Copyright divide

[Kalle]

One of the blogs I follow linked this little NY Times article called The Generational Divide in Copyright Morality

This made me think a bit about the people I know. Now, I know I'm an unabashed pro-pirate and all but no one I've known or talked to under the age of thirty has ever had a problem with straight up copying stuff. And I don't think my experience is unique.

[BennyProfane]

Of course the "under 30" crowd doesn't mind copying (pirating) things. They don't OWN anything that somebody else could steal from them yet.

As with a lot of things, their positions on the issue will evolve as they age, and discover that they can just as easily be on the losing end of piracy as on the gaining end.

Most people never copywrite anything, or own patents, or whatever. But as a general rule people tend to become more fiscally conservative--at least in personal finances--as they age, and acquire "wealth" that they feel the need to protect.

[Robert Sharp]

I think Benny is right. This isn't a new thing. Younger people have always thought they were owed something by previous generations and that they could take it for free. Then, as they get their own property, their minds change. It's the same EVERY generation. Look at the hippies who later became the yuppies. That's a classic case.

Of course there are exceptions, so please leave aside the anecdotes. We're talking trends here, right? I don't think Kalle would seriously suggest that no one under 30 respects copyrights and similar laws. There certainly are people who do.

[Stroker Ace]

Now, I know I'm an unabashed pro-pirate and all but no one I've known or talked to under the age of thirty has ever had a problem with straight up copying stuff.

No one? I'm still a few years shy of 30 :P

For what it's worth, I gave up on piracy around my senior year in college. I was in IT though, so I might have been more able to internalize the negative effects of piracy than someone in another field.

[Nick Walter]

I think Benny is right. This isn't a new thing. Younger people have always thought they were owed something by previous generations and that they could take it for free. Then, as they get their own property, their minds change. It's the same EVERY generation. Look at the hippies who later became the yuppies. That's a classic case.

Of course there are exceptions, so please leave aside the anecdotes. We're talking trends here, right? I don't think Kalle would seriously suggest that no one under 30 respects copyrights and similar laws. There certainly are people who do.

I'm a bit divided on this one. I certainly think you are quite right about how generations develop from young idealists to crusty old conservative fuddy duddies as they age. Most of the ideals of youth are lost along the way. However, not all of them fall by the wayside. A few stick and the world changes. I'm wondering if this generation's irritation with corporate abuse of copyright law and extension of it into the personal affairs of individual consumers will be one of those things that sticks.

[Stroker Ace]

I dunno, Nick. It's a far cry for me to jump from "I don't like DRM" to "and hence I download everything I can find for free".

[JPR]

Yeah. I wouldn't count "blatant, unrestrained theft" as an ideal.

(and I'm under 30, for the record)

[Nick Walter]

I dunno, Nick. It's a far cry for me to jump from "I don't like DRM" to "and hence I download everything I can find for free".

Well it's a very subtle and nuanced issue with a lot of grey area that I tried to reduce to a short post, so I wasn't giving the whole topic justice certainly. I think both of the viewpoints you mention are present in younger generations that are growing up with easy effortless copying of almost any media, though to what degree they are present I certainly couldn't say.

The reality is that copyright laws are going to need some adjustment because technology shifts have screwed them up. Whether that's going to end up being a minor adjustment or a major one, I think adjustments must be made.

[Nick Walter]

Yeah. I wouldn't count "blatant, unrestrained theft" as an ideal.

(and I'm under 30, for the record)

It is an ideal, even if it's one you don't agree with. Though calling it "theft" is perhaps framing the issue incorrectly. The people who espouse it would say something like sharing instead. I don't know how much I agree with it, but there's certainly an argument to be made that society is enriched if material becomes freely available. Copyrights expire for a reason, or at least they used to.

[JPR]

I phrased it that way as a joke, of course, but it's still reasonably close to my opinion of the matter.

[Nick Walter]

Ahhh, sorry. I'm horrible at picking up jokes in P&R. Too many people have opinions I consider outlandish on some issues that I can never pick up the sarcasm. My apologies ;-)

[BennyProfane]

I'm gonna revisit this long enough to add a thought: I personally think that current copywrite laws (both US and International) are heinous, and need serious revision. The DMCA sucks massive ass, the RIAA can kiss my ass, the MPAA can kiss my ass in line after the RIAA finishs slobbering on it.

None of that means, though, that I think writers or musicians or creators of other forms of ideas or art or whatever shouldn't benefit from the distribution of said ideas/art/etc. It just means we have a really shitty system for handling that remuneration at the moment, and the powers that be need to work on a better one.

