
As the debate rages about whether the
Pirate Bay ship will now sink or just move to a quieter bay -
An Uncarved Blog delves into the questions behind the notorious ruling this week. We ask, which of the following statements reflect the real underlying battle?
- It is about protecting and upholding the future of copyright.
- It is about defending the rights of the artistic community (The same one Home-Taping had killed off presumably.)
- It was about protecting the dwindling assets of an industry under threat from a new emerging, but as yet non-monetarised business model.
Now, let me see.....hmmm! Tricky questions.
Yet industries do change. The camera and film developing industry adapted to the swift evolution of digital media in the 90´s. They saw how their model
had to change and so changed with it in order to survive. So how is it that the other industries have failed to pick up the gauntlet of this new - and exciting - torrent technology?
Whilst the publishing, music and film industries have been complaining about lost revenue, consumers at long last have taken control of the means of consumption. For too long they were subject to the whims of the industry as new means of recording, storing and play-back media were developed. And inevitably it was the consumer that had little choice to to re-purchase the same music again and again as it shifted format from vinyl to CD to MP3. But it was not just the music or videos that changed - it was also the players. The record deck, the 8-track, cassette player, CD Player, DVD player and - Blu-Ray and MP3/WMA etc . The list goes on and on. Money just streamed into the industry over and over again.
So how have they reacted to this new development of file-sharing, a development that does not come from them, but from the tired and exasperated consumer who has paid out repeatedly for the same music or film? Well instead of investigating and working with the new methods of distribution and promotion they have have diverted their dwindling resources into defending old practices and undermining the new ones.
But hope is on the horizon, for as these dinosaurs roar and stamp about in anger, new species are appearing in ever greater numbers that give insights as to how the digital world will evolve:
Jamendo,
Blurb,
Scribd,
Lulu are some early examples and off course basic torrent sites are encouraging this new model that - hopefully - will either speed up the death of the dinosaurs or convince them to mutate.
For a more established example, the i-tunes store offers quality media on demand for a set price. And the i-tunes Store is now the worlds biggest music seller. The interesting point here is that the music industry did not voluntarily enter into the world of on-line downloads. It did so with its arm twisted behind its back. So we shall the the other industries follow suit.
Meanwhile, lets play with a few of these ideas a moment and see where we go.
What if, for instance, a media label sets itself up and invited people to join it on a membership basis. The idea being that there was an agreement to share files between members. The more someone was prepared to share the less the media would cost to download in the first place. Media could then be downloaded via torrents in exchange for some form of payment by cash, advertising, promotion or reviewing:
For example - A film could be downloaded on a sliding scale of cost or participation -
Price X: View once.( keep the torrent file only active whilst in use).
Price - X:View once but review.
Price --X:View, keep but share ( keep torrent active and distribute forward - Seed).
Price ---X:View, keep, but seed more then once.
Price ---X:View, keep, share and review. ( Cheapest option).
Perhaps if time and money were invested in a fairly priced scheme that exploited the new sharing technologies, then a large number of people would be willing to participate in quality downloads with rewards for sharing.
Artists do want their works distributed as widly as possible and at last we have the technology and incentives to do it. Why not encourage it rather than criminalise it. Why not work out a response that is not fused to an antiquated and clearly dying business model reliant on a prehistoric distribution and promotional industry.
Is it possible? Not if this week was anything to go by. Taking Pirate Bay to court was like taking a Hardware shop to court for selling crowbars.
Is it not time to move the argument on?