Copyright Totalitarianism
*sigh* You see, 11 years ago I wrote a short short story (for a science fiction class) about media interests taking all the world's media online and charging everyone pay-per-view. Reading aloud was illegal, singing in the shower was illegal, etc. In the story, a Robin Hood-esque character named Vince uses VR to break into the media banks and get children's books so that he and his wife can read them (clandestinely) to kids. (Incidentally, my teacher liked it but said it was far-fetched.)
It's 2003 now and the EU has decided to make my bad idea come true.
Now mind you, only a few years earlier I wrote my college entrance essay (with the overly-dramatic title) "The Death of Creativity" In it I wrestled with how I had been an Atari software pirate in High School and yet wanted to be a programmer when I got older. My decision then was to erase all the contraband, which looking back was a mistake (those games are pretty much gone from history now). But I did ponder and conclude certain interpretations about so-called intellectual property which inevitably everyone does. The RIAA, the EU, ASCAP, the MPAA and most IP lawyers now have all mulled over these premises. Premises like "Artists must be paid, therefore not paying for their works is theft, shop-lifting, piracy..." Or "Artists will not create things if their works are available for free." Or "Intellectual Property is the same as property."
Problem is, these premises are FALSE. To be more precise, they are semi-true/semi-false. I don't think anyone has said this before, but here goes: Property is to the Material Universe, as IP is to Quantum Theory. Confused yet? You should be. The non-tangible world of ideas is very confusing. Ideas do not behave like physical things. Ideas can be infinitely copied with no loss. They can spread through communication. They can be shared, mutated, shared again, and generally cannot be bottled up. Ideas can change the world, topple governments, make people rich, make people poor. They do not behave like land, or diamonds, or clothing, or gold, or food. While we do own them (or at least we think we do), they have lives of their own. They spread to survive. Ideas not shared die.
Yet, our lawmakers, lobbyists, and media cartels are using material laws to exert control over what they perceive as lawlessness and economic crisis. Their metaphors of "shoplifting", "real estate", and "piracy" are not accurate. Inaccurate Language can cause us to get stuck or to communicate in overly broad strokes, and if put into Law, can disrupt our very lives. Ideas are not measurable like physical things. So when the RIAA claims "damages in the billions," for all the songs being shared online, that is a massive hypothetical number. It's made up. An idea of panic and crisis unsubstantiated in the physical world. To go along with this hypothetically large crime are very real, and extremely harsh punishments. The EU proposal above would have the power to block blank accounts and starve people who are suspected of so-called copyright abuse. Their physical objects could be confiscated, their lives ruined.
So don't tell me that artists need to be paid. I am one -- I don't need there to be Thought Police for me to create things.
*sigh* You see, 11 years ago I wrote a short short story (for a science fiction class) about media interests taking all the world's media online and charging everyone pay-per-view. Reading aloud was illegal, singing in the shower was illegal, etc. In the story, a Robin Hood-esque character named Vince uses VR to break into the media banks and get children's books so that he and his wife can read them (clandestinely) to kids. (Incidentally, my teacher liked it but said it was far-fetched.)
It's 2003 now and the EU has decided to make my bad idea come true.
Now mind you, only a few years earlier I wrote my college entrance essay (with the overly-dramatic title) "The Death of Creativity" In it I wrestled with how I had been an Atari software pirate in High School and yet wanted to be a programmer when I got older. My decision then was to erase all the contraband, which looking back was a mistake (those games are pretty much gone from history now). But I did ponder and conclude certain interpretations about so-called intellectual property which inevitably everyone does. The RIAA, the EU, ASCAP, the MPAA and most IP lawyers now have all mulled over these premises. Premises like "Artists must be paid, therefore not paying for their works is theft, shop-lifting, piracy..." Or "Artists will not create things if their works are available for free." Or "Intellectual Property is the same as property."
Problem is, these premises are FALSE. To be more precise, they are semi-true/semi-false. I don't think anyone has said this before, but here goes: Property is to the Material Universe, as IP is to Quantum Theory. Confused yet? You should be. The non-tangible world of ideas is very confusing. Ideas do not behave like physical things. Ideas can be infinitely copied with no loss. They can spread through communication. They can be shared, mutated, shared again, and generally cannot be bottled up. Ideas can change the world, topple governments, make people rich, make people poor. They do not behave like land, or diamonds, or clothing, or gold, or food. While we do own them (or at least we think we do), they have lives of their own. They spread to survive. Ideas not shared die.
Yet, our lawmakers, lobbyists, and media cartels are using material laws to exert control over what they perceive as lawlessness and economic crisis. Their metaphors of "shoplifting", "real estate", and "piracy" are not accurate. Inaccurate Language can cause us to get stuck or to communicate in overly broad strokes, and if put into Law, can disrupt our very lives. Ideas are not measurable like physical things. So when the RIAA claims "damages in the billions," for all the songs being shared online, that is a massive hypothetical number. It's made up. An idea of panic and crisis unsubstantiated in the physical world. To go along with this hypothetically large crime are very real, and extremely harsh punishments. The EU proposal above would have the power to block blank accounts and starve people who are suspected of so-called copyright abuse. Their physical objects could be confiscated, their lives ruined.
So don't tell me that artists need to be paid. I am one -- I don't need there to be Thought Police for me to create things.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home