And by the way, I'm 47.

[Aleck]

I think some of it also probably comes down to when you start to have some disposable income. When you're in college and living on $50 in spending money each month, CDs or games represent a sizable investment. Once you have a real job, well, buying a CD isn't suddenly a major financial decision.

Of course, as someone pointed out in the NPD thread, I'm no longer in touch with the under 30 crowd anyway, so maybe they've all got huge amounts of money available thanks to credit cards and the like.

[Andrew Mayer]

Change is coming.

The publishers can either figure out how to profit by it, or get steamrolled.

So far they're lining up like the guy in Austin Powers.

[TheWombat]

I think some of it also probably comes down to when you start to have some disposable income. When you're in college and living on $50 in spending money each month, CDs or games represent a sizable investment. Once you have a real job, well, buying a CD isn't suddenly a major financial decision.

Of course, as someone pointed out in the NPD thread, I'm no longer in touch with the under 30 crowd anyway, so maybe they've all got huge amounts of money available thanks to credit cards and the like.

Nah, from where I sit (or stand), as a college professor, the 19-25 crowd doesn't have that much money in general, based on their griping about finances at least. But they do have a very specific view of the idea of copyrights and IP. It comes, I think, not from a conscious contemplation of the details of the issue but from a very pragmatic point of view--the stuff is there, it's easy to get, it seems stupid to try and restrict its flow, and hence, why not grab it?

This is a case of technological changes so outstripping the law, common business practice, and yes even basic conceptions about the theories underlying both law and practice that the resulting situation is close to anarchy. As an old fart, yeah, I have a built-in objection to the sort of feelings of entitlement that I see in some folks, and I tend to take a dim view of piracy. I can understand, though, that the realities of the digital world are putting utterly unsustainable pressures on the old ways of doing thigns.

We could, I suppose, act as if everyone was a monk or a nun or something and expect them to adhere to the law even if it was grossly inconvenient, but the reality is people on a college campus at least are subjected to such in-your-face availability of digital "stuff," legal or otherwise, that it would take a saint not to indulge. This is particularly true for young whippersnappers, dag nab it.

[Robert Sharp]

Wombat's experiences match my own with students. It's difficult to maintain an ideal when everyone else around you isn't, and you are the only one getting screwed from being too poor to download MP3s all the time.

But I think the larger issue of whether this is seen as acceptable is still relevant. If young people are doing this only because they feel they have no alternative but still think it's wrong that's one thing, but I don't see a lot of that. I see an outlook. In that sense, I agree with Nick. This is different from the previous generations doing the same sort of thing. My first comment was more about general trends toward trying to change the system. Those ideals often change in drastic ways as people age. That doesn't mean certain aspects don't stick. It only means that the problem of generational gaps is nothing new. There's nothing special about this generation other than the radical technology change that allows them to do this.

[Kalle]

No one? I'm still a few years shy of 30 :P

Sorry stroker, I tend to sort "people with kids" in the 30+ bracket automatically.

[TheWombat]

Wombat's experiences match my own with students. It's difficult to maintain an ideal when everyone else around you isn't, and you are the only one getting screwed from being too poor to download MP3s all the time.

But I think the larger issue of whether this is seen as acceptable is still relevant. If young people are doing this only because they feel they have no alternative but still think it's wrong that's one thing, but I don't see a lot of that. I see an outlook. In that sense, I agree with Nick. This is different from the previous generations doing the same sort of thing. My first comment was more about general trends toward trying to change the system. Those ideals often change in drastic ways as people age. That doesn't mean certain aspects don't stick. It only means that the problem of generational gaps is nothing new. There's nothing special about this generation other than the radical technology change that allows them to do this.

I think it's that "radical technology change" that is the key, here. Sometimes technology is background noise, sometimes it's the harbinger of something truly radical, in terms of changes in mores and expectations. I think digital technology, broadly considered, is the latter--it's forcing us to change the way we conceive of things, from ethics to distribution to whatever.

[Nick Walter]

I think it's that "radical technology change" that is the key, here. Sometimes technology is background noise, sometimes it's the harbinger of something truly radical, in terms of changes in mores and expectations. I think digital technology, broadly considered, is the latter--it's forcing us to change the way we conceive of things, from ethics to distribution to whatever.

