead of complaining about it after they discover that people are downloading the promos online, be it via P2P or bit torrents. Besides, the use of filesharing may not necessarily be damaging to the music industry. For the very least, it can actually be of help to artists, especially underground ones who are less known by the public. “Filesharing allows users to learn about music they would not otherwise be exposed to. In the filesharing community, it is a common practice to browse the files of other users and discuss music in file server chat rooms. This learning may actually promote new sales.” [Strumpf & Oberholzer-Gee, 2005] This is in fact very true. As an underground musician myself, I know exactly how powerful the filesharing community is. A lot of the people in these communities are not only listeners but fellow musicians themselves. Through this particular channel, we can actually form networks with other bands all over the world and market our music more efficiently. There has also been cases whereby unsigned artists land themselves a record deal from labels who happen to find their music on filesharing communities; a deal that they would not have gotten otherwise. Hence, as we can see, filesharing could prove to be beneficial to a certain extent.
Possible Solutions
As the saying goes, if you cannot beat them, join them. Instead of letting filesharing be a nemesis to the recording industry, why not make it work for us? Since musicians and labels hold the rights to these intellectual properties, they can make the initiative and be the rightful host of the files. Make use of filesharing as a cost-free opportunity for marketing bands and their records, and instead of releasing the entire album and providing listeners with an excuse not to buy, they can release one-minute long samples of each song available in the albums. This way listeners can get a rough idea of what to expect from the release, and it works very well as a bait or temptation for consumers to buy if they really like what they have heard.
In a survey that I have conducted for a previous module, the result has shown that more than 75% of the 50 participants resort to downloading and filesharing because they find prices of records too costly. What labels can do to eliminate this problem is to go digital. Cut down on pressing of CDs and other outputs and instead bank on online sales. The average price of a song available for download on iTunes is not more than 99 cents – a very affordable price for most people. If labels were more willing to capitalize on online marketing, it would have saved them a lot of trouble. There are technologies available that can tag mp3 files so that they cannot be distributed illegally through filesharing. This way, downloading can be made legal and the convenience it gives to consumers is a bonus.
Education is such a powerful tool, and yet not many are making use of it. A lot of people out there are in fact unaware of a lot of things to do with copyright and the applicable laws. What we need to do is to make sure that the mass gets the necessary information needed to be made known. An increased awareness of how intellectual property functions will be able to decrease the tendency to breach the applicable laws since people can no longer make use of their ignorance or negligence as an excuse.
Conclusion
In this competitive age where everyone is copying and technological advancement has brought disadvantages to content creators, one would have to be flexible and think of solutions as according to situations. With the above-mentioned measures, it is highly possible for us to accommodate both the interests of content creators and public good.
References
Litman, Jessica, "Sharing and Stealing" (November 23, 2003). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=472141 or DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.472141. Retrieved on February 3, 2007 from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=472141#PaperDownload
von Lohmann, F. (2004, Sept 9). Is Suing Your Customers a Good Idea?. Retrieved February 3, 2007, from Law.com Web site: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1095434496352
Ovalle, C (2005). Why Copyright?. Retrieved February 3, 2007, from An Introduction to Copyright Web site: http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/~i312co/2.php
Strumpf.K and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. (2005). The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis [Electronic Version], 2-5, 35-37. Retrieved on February 3, 2007 from http://www.unc.edu/%7Ecigar/papers/FileSharing_June2005_final.pdf.
Decades ago when you heard the news about your favourite artists making new releases, what you would have done was to save up and wait patiently. Today, people look for advance promos through bit torrents, and sample the entire album months before the actual release. Those who still possess a tinge of integrity in them choose to buy upon the official release of the record while the rest stick to what they already have, despite knowing the possible consequences that they might have to bear should they be prosecuted by the authority.
Metallica, in their early days, used to encourage their fans to make bootlegs and spread it everywhere to everyone in the underground. Then, after commercializing and selling out, they complained about piracy and sued Napster. Thus began the war against piracy, which suddenly created a worldwide awareness among the public about issues regarding copyright and ownership of intellectual property. On the other hand, Killswitch Engage did nothing when their signature riff in their hit song “End of Heartache” was ripped off in its exact, identical format by As I Lay Dying for their own hit song “94 Hours” (although both songs are ultimately very different from each other). With such polarized reactions among artists, one would wonder just how much do copyright really matter to artists. Is it still a form of protection or just a barrier against possible expansion of creativity?
