para que sirve doxycycline hyclate in wikipedia viagra versand aus europe cialis 20 mg at costco buy accutane from mexico inderal for intermittent explosive disorder viagra do they really work doxycycline malaria over the couner in philippines sildenafil citrate 50 mgdapoxetine 30 mg generic viagra on sale jnk gene zoloft reviews cipro for sale online vietnam usage of viagra cytotec e suas causas viagra and cialis prices in dubai airport torsemide to lasix conversion lady viagra uk for sale ciprofloxacino y norfloxacino comprar cytotec hermosillo efficacia cialis 10mg donde comprar viagra en malaga zovirax ointment price list ph inderal sale buy zithromax online 1g can you take doxycycline with cheese is silagra the same as viagra prix clomid algerie zoloft called uk how many viagra can you take per day 150 mg clomid multiples statistics donde comprar viagra guatemala socialist party organized in the us in 1900 cipro va in black list canadian overnight pharmacy products cialis accutane price pakistan viagra online game buy bulk sildenafil powder zovirax creme bestellen best way to use viagra yahoo answers viagra new zealand sample lilly cialis canada dreampharmaceuticals online order propecia amoxil dosage per kg is doxycycline safe for sore throat what is cost of viagra at costco take viagra in tea inderal 60 mg drugs neues viagra kaufen zovirax over the counter cream at shoppers drug mart iv lasix vs po lasix in ckd viagra for men strange and long spry in india cialis 40 mg vs 20 doxycycline used to treat syphilis propranolol modified release capsules 80 mg adderall 50cc motorbikes road legal cheap cialis cialis indiano where to buy viagra cheap costo cytotec venezuela beauty prednisone 20 mg without prescription how long does viagra make you hard zithromax tablets australia post viagra and menopause cialis 20mg in south africa propranolol 10 mg laboratorio chile generic viagra website review over nite delivery in usa on viagra solucion oftalmica ciprofloxacin 500 mg prednisone safe drug how to avoid nausea from doxycycline best us pharmacy prices for cialis next day delivery viagra ireland cialis daily use canadian pharmacies where to buy viagra cialis in pakistan prednisolone 9 mg low progesterone treatment clomid tadalafil croatia over the counter tolvon 30 mg beipackzettel ciprofloxacin veloxin 25 50 mg zoloft propecia doesnt work temples in singapore buy viagra in falkirk viagra generika in der schweiz buy viagra in philippines can cialis cause nerve damage what can i use besides accutane prices for cialis how many hours in advance to take viagra generic cialis order clomid causes early period buy genuine viagra online no prescription propranolol other names slow release metformin nhs discounts metformin drug costs anafranil zoloft combination xlstat 10 mg prednisone cialis kaufen erfahrungsbericht what is really in accutane buying viagra otc in france doxycycline in lactating women are there any generic viagra mexico ultra brand sildenafil 100mg finasteride dosage dht zoloft 300 mg dopamine levels viagra at a cost of rs 20 to 25 per tablet no dairy with doxycycline drugs for chlamydia zithromax z pak buy floxin otic vs ciprodex cialis 20 mg doses propecia costo venezuela diflucan 200 mg notice of intent google backed buy cialis online donde comprar viagra en madrid sin recetas best time day take prednisolone buy viagra online usa no prescription does cialis come in 80mg tesco viagra reviews 20 mg cialis sufficient doxycycline uses ear infection finasteride propecia buy online cialis 10mg vs viagra 50 mg generic dapoxetine eciwlcodkedefe herbs to buy online uk viagra powered by mybb discount generic viagra usa rx metformin 500 mg dog how long does 2.5 mg cialis last can u get high off doxycycline is clomid effective tadalafil generika deutschland lied should i take 10mg or 20 mg of cialis liberty mutual ads asian actress in viagra thuoc amlor 10 mg prednisone how easy is it to get viagra prescription cheap generic viagra price of sildenafil at asda viagra how many mg for 50 year old men viagra 25 mg 4 film tablet dose normale viagra propranolol tablets australia cialis in french ciprofloxacin solubility in dcm propranolol zolpidem oxycodone and oxymorphone cialis direkt holland kaufen comprar pastillas cytotec en venezuela cancion what days should u take clomid partition coefficient of ciprofloxacin in humans cytotec use in fetal demise ultrasound cialisbuy now malaysia finasteride blood in stool what is the common dosage for viagra buy 80 mg cialis how long does sildenafil stay in body dapoxetine usage statistics cialis cost of inderal para que serve clomid online illegal propecia indian buy viagra at boots uk cialis help last longer in bed viagra available in karachi accutane 20 mg log brand cialis for sale in us viagra buyers africa counterfeit viagra through customs sildenafil compare prices where can i buy cialis in las vegas how much will a private prescription for clomid cost zovirax ointment in cape town should i take metformin in the morning or at night arizic topiramato 25 mg of zoloft cialis tablets online uk tadalafil best price pharmacy