I wonder who took this photo and paid for it to be published? Maybe it was me and I forgot |
As you've undoubtedly heard, a few of the internet's most popular websites, including Wikipedia, Reddit, and others, are blacking themselves out today in opposition to the the proposed SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act) currently being considered in the US House and Senate respectively. The attempts to curtail online piracy through heavy-handed legislation, pushed in large part by the Motion Picture Association of America (now headed by former Senator/world class schmuch Chris Dodd) are without a doubt over-reaching, and could set a dangerous precedent for the exchange of information over the internet.
Perhaps most horrifying to everyone, this site itself would essentially cease to exist. The law would make it so that every time I post a photo, or a video, or quote at length from another copyrighted work that I do not own, which I do frequently, much like every other blogger in existence, I would make not only myself -- and here's where the change comes in -- but also the company that hosts this website (Blogger via Google), responsible for the copyright violation.
We already have rules in place meant to deal with this, namely the Digital Communications Millennium Act. If a copyright violation occurs, the owner of the copyright can have the material taken down. Under the new laws, the perceived sins of one user on a particular platform like Blogger, (or Facebook, or Buzfeed etc etc) can be extrapolated upwards to the larger entitity. In effect every social media outlet would need to begin monitoring every interaction of every one of its users.
Obviously this type of thing would be unfeasible, and many smaller sites (although LOL if you think Google and Facebook are getting taken down by anyone, including the government), would have to close up shop.
Most people who use the internet, so, you know, no one in Congress, argue that this is an overreaction to the problem, if they even allow that there is a problem in the first place. They say it's akin to, for example, bombing an entire residential building in Iraq because you suspect there's a terrorist inside, something that we would never allow to go on in our name as Americans. Even more important than the lives of people we'll never meet, however, is our god-given right to share Rihanna videos on our Facebook page. That's the type of thing that really matters.
The analogy to SOPA and PIPA being a baseball bat when you need a fly swatter is a good one I think, and I hope this legislation doesn't pass. It would be like shutting down an entire bar because there are underage kids found drinking there, which, woops, we also do that too. OK, how about this: it would be like shutting down a concert venue just because you found a couple losers doing coke in the bathroom. Surely that's an overreaction.
The problem is, illegal drugs are still illegal, as much as we may not want them to be, as is online piracy of movies and music. The tactics being employed to stamp them out, however ham-fisted and disagreeable, do not change the fact there are millions and millions of copyright violations being enacted every minute of every day online. Whether or not you think that's something even worth considering will vary, but it's not something that should be ignored outright.
I wrote about this previously, but I am pretty sure I hold the copyright to it (I think?) so I will quote from it at length here again.
Stealing Shit Online
"No, it's cool, cause if I download a movie online and I like it, I'll buy the DVD. Plus music and movies are too expensive, and most of them are crap anyway. "
Hey, here's an idea. Go into a restaurant, eat your meal, then if you like it, pay for it. Otherwise just peace out and kick the chef in the nuts on the way out the door. Same thing.
You know what I do when I can't afford something I kind of want? I don't get it. Woh. I know, pretty weird, right? Call me crazy, but I'm old school like that.
Whether it's a mortgage on a house, a brand new car, season three of Friday Night Lights or that thirteenth beer, if I don't have the money, I somehow pull my act together and move on empty handed. Why? Because I'm not an infantile On Demand omnivore incapable of satiating my demand for instant gratification. (Plus I need to save my money for gambling debts.)
No one cares about your half ass futuristic Robin Hood with a Mac book routine pal. We saw Fight Club too, yet somehow we managed to resist rolling that horseshit into a life of self-satisfied petty theft. You're not some freedom fighter standing up to the corporate overlords every time you search for Family Guy episodes on bit torrent, you're just an a-hole who's too cheap to shell out a few bucks for the things he wants, and too greedy to not steal shit you will never, ever possibly look at twice. Homer Simpson with his hand stuck in the internet candy machine over here.
You know who else has a story about why the dirt they did wasn't really illegal too? Every dude down at the courthouse.
SOPA/PIPA are worth protesting, and they will certainly make "freedom of expression" and "creativity" online a lot more difficult, but what sort of artistic process is it we're actually defending here? The ability to post someone else's work on our own blog/Facebook wall, and say "I like this." Is that adding value to the work? Is that creativity?
That was the crux of my argument against what Tumblr culture is doing to our ability to express ourselves here in Why Tumblr is making us all stupid ))<>((. We're not curators, and we're not artists, we're consumers. And what's the value of a consumer when you're not actually consuming anything?
brought to you by
9 comments:
You failed to make the connection between illegal and unjust; just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it's actually wrong or that you should even keep from doing it.
I agree with that sentiment, and things that are worth protesting through civil disobedience, like the occupy movement, the unfair war on drugs etc... are too worthy examples.
I think drugs should be more legal than they already are. I don't know that I necessarily agree that we should all treat creative works as ours to do with what we please. I say that from a conflicted place, as I've done it many times myself. Just not sure we should feel so entitled to it. That's a separate, but very connected part of the debate over SOPA/PIPA.
Every form of entertainment and media needs to adopt the indie band business model. Let them jack your shit (or even just give it away) and just make your money on touring and live shows, bro.
Good point. Some day I am going to take this blog on tour. GET IN THE VAN PUSSIES
i have to admit, when holding two books about boston dive bars in my hand to decide which to purchase, i really respected the guy who got in the van and was willing to do a book tour.
Ha. I toured all the way from Magoun Sq to Dudley, from L Street to Maverick.
those middleton broads. so hot.
This is a good article, and I don't know what I'd do without this blog, but music industry money really does trickle down to creatives. There's just more pussy and easy money going around when people are forced to pay for media. Maybe we can lower their rents so they can pay for media more.
Luke will have to suck it up and go work for a magazine like Leisure or some shit, full time. They'll have photographers (who get paid) to create their content.
Bring on the 90's again I say!
well then you will just have to clean up your act, sir.
Post a Comment