This was written in order to elaborate on my last post about institutions using fear to control the distribution of their content. I was asked to include comment about what it would mean for people involved in creative industries:
I am sure that no-one wants to see musicians, actors or authors etc go without being paid for their work, but the current system is outdated. As consumers we want access to content now! And the internet offers a way to get it.
Film and music production companies, news media agencies, publishers etc are essentially businesses who have become very good out of making money out of other peoples ideas and works. They have had access to the channels of distribution the average person has not, making them the middleman between producer and consumer. The ability to share files over the internet challenges the necessity and relevance of the "middleman" and their business model is starting to unfold.
There is an interesting case going through the courts at the moment where "Hollywood" (US film production companies) are trying to sue iiNet - an Australian ISP over file sharing (Turner 2011). They claim that the ISP is "authorizing copyright infringements" (Fisk and Humphries 2011) by providing a network where it can take place. To me this case is akin to suing a car manufacturer over speed related road fatalities or suing a phone company over conversations had on their networks.
I am sure that no-one wants to see musicians, actors or authors etc go without being paid for their work, but the current system is outdated. As consumers we want access to content now! And the internet offers a way to get it.
Film and music production companies, news media agencies, publishers etc are essentially businesses who have become very good out of making money out of other peoples ideas and works. They have had access to the channels of distribution the average person has not, making them the middleman between producer and consumer. The ability to share files over the internet challenges the necessity and relevance of the "middleman" and their business model is starting to unfold.
There is an interesting case going through the courts at the moment where "Hollywood" (US film production companies) are trying to sue iiNet - an Australian ISP over file sharing (Turner 2011). They claim that the ISP is "authorizing copyright infringements" (Fisk and Humphries 2011) by providing a network where it can take place. To me this case is akin to suing a car manufacturer over speed related road fatalities or suing a phone company over conversations had on their networks.
Personally I think its time for these companies to come up with a new idea when it comes to distributing content. They need to move forward and update their business model just like any other business has to do when challenged by new competition. Creative types still need copyright, and should be remunerated for the works they produce, but the industry between producer and consumer needs adapt to change, rather than employing bullying tactics to try and prevent it.
Fisk, A., and J. Humphries. 2011. An industry-wide solution will tackle illegal downloads: iiNet. http://www.iinet.net.au/press/releases/20110812-an-industry-wide-solution-will-tackle-illegal-downloads.html (accessed 5/9/11).
Turner, A. 2011. AFACT Uncle Sam's puppet in iiNet trial. http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/blogs/gadgets-on-the-go/afact-uncle-sams-puppet-in-iinet-trial-20110902-1jp4w.html (accessed 5/9/11).
No comments:
Post a Comment