buying viagra otc in hong kong does 5 mg cialis work immediately cost viagra nhs prescription inderal over counter do you need a prescription to order viagra online viagra in saudi a zoloft and diltiazem viagra for men sale posologia azitromicina diidratada 500 mg metformin finasteride x alopecia generic cialis pattaya where can i buy viagra in tucson az nolvadex 20 mg controindicazioni alla zovirax 800 mg online india herbal viagra offers are you allowed to bring viagra into australia paginas seguras donde comprar viagra cipro 500 mg bayer how long can you safely be on prednisone accutane for women reviews what to use besides viagra terazosin and cialis does cialis build up in the system viagra private prescription costs generic viagra customs confiscation generic cialis soft sale clomid cost with tricare prednisolone rectal foam buy viagra camden united states founded on socialism doxycycline cost at boots online pharmacy accutane no prescription foro cialis donde comprar extreme peptide clomid review is accutane safe webmd what time is best to take cialis what is the highest dose for clomid buying blackmarket viagra australia can i buy viagra over the counter at walgreens sildenafil citrate tablets cenforce 100 reviews what is ciprofloxacin hcl 250 mg ampicillin four times a day in a rx how much does it cost to manufacture viagra ipraalox 20 mg cialis determination of metformin in plasma shoppers mart cialis price will adderall 10 mg effect prednisone cost of daily cialis at costco viagra means in urdu plz get online viagra prescription generico do viagra ems cialis liquid for women order praivecy viagra generico precio canada to us with viagra propranolol 10 mg opinie viagra como usarlo propranolol 10 mg laboratorio chile who does propecia work best for zoloft overdose 400 mg cialis rebate program farmacias online fiables cialis for women buy zovirax 600mg viagra tablet in hindi betun de judea donde comprar viagra delaware caverta generic viagra veega effet secondaire zoloft 25 mg metformin versus orlistat in loosing weight online pharmacies propecia doxycycline 100 mg effets secondaires why take zoloft in the morning buy diflucan on line canadian black market viagra how good is 500 mg viagra cialis 5mg malaysia where to buy viagra in riga in stores sildenafil tablets 100 mg paypal diflucan is it safe for a dog generieke cialis bestellen do you require a prescription for cialis in ontario viagra generico en ecuador marzo zoloft prescription cost carbocisteine over the counter uk viagra propecia effectiveness in young men advil and 5 mg prednisone prednisone is it safe doxycycline dosage for pid ciprofloxacina de 500 mg para que sirve best buy generic online propecia canada viagra need prescription generic viagra walgreen safe dose for doxycycline canada viagra women diflucan at walgreens deltasone baownbeuv for sale reviews of canadian pharmacies that sell viagra online has anyone taken accutane cialis 5mg in india how much does it cost for cialis daily use cialis cost 20mg no prescription zithromax brand sildenafil women india is tadicap as good as cialis brand generic propecia usa how to purchase zithromax cialis online pharmacy uk pharmacist am acasa o feria mica generic cialis clomid dosage and multiples viagra in malaysia how do you get prescribed viagra womens equivalent to cialis in australia can i buy herbal viagra from holland and barrett 50 vs 100 mg clomid glumetza vs generic metformin makers metformin review nature made zovirax cream price i dk apotek le nouveau prix du viagra buy doxycycline monohydrate 100 mg uk how much for 5 gram cialis costco where to buy viagra nottingham is clomid safe uk how to get a tan while on accutane virilization in pcos metformin sandoz sildenafil uk 50 mg price dapoxetine hydrochloride price buy genuine viagraa perivasc bula generico de cialis lasix vs bumex in renal insufficiency metformin average dose efectos secundarios de usar cialis dosage how long does accutane stay in your liver cialis price cash viagra toronto sale does doxycycline 100mg work for acne viagra guercmorteo canada buy viagra in south australia i was born does real viagra look like cialis 300 mg 30 tabletop metformin diabetes uk christmas mexican viagra drink doses for lasix viagra super active low price max dose viagra buy cialis online bodybuilding over the counter viagra ottawa cost of cipronol in metformin 500 mg during pregnancy finasteride and ketoconazole viagra discovery story super viagra 150 mg viprogra sildenafil 100 mg best migraine specialist nashville tn sildenafil jelly uk ambasciata di cipro in italia buy viagra fom canada cinta adhesiva de colores donde comprar viagra buy prescription viagra online tabletki na potencje viagra online do you take clomid on an empty stomach finasteride generic mexico costco cialis super active sale copy viagra is it safe metformin price without insurance ebay cialis generic ratn ciprofloxhcl 500 mg chi ha usato zoloft emthexate pf 50 mg zoloft severity acne accutane reviews what happens to a woman that takes viagra nolvadex ireland cost is viagra safe to use after expiration date what are the