It is said that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Furthering this philosophical postulation, the good people upholding the principles of intellectual property rights would have us believe that the same is applicable to software, music, videos and other forms of digital entertainment. Then there are those who feel that the unauthorised reproduction and illegal distribution of material protected by copyright laws is okay – a stance pivotal in furthering the phenomena that we recognise today as piracy.
Interestingly, the same term once invoked images of ships laden with goods and valuables falling prey to the plunder at sea by foul-mouthed seafarers, sporting eye-patches and/or a wooden leg, a talking parrot or two and the Jolly Roger being brandished for good measure. Today, in a world increasingly influenced by all things digital, piracy comes in a different shape.
Sea currents have been replaced by the dark waters of peer-to-peer (P2P) servers and the pirates have evolved into hackers searching for control of copyrighted streams of information and content. Hijacked movies, music, games, software and even books are not exempt from digital piracy.
Copyright infringement has existed well before the proliferation of internet connectivity. Back then software, videos and music were illegally copied and burned onto mediums such as CDs and DVDs and sold for a fraction of the retail price.
Digital Natives, an online collaborative research project focusing on the issues and benefits of the new digital media landscape, describes digital piracy as the illegal duplication and distribution of copyrighted content via electronic means. Although the use of online P2P networks is the most pervasive outlet for digital piracy, hosting copyrighted files such as MP3s, movies, and software on web servers, uploading copyrighted media on video sharing sites, and even simpler ways of distribution such as via email or instant messaging are also considered illegal digital piracy.
IT-enabled copyright infringement is not always about making a quick buck.
In the digital world, media and content can be infinitely duplicated and distributed at roughly zero cost, making it easier and more convenient to gain access to pirated goods than to find an original. And just because “everybody’s doing it”, nobody seems to think copying songs, software and ideas is a big deal anymore.
Yet, does this justify the act?
The answer depends on who is answering. Anti-piracy advocates and organisations that stand to suffer commercial loss from the unauthorised distribution of their proprietary productions are convinced that intellectual property needs to be protected and paid for. More often than not, this contention is bolstered by predictions that the unfettered growth of piracy will lead to the death of creative activity. Simply put, if everything people produce can be stolen with impunity, people will stop producing.
Opposing this view are those who insist that it is the right of all human beings to freely disseminate and access information without paying for it. There seem to be many well-articulated arguments to justify digital piracy, but all seem to be predicated on the assumption that as ‘stealing’ digital content does not deprive the original owner of the content, therefore it is not really stealing at all. Consumers of pirated media feel that the culture of free content is the hallmark of the internet and there is nothing wrong with sharing what they own. Although digital piracy costs the movie, music, video games and software industry billions of dollars in lost revenue each year, they firmly believe their actions are justified by the unreasonable prices set by the legitimate industries.
Digital piracy follows the principles of demand and supply. However in this case, a single user can simultaneously be a supplier and a consumer, a notion illustrated by the P2P network.
Users of P2P networks (such as BitTorrent, LimeWire and others) can provide content (movies, music, ebooks, etc.) that is on their computers to other users of the network. In return, they can use the network to copy the files that have been made available by other users. Digital piracy represents a significant threat to the marketers of digital service products. The existence of a large number of suppliers willing to provide pirated content at virtually zero price poses new and difficult challenges to copyright owners and policy makers.
Despite the arguments and attempts to rationalise it, digital piracy is unethical. It has serious economic implications going far beyond lost revenue.
A report, Confronting Digital Piracy: Intellectual Property Protection in the Internet Era, published by the Progressive Policy Institute, claims that many content providers have partly resisted embracing digital distribution and online business models because of the fear that digital piracy will eventually destroy their businesses. As they say, it is impossible to compete with free.
Media companies that have long built their business around a restricted supply are now facing the toughest competition from digital piracy. Others realising the futility of trying to stem digital piracy, have turned it into a marketing gimmick to penetrate potentially unattainable market segments, while maintaining existing pricing and distribution strategies. A case in point is Microsoft.
Although the world’s largest software maker spends millions of dollars annually to combat the illegal copying and distribution of its products, critics allege – and Microsoft acknowledges – that piracy sometimes helps the company establish itself in emerging markets and fend off threats from free open source programmes.
The gist of the beneficial piracy argument as outlined by the Los Angeles Times is that the retail price Microsoft charges for signature products such as Windows and Office (as much as 669 dollars depending on the version) can rival the average annual household income in some developing countries, which is why the vast majority of those users opt for pirated versions. The proliferation of pirated copies nevertheless establishes Microsoft products – particularly Windows and Office – as the software standard. The argument here therefore runs that as economies mature and flourish, and people and companies begin buying legitimate versions, they usually buy Microsoft because most of them already use it.
In some market segments, business models are already evolving to respond to new market dynamics brought about by the low cost of reproduction and distribution of digital content. A study conducted by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, titled Piracy of Digital Content has revealed that consumers who are offered attractive legal options have less incentive to use the illegal alternatives. In this context, factors such as legality, quality and ease of use are becoming key factors in attracting customers. However, the pervasiveness of, and easy access to, unauthorised content operate as significant limiting factors in efforts to develop a robust, legitimate marketplace. Moreover, the development of new business models and content services that meet consumers’ expectations should not be overlooked when considering ways to address piracy.
I finish by offering a quote by a wise man you may have heard of:
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change.” – Charles Darwin.
First published in the September-October 2012 issue of Aurora
Reba Shahid 