Sunday 10 February 2013

Gift economies in the online piracy (non)market.




The passage chosen was paragraph eleven from the following article:

Bradley, D. (2006) Scenes of Transmission: Youth Culture, MP3 File Sharing, and Transferable Strategies of Cultural Practice. M/C Journal. 9(1).


I found that this particular passage/paragraph was the most pertinent to this module's topic. The convergence of the two subcultures - hackers and MP3 communities - perfectly blends with the themes of this entire course. The passage shows a degree of prescience regarding Napster as a seminal firm for the file sharing community. Today, Napster has been left behind for leaner, meaner, file sharing and pirating activities that are certainly rife with their own moral and legal issues. This is the future.

Soundcloud image courtesy of user: Idea go, freedigitalphotos.net

4 comments:

  1. Mike, first off, I liked how you approached this assignment, the podcast. I crafted mine in writing first and it took many read-through’s before I actually posted it. I kind of wish that I had approached it a little more off- the- cuff as you did. I felt like I was actually in a classroom again engaging in a bit of dialogue and listening to one of my peers muse about their take on a reading, sorting it out a bit as they went along. Very authentic and definitely more organic than my audio-post.

    Now, I have a question for you. In your podcast, you seem to suggest that while there is a moral and ethical debate to be had over whether or not it is okay for people to consume creative product for free, movies, music and books are out there for free and there is no way to reign this back in. The toothpaste is definitively and irreversibly out of the tube. You also suggest that by having such cultural content out there on the web accessible for free, we are all the richer for it. I believe you said that it aids us in our pursuit of happiness or something to that effect. So, in this ethical debate, is it your stance that having a rich cultural commons, accessible to anyone and everyone, trumps the desire of all those who participate in the production of creative content to be compensated for their contributions?

    I only ask because I was asked in a response to my own podcast what I would do, if anything at all, to stop the illegal downloading of creative content. I've been struggling to come up with an answer for the better part of a few days now. But, if I believe in having a strong cultural commons, as you say, because it enriches our lives. And if I also believe that the little guy needs to be paid for his toils. Then, if I take the stance that I want both, then the only solution is to look at alternative compensation schemes that encourages the production of art while ensuring that it is free to all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Bruce - I appreciate the sentiment. I really just decided to record myself talking about the subject and felt it turned out alright.

      Like you, I really do not have an answer to that question. That is why I decided to take an amoral, economic, consumerist approach to the module. The current climate in piracy affords us an opportunity to consume these products for free - therefore, no reasonable, economic thinker would pay for these products.

      An alternative compensation scheme might be the option - I don't know. The only absolute we have is that this is the current state of many of our entertainment industries. The artists, authors, performers, software developers, among others can choose to stop their creative efforts or choose to continue. Yes, less of an economic incentive will naturally cause a decrease in production, however I simply do not see it becoming as significant a decrease as some predict.

      Some may call my approach immoral. I call it amoral. Thinking strictly economically, consumers should pirate and producers should cease production. We are currently in the middle somewhere.

      Delete
  2. Hi Mike - very nice job with your podcast! I like that you defined your terms to establish how you wanted to approach your whole premise.

    I am in complete accord with you, as I noted in my podcast, that the tide is not going to turn back so that we cannot download our cultural products of choice. Moral issues aside, do you have any concern that if we are not willing to pay for our books, and music and software (for example) do we ultimately disincentivize original creation and leave ourselves with not much from which to choose?

    I think that we need to find a balanced model where copyrights are not choking the creative process (as per Lessig), but where risk and reward in the creative endeavour are compensated in a way that is meaningful.

    Thoughts?
    Ann

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Ann - my response to Bruce is very similar to one that I would produce for you. Hence, thinking economically, I refer you to my above comments.

      However, I am encouraged by your prospective "balanced model", will listen to your thoughts, and offer more comments on your blog.

      Delete