effects of viagra in women iv push lasix 40 mg cost per month of cialis for daily use stree price cialis sildenafil 800 mg contraindications to cytotec in labor sildenafil is generic viagra generic name for viagra ibepokin liquid tadalafil phoenix labs ny how many viagra are in a buy 60mg cialis on line cialis alternative gnc mountain hardwear kelvinator womens reviews on cialis dapoxetine australia pbs program cura cialis 5 mg glucophage druginfosys brand viagra where to buy in india glucophage 850 mg and pregnancy prix du cialis generique tadalafil citrate review extended release metformin dosage cialis 20 mg billiger can i get cipro in greece is it safe to take prednisolone can u buy clomid ttc in uk waar viagra bestellen acquisto viagra online restoration hardware baby buy xenical viagra propecia com carisoprodol off road racers for sale in uk zithromax can i take clomid and tylenol socialism in labor of 1800s in america doxycycline hyclate generic cost zoloft vs wellbutrin how to buy viagra online prescription sildenafil sampling intervals in bioequivalence where to get viagra in cambodia viagra pills for sale uk finasteride 1mg generico precious moments thuoc tadalafil 10mg se escaduto il brevetto quanto costa il viagra prednisone 20 mg backorder can tourist in canada buy viagra rezolutiunea contractului de renta viagra online is prednisone safe for bronchitis mandado de busca e apreensao generico de cialis prednisone 60 mg taper risks buy cheap generic cialis can you take viagra with tylenol comprare metformina on line finasteride generico 1 mg farmacia del ampicillin dosage for gbs minoxidil propecia and nizoral shampoo best p t reactions to prednisone vendo viagra santiago sildenafil citrate 100mg canadian who should take 100 mg viagra generic cialis pay with mastercard salon hits 11 benefits donde comprar viagra was sind viagra generika north face buy online uk viagra generic viagra phillipines buy cheap viagra super force with amex ciprofloxacin al 250 mg einnahme can clomid cause nipple pain like viagra in dubai ek thongprasert buy online uk viagra prednisolone alternova 5 mg biverkningar av metformin getting pregnant faster with clomid for sale how long does blue viagra take to work canadian viagra reviews cialis soft 50 mg coupons for viagra how long is zoloft in the system viagra cost tablet finasteride now available as a generic is it safe to take metformin to loose weight best masturbation method on cialis tadalafil online italia best price viagra thailand viagra legal india priligy price in europe nursing bras canada cheap viagra is diflucan safe in late stage of pregnancy should cialis make you real hard etoricoxib 60 mg bijwerkingen prednisone pharmacy canada tadalafil daily northway cialis best life how many mg of finasteride in propecia gabriel generic cialis is 150 mg too high a dose of viagra viagra indianapolis viagra and bipolar disorder clomid and iui treatment ciprofloxacina generica how long before cialis 5 mg starts 2 work cheap priligy hereisthebestin capuchin baby monkeys for sale in uk zithromax what are the active ingredients in prednisone priligy 60 mg bestellen put half a viagra in a drink generic viagra is there such a thing can you buy viagra at nassau farmacias similares cialis over the counter lyme disease and doxycycline dose vasque taku gtx womens reviews on viagra 1000 mg metformin weight loss where can i purchase metformin using glipizide and metformin together accutane and sterility in women viking sun pharmaceuticals generic viagra clomid dose in men what is better 1 mg or 5 mg propecia ergenyl 300 mg biverkningar av metformin amoxil 500mg dosage for tooth infection doxycycline hcl mg to cure std treating heartworms doxycycline viagra availibility in pkistan best way to take metformin to lose weight will viagra ever get cheaper do they sell propecia in walmart finasteride cost per year uk generic cialis walgreens brand cialis online no prescription canada acne medication other than accutane reviews 20 prednisone taper price dealers for sildenafil in india can you take cialis and viagra propecia 5mg buy metformin acid 1000 mg generic cialis uk online trial para cuando cialis generico cialis 5 mg grapefruit juice intentional found undigested metformin in stool doxycycline generic capsules doxycycline economic brand in india bestellen finasteride where can i buy viagra in holland best dose of cipro for uti can i buy real viagra in cozumel sildenafil en gel is viagra illegal in canada viagra for woman in bangalore tadalafil comprar ropa paypal soft cialis bula do ablok 25 mg zoloft amoxil dosage bronchitis viagra equivalent for females lasix pills bodybuilding original viagra in uae accutane reviews by athletes 160 mg lasix twice a day how to get rid of doxycycline rash cialis kaufen frankreich propranolol can cause short term memory loss in exams when did pfizer start selling viagra cialis 20 canada pharmacies prednisolone cristers 20 mg posologie russkie pesni viagra for sale doxycycline 400 mg per day cialis and painkillers lasix water retention causes in men Kiwipolitico » Blog Archive » Credulous about copyright