Copyright vs. Filesharing: Problems and Issues
It is indeed true that copyright has helped artists in various ways. It “encourages the creation and mass dissemination of a wide variety of works” [Litman, 2003], and that it “allows creators to benefit financially from their creations which should provide them an incentive to continue creating” [Ovalle, 2005]. However, the table has since been turned now that copyright is actually limiting what it is supposed to magnify. From my own personal experience as a musician, this particular issue has been quite a hassle. Whenever a new song is written, I will have to make sure that they are totally original and none of the riffs in the songs sound like something other bands have played. It is especially irritating when you know that you came up with those tunes first, but because someone else beat you to submitting their work for official release, the rights are given to them and as a result, you have to modify your work, hence, affecting the original quality of it. There are only so many notes, scales and patterns in music and the fact that we belong to a new generation of musicians, it simply does not help. A lot of what musicians do today is in fact a recycle of what had been done by the pioneers in the past. Creativity no longer guarantees originality like it used to.
Besides that, doing cover songs has also become yet another problem. The reason behind doing cover songs is to pay homage and tribute to that band who is an inspiration to the artist involved, and in doing so, the artist who is doing the cover is actually helping to promote the band that is being covered. By right, the artist should be the one being paid. Not only that this does not happen, but instead, the covering artist will have to pay royalties to the band being covered.
As of 2004, the number of lawsuits pertaining to illegal downloading has actually reached up to 4,208 cases [Lohmann, 2004]. “The campaign appears to have hit its stride, with the Recording Industry Association of America announcing roughly 500 new suits each month” [Lohmann, 2004]. Are consumers really to blame for breaching of law concerning intellectual property? I am afraid not. A lot of record labels have the tendency to release promo versions of albums that have yet to be released for distributors so that their customers could sample them. They should have known better that once promo versions are released, there are bound to be people ripping them into their computers and then uploading them for filesharing. It is a risk that record labels should have taken into account instead of complaining about it after they discover that people are downloading the promos online, be it via P2P or bit torrents. Besides, the use of filesharing may not necessarily be damaging to the music industry. For the very least, it can actually be of help to artists, especially underground ones who are less known by the public. “Filesharing allows users to learn about music they would not otherwise be exposed to. In the filesharing community, it is a common practice to browse the files of other users and discuss music in file server chat rooms. This learning may actually promote new sales.” [Strumpf & Oberholzer-Gee, 2005] This is in fact very true. As an underground musician myself, I know exactly how powerful the filesharing community is. A lot of the people in these communities are not only listeners but fellow musicians themselves. Through this particular channel, we can actually form networks with other bands all over the world and market our music more efficiently. There has also been cases whereby unsigned artists land themselves a record deal from labels who happen to find their music on filesharing communities; a deal that they would not have gotten otherwise. Hence, as we can see, filesharing could prove to be beneficial to a certain extent.
Possible Solutions
As the saying goes, if you cannot beat them, join them. Instead of letting filesharing be a nemesis to the recording industry, why not make it work for us? Since musicians and labels hold the rights to these intellectual properties, they can make the initiative and be the rightful host of the files. Make use of filesharing as a cost-free opportunity for marketing bands and their records, and instead of releasing the entire album and providing listeners with an excuse not to buy, they can release one-minute long samples of each song available in the albums. This way listeners can get a rough idea of what to expect from the release, and it works very well as a bait or temptation for consumers to buy if they really like what they have heard.
In a survey that I have conducted for a previous module, the result has shown that more than 75% of the 50 participants resort to downloading and filesharing because they find prices of records too costly. What labels can do to eliminate this problem is to go digital. Cut down on pressing of CDs and other outputs and instead bank on online sales. The average price of a song available for download on iTunes is not more than 99 cents – a very affordable price for most people. If labels were more willing to capitalize on online marketing, it would have saved them a lot of trouble. There are technologies available that can tag mp3 files so that they cannot be distributed illegally through filesharing. This way, downloading can be made legal and the convenience it gives to consumers is a bonus.
Education is such a powerful tool, and yet not many are making use of it. A lot of people out there are in fact unaware of a lot of things to do with copyright and the applicable laws. What we need to do is to make sure that the mass gets the necessary information needed to be made known. An increased awareness of how intellectual property functions will be able to decrease the tendency to breach the applicable laws since people can no longer make use of their ignorance or negligence as an excuse.
Conclusion
In this competitive age where everyone is copying and technological advancement has brought disadvantages to content creators, one would have to be flexible and think of solutions as according to situations. With the above-mentioned measures, it is highly possible for us to accommodate both the interests of content creators and public good.
References
Litman, Jessica, "Sharing and Stealing" (November 23, 2003). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=472141 or DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.472141. Retrieved on February 3, 2007 from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=472141#PaperDownload
von Lohmann, F. (2004, Sept 9). Is Suing Your Customers a Good Idea?. Retrieved February 3, 2007, from Law.com Web site: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1095434496352
Ovalle, C (2005). Why Copyright?. Retrieved February 3, 2007, from An Introduction to Copyright Web site: http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/~i312co/2.php
Strumpf.K and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. (2005). The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales: An Empirical Analysis [Electronic Version], 2-5, 35-37. Retrieved on February 3, 2007 from http://www.unc.edu/%7Ecigar/papers/FileSharing_June2005_final.pdf.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
