The complexity of file swapping issues is thickening as the MPAA tries to imitate the RIAA legal strategies. After reading an article about this issue at TechNewsWorld, I have multiple comments: MPAA Fights Film Swapping with Suits and Software. So here it goes.
The MPAA has a tough job. They have intellectual property that is being stolen and the media itself has little objective reporting of the RIAA and MPAA. This article is a good example of the type of reporting that I'm referring to. For example:
Fred von Lohmann, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agreed that the MPAA will have a difficult time finding sympathy from consumers.
"There's absolutely no evidence that file sharing today is impacting their bottom line," von Lohmann told TechNewsWorld. "The recording industry experience has demonstrated that this just doesn't work," he added with regard to the lawsuits.
Despite filing more than 7,000 lawsuits in the last year, the RIAA has failed to make a dent in illegal trading of music, according to von Lohmann. He also indicated that service providers and the courts are becoming upset with the recording industry over subpoenas and legal maneuvers that include filing single cases with hundreds of defendants in different jurisdictions.
Since the file swapping controversy of Napster started years ago, I've noticed the media seems to report the side of the file swappers. Some of this has to do with the perception that business is evil. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is an ACLU-type organization that specifically defends companies and individuals who face law suits and prosecution related to technology. Like the ACLU, sometimes the EFF steps over the line to oppose the rights of large companies who, in fact, have the law behind them. The EFF may be right in that there is no definitive proof that file swapping is eating into entertainment revenues for members of the MPAA and RIAA. However, there is also no definitive proof that desktop publishing technologies are cutting into the revenues of type setters. This is a silly argument. The real issue is not that of loss of potential revenue. Projected revenue is not a sure bet. What is concrete is that intellectual property that is released to consumers is done so in the good faith that consumers must buy it via the distribution channels of the content owner.
To make it plain as I can, if you didn't buy it from an authorized reseller, then it is illegal. There are numerous court precedences and laws protecting this concept. That concept, however, is missing from this article. File sharing is not illegal. I can share files all day long as long as they are files I originally created or obtained permission to share. The article is unfair to the MPAA by turning file sharing into an issue of whether or not the MPAA can scientifically demonstrate a direct correlation between file sharing and revenue. If this was an article authored by m e, I would have found an expert who could give me information the legality of the actual intellectual property being swapped as opposed to an expert belonging to an organization opposing the MPAA in court. This is not an objective quote.
The next point I want to make about this issue is that the MPAA is being criticized for creating software that snoops out file swapping applications on a PC. I think this is a great idea, especially after acting as an IT support person in a previous life. Check this out:
Associating P2P programs with viruses and other malicious software, the MPAA said it would fight piracy with the lawsuits, the software, and an educational effort that includes a play on movie ratings with the slogan, "I: Inappropriate for All Ages."
This article quotes other sources that this software is a PR nightmare for the MPAA. This idea is based on the assumption that protecting their business is wrong. I agree that the movie and music industries have been way too slow to adapt to new technologies and that they have indirectly contributed to their own file sharing problems as a result. Just because the entertainment industry is slow, dumb, incompetent, or whatever doesn't mean that sharing files illegal is right. In the end, I the MPAA has a responsibility to its members to help them protect their businesses.
The MPAA has some better ideas than the RIAA. One of which was their campaign to explain how stealing intellectual property is wrong. I think it was a somewhat effective campaign. But just showing a commercial before movie trailers is not going to help. The MPAA should expand its program to education in schools. We live in a capitalistic society with laws protecting intellectual property. If children do not grow up learning to respect intellectual property, the MPAA and RIAA will never, never get a handle on file sharing.
Finally, the companies who make up the MPAA and RIAA are falling on their faces still. They haven't learned to price entertainment to a point where it's just easier to buy it than download it. They also have been slow to give consumers what they want. As long as they are slow in these areas, I don't think the press will give them any slack. File sharing is a PR, technological, and cultural battle.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Unrest by Parkway Drive