Credulous about copyright

datePosted on 16:02, July 12th, 2009 by Lew

This morning’s Insight documentary on NatRad is an example of what happens when journalists who know almost nothing about a given topic are tasked with putting together an in-depth, large-scale piece of investigative journalism on that topic. is based on the misleading assertion that copyright grants its owner an inherent right to an income.

Kim Griggs’ journalistic technique is fine – she’s talked to the major stakeholders, given both sides of the story and generally done very well at covering the issues. But she’s labouring under a delusion about what copyright grants. Specifically, she says:

Put simply, copyright is a bundle of rights which exist once an idea is given concrete form. That form can be a song, a film, a book, a cartoon, a map, or even an email, and the copyright owner has the right to decide how it’s used and to get paid for it.

My emphasis. But there is no copyright law anywhere which grants creators a right to get paid – all they have is the right to control the exploitation of their work, and if they can turn that into payment, then good on them. In the documentary John Key also makes this error, conflating “compensation and recognition” into the right to get paid.

It’s this false idea – that copyright owners have an inherent right to be paid regardless of how broken their business model might be – which prevents the development of better business models which mean they don’t need to treat their customers like the enemy in order to make money. Even the copyright lobby accepts this; they’re just so far behind the curve that their old models have failed before their new models are even off the drawing board. Of course, if they want to keep applying the stick, rather than employing the carrot, that’s their right.

The content owners have pulled a snowjob on Kim Griggs, which It is unfortunate, because there’s already too much uncertainty and misinformation on this matter, without more confusion being added by people who should be clarifying the issues.

Edit: Kim Griggs has emailed me to outline her extensive experience and expertise in the copyright industry in NZ, and Pippa makes many of the same points in a comment. On that basis I have apologised to Kim for the statement above about her expertise, and for suggestion she was fooled by the copyright lobby.

Nevertheless, my broader criticism stands: the statement I highlighted is wrong in fact and is unhelpful to the cause of reasoned debate because it blurs issues around economic rights, moral rights, contract law and industry practice into a blank statement that copyright == money.

I’ve offered Kim an opportunity to put her case here, if she chooses.

L

30 Responses to “Credulous about copyright”

  1. Anita on July 12th, 2009 at 17:42

    Well if it’s not about the money, then what would be the point? :)

  2. Keir on July 12th, 2009 at 17:47

    My emphasis. But there is no copyright law anywhere which grants creators a right to get paid – all they have is the right to control the exploitation of their work, and if they can turn that into payment, then good on them. In the documentary John Key also makes this error, conflating “compensation and recognition” into the right to get paid.

    They have the right to get paid for exploitation, no? I mean, sure, they don’t have the right to get paid if no one wants to exploit their work, but that’s like saying `you don’t have the right to be paid for your work’, which is trivially true if someone is just randomly digging holes. But that’s not a common occurrence, so it isn’t that important.

    What is a common occurrence is exploitation without payment, which seems to me to be what she is talking about. All the stuff about `broken business models’ etc doesn’t change that; a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. What is happening is not that people refuse to buy & don’t use what’s for sale; rather they refuse to buy & then use the product anyway. And the rights-holder should be compensated in that case, and often isn’t.

  3. Anita on July 12th, 2009 at 17:54

    Keir,

    Copyright gives the owner the right to set all the terms of use, that’s far broader than the price.

    Let’s say I write a stunning piece of music and say “this may be used as part of anti-GE ads, but it may not be used for any other purpose” then people can’t pay me and use it to advertise cars.

  4. Idiot/Savant on July 12th, 2009 at 18:04

    What is a common occurrence is exploitation without payment

    Which is a consequence of a failure to respect the right of control, not of any right to get paid. That’s between you and your publisher, and nothing to do with the law. Of course, if you’re not paid, you can always say “no”.

    And OTOH, given that exploitation has traditionally been in exchange for cash, its a bit hair-splitty.

  5. Lew on July 12th, 2009 at 18:05

    Keir,

    They have the right to get paid for exploitation, no?

    They have the right to get paid for exploitation if they can. But it’s the same as the buggy-whip makers: they can’t.

    What is happening is not that people refuse to buy & don’t use what’s for sale; rather they refuse to buy & then use the product anyway. And the rights-holder should be compensated in that case, and often isn’t.

    By whom should they be compensated? It’s not the job of government to prop up broken business models, and it’s bad policy to constrain legitimate technologies on the grounds that one pressure-group is unable to keep with the times.

    L

  6. Keir on July 12th, 2009 at 18:09

    Just because you have broader rights, doesn’t mean you don’t have more specific rights, viz. the right to get money in return for use of the fruits of your labour if that’s what your ask for. (Which is I think what Griggs is talking about, given that not getting money in return for use of the fruits of labour is a reasonably common proposition today.