I broadly agree, but I would offer one small correction. We aren't changing the way we conceive of these things, we are facing them for the first time. Copyright law might be venerable but it was always a business level regulation. It existed to keep publishing businesses competing fairly with each other and in a manner consistent with the good of the public. Up until recently it was basically impossible for an individual to commit a violation of copyright law.

Copyright law impinging on the day to day to activites of an individual is a wholly new thing and, in my not at all humble and actually quite cocky opinion, needs to be considered from scratch and not in the old framework of business level copyright regulation. Otherwise we are going to spend a lot of time hammering that round peg into the square hole.

[Machfive]

I think we need to revert back to 17 year copyrights. What piss me off is this Life+50 Mickey Mouse bullshit.

Fuck Sonny Bono's corpse to hell.

[Robert Sharp]

Copyright law impinging on the day to day to activites of an individual is a wholly new thing and, in my not at all humble and actually quite cocky opinion, needs to be considered from scratch and not in the old framework of business level copyright regulation. Otherwise we are going to spend a lot of time hammering that round peg into the square hole.

Excellent point. Since the laws were originally created in an environment where large printing runs of pirated books were pretty easy to stop, it doesn't seem to apply to the open distribution current technology allows. As such, a whole new framework would be better. Do you have anything in mind? I'm not saying you need to. Your point holds either way. I'm just curious.

[Squirrel Killer]

I think we need to revert back to 17 year copyrights. What piss me off is this Life+50 Mickey Mouse bullshit.

Fuck Sonny Bono's corpse to hell.

With all of the "RIAA-copyright-forever" and "pirates-ahoy" advocates out there, it's nice to know I'm not alone in the "copyrights-but-keep-it-sane" group.

[Nick Walter]

Excellent point. Since the laws were originally created in an environment where large printing runs of pirated books were pretty easy to stop, it doesn't seem to apply to the open distribution current technology allows. As such, a whole new framework would be better. Do you have anything in mind? I'm not saying you need to. Your point holds either way. I'm just curious.

I've waffled around on this over time. I used to be a proponent of no copyright whatsoever on the grounds that even with the reduced output of creative works society still net benefits from free redistribution. Nowadays I've retreated from that position a little bit and do favor copyrights but extremely short ones. 2-5 year type deals. More than long enough to monetize a creative work in our fad driven society, short enough that people might be willing to wait it out. I'm also completely against legally mandated or enforced DRM unless there's a strong consumer bill of rights attached that protects consumers as much as industry.

[Robert Sharp]

So it's the time you mainly have in mind? What about enforcement rules and distribution rights? If I give a copy to a friend am I in trouble? What about posting it on my website? The latter seems to cross the line, but I'm trying to figure out where we should draw it, and I'm honestly not sure.

[Machfive]

With all of the "RIAA-copyright-forever" and "pirates-ahoy" advocates out there, it's nice to know I'm not alone in the "copyrights-but-keep-it-sane" group.

Actually, 14 + renew once is a good plan as well. Fuck, I'd take almost ANYTHING over the fucking piece of shit system we have now.

[Andrew Mayer]

Actually, 14 + renew once is a good plan as well. Fuck, I'd take almost ANYTHING over the fucking piece of shit system we have now.

I absolutely agree. It would be a great start.

[Nick Walter]

So it's the time you mainly have in mind? What about enforcement rules and distribution rights? If I give a copy to a friend am I in trouble? What about posting it on my website? The latter seems to cross the line, but I'm trying to figure out where we should draw it, and I'm honestly not sure.

Well that's the crux of the issue, it's insanely difficult to police individuals on this sort of thing. I can only see two ways to accomplish any reduction in redistribution. The first way is to mandate DRM in everything. In every computer, every device, and every file. That's awful draconian though and as I said previously I only support that if strong protections for consumers comes as part of the deal. The second way is to remove the incentives. In a, say, 2 year copyright environment there would presumably be less incentive to illegally redistribute materials since simple patience could suffice to get free legal copies of stuff. This would hopefully reduce the scope of the illegal sharing until it was a small enough issue to be manageable.

[chet]

I absolutely agree. It would be a great start.

And it would change nothing.

[AaronSofaer]

And it would change nothing.

Only as far as games go. For music, movies, books... it would be quite a change.

[Lurb]

Yeah, I agree that the jester must eat well enough or he'll stop being funny.
On the other hand, the first time I read Stallman's "The Right to Read" I thought it was plain beardy-hippy apocalyptic nuttery and a few years later we are swimming in DRMd e-book readers and the EU is trying to make public libraries pony up for the loss they cause to authors.