I Can Feel It In The ©opyright, Hold On

Something I did not know before was that the RIAA, MPAA, and ESA are disproportionately interested in campus-based file sharing (whoops--maybe i should have cited that, since it is directly from Ms. Graves' presentation). I am old enough to have experienced the beginnings of widespread file sharing as an adult. I will admit to downloading songs and videos from Napster, Kazaa, and Morpheus when these sites were brand new. I honestly didn't even realize at the time that my actions were illegal. I was under the impression that as long as I just enjoyed videos of Robert Tilton accompanied by hilarious fart sounds in the comfort of my own home and only made music CDs for my wife and myself that I was not doing anything illegal, much less wrong. After all, CDs were way over-priced (they are the only technology I know of that increased in price after coming into common use) and there was usually only one good song on the whole album anyway, right? Also, where else was I going to find "Farting Preacher" and "Farting Preacher II: Fart Harder"? Then the stink started (no pun intended). The RIAA was kicking down people's doors accompanied by S.W.A.T. teams to arrest teenage girls for downloading the latest Backstreet Boys tune. Nightsticks were used on grandmothers for allowing their grandson to burn a CD of a free collection of Busta Rhymes' greatest hits on her computer. Still today (I remind you that it hasn't been that long), we read stories about huge evil organizations using Gestapo tactics to pick on people for simply downloading songs (or even for nothing at all, like the unfortunate lady in this story). After all, didn't the music industry bring this frenzy of free-(down)loading on itself? I distinctly remember my brother-in-law saying "It's more like they priced themselves out of the market" when it was suggested to him that downloading music without paying for it was stealing. "Besides," it has often been intoned, "who are we stealing from, anyway? Record companies have bazillions of dollars and the artists only get a penny for each album they sell." That's true. For all of Lars Ulrich's attacking of Napster, the artists themselves are not affected much at all, relatively speaking.

Here's the thing: none of that matters. Yes, we are charged too much for cheap technology. Yes, the RIAA and others are at times unfair and over reactive in their response to free downloading. Yes, the record companies are already swimming in golden pools filled with liquefied diamonds instead of water. The fact is, stealing is stealing. If a product is overpriced, don't buy it. You see, there's this brand-new concept called "supply and demand." I know, I know--crazy ideas from Futureland, but just try to hang in there with me. If a product is too expensive, less people will buy it--we call this a "decrease in demand." When demand goes down in relation to the supply, the price of that product will drop. This concept is the center of a little thing called "capitalism," which I think may start to catch on one day. All sarcasm aside, greed on someone else's part does not erase moral obligation on our part. It's not like the ESA is twisting its moustache while not allowing you to eat--you can live without a copy of Achy Breaky Heart. What gives an individual the right to decide at which price it becomes acceptable to swipe the product for oneself? Does the high price of gas give me the right to fill up and leave without paying? Does the high price of milk give me the right to hide my half-gallon of organic 2% in the checkout line at Target? Do ridiculous movie ticket prices justify me sneaking into Ghostbusters 3: Egan crosses over? Does a greater number of rhetorical questions make for a better argument? Anyhoo, it is important to remember that many people do make their living off of royalties, including artists and relatively unknown authors. Of course, this issue is much easier today. Most of this class was in diapers at the advent of iTunes (o.k., maybe a slight exaggeration again), but I remember thinking what a great idea it was to make electronic media available that cheap. So cheap, in fact, that no one really has an excuse to download free music anymore. Of course, there are other forms of media involved in this, but the principle is the same. I very much appreciated the example Ms. Graves gave wherein each of us put ourselves in the shoes of a producer of work whose product was stolen or otherwise used for someone else's benefit without our permission. Of course, any one of us would be angry. Some people just can't understand an issue until it is presented to them as something that affects them personally, but there is no essential difference between the person who claims your essay as his own and the student who copies and pastes paragraphs of material into his report without permission and citation. Neither is there any essential difference between the kid who sticks CDs or DVDs inside his jacket and the one who uses Kazaa at home.

Everybody Wi-Fi tonight

I honestly use the Trinity network almost entirely for homework (including this assignment). Also, I never use my computer for personal things such as email and Facebook during class--I'm far too busy taking notes! Of course, I know that the preceding will elicit one of two responses: "yeah, right," or "what a nerd!" Well, I am telling the truth, so I guess that makes me a nerd. I think this has a lot to do with the fact that I have experienced the "Real World" (and employment without a college degree) for a number of years. There is simply no way I can take this opportunity for granted or not take it seriously. I am incredibly grateful that Trinity provides us with wireless internet access, and I can't imagine using it primarily as a source of entertainment.

Check out this link for an article about the growing presence of Wi-Fi on college campus and its advantages and disadvantages.