    Let’s say I write a stunning piece of music and say “this may be used as part of anti-GE ads, but it may not be used for any other purpose” then people can’t pay me and use it to advertise cars.

    Um, actually under certain circumstances they can do quite a lot — not the specific example, but under US (frex, can’t remember the NZ law) compulsory licensing they can just pay up and do certain things.

    They have the right to get paid for exploitation if they can. But it’s the same as the buggy-whip makers: they can’t.

    How does that differ from `But it’s the same as the coal miners: they can’t’, or `it’s the same as women: they can’t’? The reason buggy-whip makers didn’t get paid was that no-one wanted buggy whips; that is not the case for Lily Allen’s music.

  7. Lew on July 12th, 2009 at 18:09

    Right, I/S also makes the source of the problem clearer – content-creators ought to insist on being paid royalties by their content-owners regardless of whether end-users pay for content. That’s the point of signing your copyrights over to a publisher: they gatekeep. Publishers are failing at their gatekeeping job and then crying poverty on behalf of the creators who they ought to be paying regardless.

    The whole problem is a moral hazard: those who have the ability to fix the business model (publishers) are not those most harmed by it (creators).

    L

  8. Lew on July 12th, 2009 at 18:16

    Keir,

    With respect, I think Griggs is just reading from the factsheet given her by the content owners. It’s a common refrain.

    But it’s the same as the coal miners; they can’t. Come off it, would you, and stop with the anti-worker bullshit? The reason buggy-whip makers didn’t get paid was that no-one wanted buggy whips; that is not the case for Lily Allen’s music.

    It’s not at all anti-worker. If you want to look at it in that way, the ‘workers’ in this case are not having their interests adequately protected by the ‘bosses’ the people to which they have sold the rights to their content in exchange for the responsibility of protecting those rights.

    L

  9. Keir on July 12th, 2009 at 18:23

    (Where did that nasty word `anti-worker’ come form? I never said that…)

    It’s not at all anti-worker. If you want to look at it in that way, the ‘workers’ in this case are not having their interests adequately protected by the ‘bosses’ the people to which they have sold the rights to their content in exchange for the responsibility of protecting those rights.

    We-ell, no, the point was that `I am going to expropriate the fruits of you labour because I can’ is the justification of bosses the world over, and it isn’t actually good enough — you wouldn’t take as an argument about pay equity, or miner’s pay, so why is it A-OK in the case of IP — and note that file sharers don’t respect independent creator/publisher stuff any more than they do the majors.

  10. Lew on July 12th, 2009 at 19:39

    Keir,

    (Where did that nasty word `anti-worker’ come form? I never said that…)

    Well, yeah, it’s not the sort of spin I’d normally have put on the issue either, but it was still in your comment when I read it.

    We-ell, no, the point was that `I am going to expropriate the fruits of you labour because I can’ is the justification of bosses the world over, and it isn’t actually good enough — you wouldn’t take as an argument about pay equity, or miner’s pay, so why is it A-OK in the case of IP

    In cases where ‘bosses’ are exploiting ‘workers’ to an unacceptable extent, governments regulate that relationship – not the relationship between the bosses and the end-users of the product.

    To employ an analogy, if Spacely Sprockets decided to store its sprockets someplace where people could just zoom up in a flying car and take them, a government would be more inclined to require Cosmo Spacely to better protect his product than to allow him to simply cut George Jetson’s per-sprocket remuneration and make up the shortfall.

    L

  11. Quoth the Raven on July 12th, 2009 at 19:48

    Wonder why you don’t see more hybrid cars? Here’s an interesting article: Intellectual Property vs. Global Warming.

  12. Keir on July 12th, 2009 at 19:58

    But the point remains: `I want Lily Allen’s labour, but I don’t want to pay her’ is bollocks. And that is what people are arguing against, because that is what is happening. Lily Allen has the right to be paid for her work. (And if you think the solution is to empower Lily Allen vs. Capitol Records, hell yes, but that’s not what’s being proposed, as a rule.)

    (Whereas the buggy-whip analogy implies that you don’t want Lily Allen’s labour, in which case, no you shouldn’t have to pay her. But that’s not the case at all, so…)

  13. Geoff on July 12th, 2009 at 20:18

    Thankfully we still have Radio NZ able to dissect and debate these sorts of issues …can you imagine this debate on TVNZ ???

  14. Lew on July 12th, 2009 at 20:27

    Keir,

    But the point remains: `I want Lily Allen’s labour, but I don’t want to pay her’ is bollocks. And that is what people are arguing against, because that is what is happening. Lily Allen has the right to be paid for her work. (And if you think the solution is to empower Lily Allen vs. Capitol Records, hell yes, but that’s not what’s being proposed, as a rule.)

    Indeed, but it should be, as only Capitol Records have the ability to change the state of affairs here. Lily Allen can’t up and invent her own business model as Trent Reznor and Radiohead did (at least until she’s off-contract). But Capitol can do so any time they like – they just need to be properly incentivised to do so.

