Pirate Fairness

December 9, 2007 · By Matthew

If I had to rate the Harper government’s performance so far, I’d have to give it an A since it has managed to do more good for Canada than 8 years of Mulroney rule and certainly more good than 12 years of Chretien-Martin rule. There are occasional examples though of when our current government will actually do harm to the freedom and liberties of Canadians Incidentally, they are usually associated with now-Industry Minister Jim Prentice.

Such is the case with the new music copyright and piracy legislation that the government is in the process of introducing. Now, before I go any further, let me say that I completely understand and agree with the argument that Canada’s copyright legislation is currently too lax, and that this country, thanks to Pierre Trudeau and his beloved philosopher-kings in the Supreme Court, is endorsing theft. But, as the old childhood lesson goes, two wrongs don’t make a right.

The fact of the matter is that if you’re downloading movies or music for free online without the explicit permission of the owner(s), you are committing theft. The argument that the money just goes to overpaid music execs who abuse their meal ticket artists is irrelevant. Below I will get into why I have little respect for the music suits as well, but that does not mean that I am free to engage in vigilante justice. Otherwise, people could rightfully justify (also in their own minds) taking gas from the pumps without paying (”it just pays for oil barons to build another mansion”). In fact, you could basically steal anything since there’s an infinite number of excuses out there that we could all use to justify the unauthorized use/possession of a product under the law. So, in that sense the entertainment industry is correct in pushing the government to give legislative teeth to the companies’ claim on their products.

That said, I think in this case a revision of our laws will actually cost the music industry in particular more than it will gain — and that’s certainly not a bad thing either! Music companies have, for decades now, abused the fact that they hold the power to make or break artists with just a word. Twice, in the late 70s, and more recently in the late 90s, this power has been challenged by the free market spirit of competition. Both times, record sales have declined. The former case had CDs and MTV, among other forces to thank for bringing it to a close. However, almost a decade later, the internet phenomenon has seriously wounded the way that music companies do business and demonstrated that it is an obsolete model that is on its way out.

So what do these companies propose as a solution? Rather than adopt to the emerging realities, these companies go to the governments of the world and demand compensation through new taxes and laws that presume guilt from every single buyer. The new legislation that Minister Prentice is proposing will actually bite the hand that feeds the music industry: people like me who actually buy their music will be forced to pay a new tax on sites like iTunes to compensate the company for our neighbours who chose to get their music by theft. Wonderfully fair, isn’t it?

So, will the music industry actually right any wrongs through this methodology? Hardly! Already, the music industry’s reputation is in decline among music buyers for having the audacity of proposing that the government force Canadians to pay their bills for them. Remember too that this is a group of companies that HATES to give consumers what they want until there is absolutely no other choice: we still find CDs full of filler songs and at prices only moderately lower, post-Napster, than they were before; the selection on iTunes is still dull since companies are reluctant to allow users to purchase individual songs; artists are still being scammed and, in older cases, unable to maintain control of their creations (I’ll note here that while this is technically legal, it demonstrates that our property laws really need revisions as well!).

In short, the music industry as we know it is dying but it’s trying to drag the rest of us down into the ground with it. Too bad the government is actively going to help it. To show just how misguided these attempts are though, might I suggest you merely go down to Buffalo and purchase a US iTunes card — the store has better selection, and there won’t be a squeaky wheel tax levied on the purchase!

Comments

5 Responses to “Pirate Fairness”

  1. Charles Anthony on December 9th, 2007 8:35 pm [#]

    Copyright violations can only be called “theft” because our government labels it so. The government can change that.

    Copyright violations are objectively just copying in the same way as many people like to copy fashion designs from movies stars. Our government could make copying fashion designs illegal too.

  2. Matthew on December 9th, 2007 8:58 pm [#]

    I see where you are coming from Charles Anthony, however in this case I would say that the product being sold isn’t a particular alignment of electrons but a song. Frankly, I would agree with you that making backup copies of songs or software, like people did with cassette tapes back in the day, does not constitute theft since one purchased the right to own a copy of that song. However, downloading a song for free when it’s owners expect a price to be paid for the time, energy and financial investments they put into that song is clearly theft. We have to move beyond the technicalities and realize the spirit of the transaction here.

    All that said, please note that I have more criticism for the music companies than I do for the downloaders out there. Both groups to realize though that two wrongs don’t make a right!

  3. Charles Anthony on December 10th, 2007 5:49 am [#]

    I have no criticism for the music companies other than that they are using government to win favors and tax-payer’s money to reduce their marketing costs. They are not original.

    How we choose to identify what product is being sold is debatable but mostly irrelevant because the law prohibits a behavior — which happens to be copying. The law does not prohibit the confiscation of any physical matter — which would happen to be theft.
    Calling copyright violations “theft” is misguided. I suggest that you stop doing that. Just call it “copyright violation” or simply “copying” for short.

    Be careful when you use the term “wrong” when it comes to this issue. You can not ask the discussion to “move beyond the technicalities” when your argument is entirely a technicality. It is only technicalities (I would also call it a manifestation of government cronyism) that dictates:
    1) copying an artist’s music is “wrong”
    2) copying an artist’s hairstyle is irrelevant

    The same moral authority that dictates that copyright violations are wrong is the same moral authority that overlooks copying a person’s hairstyle or dictates that abortion is “right” or denies any legal right to property.

    You are only able to call copyright violations “wrong” because the strong arm of the government imposes an arbitrary law.

  4. Charles Anthony on December 10th, 2007 5:57 am [#]

    I would add one more thing: it will be technology that reduces copyright law to irrelevancy.

  5. ThePolitic.com » UK becoming internet police state… not! on February 13th, 2008 8:06 am [#]

    [...] year, the Canadian government played a similar charade solely for the sake of [...]

Got something to say?