    It’s mathematically impossible to prevent filesharing. Can’t be done. That’s not a value judgement, that’s just an objective fact. Anyone who tries to do so instead of adapting is on a hiding to nothing in the long run, as their customers and then their content creators abandon them.

    L

  15. Keir on July 13th, 2009 at 13:58

    It’s mathematically impossible to prevent filesharing. Can’t be done. That’s not a value judgement, that’s just an objective fact. Anyone who tries to do so instead of adapting is on a hiding to nothing in the long run, as their customers and then their content creators abandon them.

    Pleased to know a back hoe is a mathematical impossibility… (I know what you mean, but if you are going to start saying things like `mathematically impossible’ I am going to start being a bitch about terms & in fact it is a value judgment, tho one I agree with you on.)

  16. Lew on July 13th, 2009 at 14:18

    Keir,

    A backhoe can’t prevent filesharing! Anyway, sarcasm is just going to earn you EFF axioms from me – the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it; Bob is Carol; if you can see or hear it, you can record and distribute it; etc :)

    But I apologise if I’ve assumed too little understanding on your part.

    L

  17. Pippa on July 14th, 2009 at 17:18

    You have the accused the wrong journalist of knowing “almost nothing” about this particular subject. Before joining RNZ, as a freelance journalist and an advocate for them, Kim Griggs has done more than most to teach freelancers about the importance of protecting their copyright (so they can have a business model i.e. eat). She has addressed conferences on the subject, made submissions on the Copyright Act reviews and was until recently on the Copyright Licensing Ltd. She is probably the best placed journalist to put together a large scale, in-depth piece of investigative journalism on copyright.
    Personally, I wonder what’s the point of having a property right if you can’t realize some income from it? Oh, I know some people might be happy with being recognised as the originator of a work but it is a perfectly good business model until people rip off the copyright holder. And they do that because it is (largely) an intangible thing – an idea. Yet ideas are surely what we should prize the most – and the people who have them and quite possibly could have more of if they could make a living from their work.

  18. Keir Leslie on July 14th, 2009 at 17:53

    A backhoe can’t prevent filesharing! Anyway, sarcasm is just going to earn you EFF axioms from me – the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it; Bob is Carol; if you can see or hear it, you can record and distribute it; etc :)

    Backhoes, the nemesis of the internet ™. Enough backhoes and there will be no internet worth speaking of. (Iain M Banks has a great passage on this — the problem with the land of infinite fun is that you have to remember where your off switch is…)

    There are things which are mathematically impossible in computing, & people sometimes claim they can do them, so I think it is important to keep `impossible’ & `mathematically impossible’ separate.

    But of course, you are right, preventing filesharing is impossible in the way that making everyone wear blue is impossible. All you can do is mitigate the impact — which is possible. But one peeve of mine is people saying `x is just inevitable (or logically determined)’ or whatever, when quite often it isn’t.

  19. Lew on July 14th, 2009 at 19:11

    Pippa,

    Kim has emailed me to make the same point. I’m awaiting a reply from her before I amend the post.

    Personally, I wonder what’s the point of having a property right if you can’t realize some income from it?

    There are plenty of uses for property rights other than the extraction of income, and there’s plenty of people who hold copyright to interesting, important or valuable works from which they don’t derive an income. The entire free software industry is an example, with its products used by tens of millions of people daily without a single cent of royalty or licensing money changing hands. The blogosphere is another.

    This is certainly not to argue that copyright holders shouldn’t want to make a living or should feel guilty for doing so, not at all. Just that the the two are not intrinsically linked.

    Oh, I know some people might be happy with being recognised as the originator of a work but it is a perfectly good business model until people rip off the copyright holder. And they do that because it is (largely) an intangible thing – an idea. Yet ideas are surely what we should prize the most – and the people who have them and quite possibly could have more of if they could make a living from their work.

    Filesharing is not the ‘ripping off’ of ideas – that’s plagiarism. Filesharing in the conventional sense in which it’s discussed, with reference to music, film, etc, is ‘ripping off’ of media – fixed expressions or productions of ideas. I agree those are important and wonderful too, and I think content producers should get paid for their work. But it’s not the fans, or the filesharers who are preventing that.

    L

  20. Lew on July 14th, 2009 at 19:32

    Keir,

    Perhaps I didn’t assume too much understanding of how this all works after all.

    There are things which are mathematically impossible in computing, & people sometimes claim they can do them, so I think it is important to keep `impossible’ & `mathematically impossible’ separate.

    Nope, it’s actually mathematically impossible to prevent filesharing (of media, etc.) without preventing the sharing of other content as well.

    The rationale for this is fairly simple.

    If I can transmit one kind of data from one computer to another, I can equally do so with any other kind of data: the network doesn’t care, and even if it did care, due to encryption it can’t know: it’s all ones and zeroes. So any content which can be converted to zeroes and ones (text, images, audio, any combination, etc) can be made into files and transmitted between computers just as easily as any other kind.

    Because of this, efforts were channeled into preventing the conversion of media into zeroes and ones. The problem is that the nature of media is such that if you can use it for its intended purpose (watching it, listening to it, etc) then you can convert it to zeroes and ones. This problem is often expressed as ‘Bob is Carol’ because the person for whom the content is intended and the person from whom it is supposed to be protected are the same person using the same mathematical means to access the content. Cory Doctorow explains it much better than I do.

    But of course, you are right, preventing filesharing is impossible in the way that making everyone wear blue is impossible. All you can do is mitigate the impact — which is possible. But one peeve of mine is people saying `x is just inevitable (or logically determined)’ or whatever, when quite often it isn’t.

    Well, yes, it’s impossible in that way as well. But that’s largely irrelevant when you consider that, without outlawing computing which can be programmed to do what their users want them to do, it’s impossible at the mathematical level as well.

    L

  21. Pippa on July 14th, 2009 at 23:11

    I think you may be hopelessly confused. For a start plagiarism is the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work. I’m quite sure file sharing in the sense we are talking here is not that. It would only become plagiarism if people then represented large parts of a downloaded movie or music as their own.
    We are definitely talking about copyright and theft of it.
    You say quite categorically that file sharing is “ripping off of media” [i.e. breach of copyright or theft] and that producers of these “fixed expressions and productions” should get paid. I couldn’t agree more.
    So, just tell me how file sharers and fans are not ripping off [i.e. breaching the copyright of or stealing from] the producers when they don’t pay for the productions they download and share?
    Just because you have the means to file share (rip off) doesn’t make it right, no more than it makes it right for a thief to steal a car or break into a house because they have a jemmy or a balaclava.
    You can twist yourself into knots and try to justify it all you like but if a copyright holder wants an income off their efforts they have every right to expect others to respect that. And they have every right to expect the lawmakers and enforcers to protect those property rights as they would for any other theft.
    I begin to wonder whether much of this argument comes from people who have never produced anything original in their lives. People who have know the hard work that goes into it and how galling it is when others freeload.

  22. Anita on July 15th, 2009 at 06:32

    I think it’s still plagiarism whether or not it’s authorised – isn’t the test whether you pretend to be the author of work when you are not? and the offence is toward your audience not the copyright holder?

    Pippa,

    The right to set a term for use which is payment (e.g. “you can use this song for your car and if you pay me $40,000”) is important, but it is not the only thing protected by copyright, nor the only important thing. The right to be acknowledged as the author, for example, is very important to many.

    When copyright discussions focus only on the right to be paid they feed into the myth that everything is for sale, and that any use of a work (no matter how contrary to the author’s wishes) is permitted as long as the user pays the price.

  23. Lew on July 15th, 2009 at 07:59

    Pippa,

    The distinction of plagiarism is that it is the misappropriation of ideas rather than things. On this basis filesharing (misappropriation of files) is not plagiarism. I never said filesharing was plagiarism; I explicitly said it wasn’t.

    So, just tell me how file sharers and fans are not ripping off [i.e. breaching the copyright of or stealing from] the producers when they don’t pay for the productions they download and share?

    They are breaching copyright but not stealing – filesharing isn’t theft because it isn’t zero-sum. the fact that I copy your file doesn’t mean you no longer have the file; we both have a copy. A content creator doesn’t lack the file; in your argument they lack the royalty which they could have been paid if the file had been purchased legitimately. But the filesharer didn’t take the royalty, they only took the file, so nobody has stolen anything except in a rhetorical sense. In no jurisdiction anywhere in the world are copyright infringers charged with theft, in the sense that someone would if they stole a CD from a shop.

    The line that copyright is theft is a handy piece of argument, but it relies on this abstraction from the piece of content to some counterfactual amount of money which it represents. This ignores the fact that not every file downloaded is a file which would have otherwise been bought legitimately and a royalty paid. The reason people are choosing to download files rather than buy them is mainly because content owners make it hard for them to buy content; the barrier is convenience more than money. Schemes where content owners have made it easy for people to buy digital content have been enthusiastically embraced, even where the cost of the content isn’t much less and the quality is much worse (such as iTunes).

    The silent third-party in this discussion, which centres on the end-user and the content creator, is the content owner. They ought to be protecting their property rights by the best means available. I’m not arguing they don’t have the right to protect them via legal means – I’m arguing that there are better ways.

    I’m also not arguing that filesharing is right – I’m arguing that it’s inevitable and impossible to prevent under the current arrangements where content owners make it harder for their fans to access their content by legitimate means than by other means which are available.

    You can twist yourself into knots and try to justify it all you like but if a copyright holder wants an income off their efforts they have every right to expect others to respect that. And they have every right to expect the lawmakers and enforcers to protect those property rights as they would for any other theft.

    No twisting; as I said, copyright owners’ rights should be respected. But that doesn’t follow to the rest of your comment, since copyright infringement is not theft, and since copyright is different to other property rights (you might argue it shouldn’t be, but that’s irrelevant in the face of the fact that it is different).

    Content owners do have the right to expect the authorities to protect their rights to the extent which other copyrights are protected, but the problem is that most copyright protection proposals contain provisions in law which go much further than those which apply in protection of other similarly-valuable forms of property, such as the requirement of surveillance by common carriers (in order to detect breaches) or the requirement of suspension of service on mere suspicion of breach. Those are rights which have never been granted other right holders. It’s particularly stupid that such approaches are being proposed when the solution to the filesharing problem (or at least the revenue model behind it) is solvable by the content owners (and nobody else).

    I begin to wonder whether much of this argument comes from people who have never produced anything original in their lives. People who have know the hard work that goes into it and how galling it is when others freeload.

    Perhaps it does, but not from me. A postproduction leak and unauthorised broadcasts nuked any licensing prospects for a project I co-wrote, produced, directed and generally spent months of my life on. I write for a living.

    L

  24. Keir on July 15th, 2009 at 13:50

    Well, yes, it’s impossible in that way as well. But that’s largely irrelevant when you consider that, without outlawing computing which can be programmed to do what their users want them to do, it’s impossible at the mathematical level as well.

    Yes; without oulawing computing*; it is not axiomatic that we must have networked Turing Machines. (And in fact, it can be pretty trivially shown that filesharing is preventable without any mathematical impossibilities —let the sun go supernova, and then… Whereas even if the sun goes supernova it will still be impossible to comprehensively order the irrational numbers.)

    Mathematical impossibility is very, very strong. Some things actually are mathematically impossible, like writing a program to tell if any given program will halt. But stopping filesharing really really isn’t one of them.

    * Strictly, without outlawing networked computers; if every computer is surrounded by fresh air & a Faraday cage…

  25. Lew on July 15th, 2009 at 14:02

    Keir, if you have to resort to such absurdity as the heat-death of the sun or the banning of all computers and networks to prove your point, then I suppose you’re welcome to it.

    Preventing filesharing at the cryptographic level, that is, preventing Carol from accessing content intended for Bob when Carol is Bob, is in fact a mathematical impossibility; that’s my point.

    L

  26. Keir on July 15th, 2009 at 17:40

    Preventing filesharing at the cryptographic level, that is, preventing Carol from accessing content intended for Bob when Carol is Bob, is in fact a mathematical impossibility; that’s my point.

    But that’s not what you said. You said something which just isn’t true; preventing file sharing isn’t mathematically impossible without positing various other axioms like: we must have computers, they must be networked, etc. etc. Some things really are mathematically impossible & we should reserve that terminology for things which truly are, not for things which are merely absurdly difficult.

    Keir, if you have to resort to such absurdity as the heat-death of the sun or the banning of all computers and networks to prove your point, then I suppose you’re welcome to it.

    Again, not mathematically absurd. You’re the one that decided to make the strong claim; either defend it using the standard rules for mathematical impossibility or don’t, but don’t pretend that it’s cheating to bring up mathematically possible physical absurdities as a counter-example; they are perfectly legit in maths. It’s intellectual passing off to do so; you are using the prestige of maths to say x, when really maths says x iff a b c are met.

  27. Lew on July 15th, 2009 at 19:22

    Keir,

    To continue to flog what may be a dead horse, without computers, there can be no filesharing as customarily defined; likewise, if the heat-death of the sun takes place and engulfs the universe, filesharing (as customarily defined) is impossible (there being no computers is one of many things which make it so).

    Nevertheless, in the interest of not continuing to defend such a position I shall reform the statement to the extent necessary to render it valid; that is, the statement you quoted above (or something much like it). You can keep your heat-death, backhoes, faraday-cage-making-and-installing pixies and mathematical impossibilities, up there on their lofty heights.

    There is a certain irony in the turnabout; me having pulled someone up on an important but obscure point of fact in the OP (and then you having defended that point). Details matter, terminology matters; my overall argument stands but I accept your point.

    L

  28. Keir on July 17th, 2009 at 12:15

    There is a certain irony in the turnabout; me having pulled someone up on an important but obscure point of fact in the OP (and then you having defended that point). Details matter, terminology matters; my overall argument stands but I accept your point.

    Comity!

  29. Geoff on July 21st, 2009 at 21:36

    Kim Griggs – who she ?

  30. Lew on July 21st, 2009 at 22:10

    Geoff, she’s a freelance journalist, writer and advocate for other freelance journalists.

    L

Leave a Reply

Name: (required)
Email: (required) (will not be published)
Website:
Comment: