The debate has been going on for some time, and depending on which way you look at it everyone is right--the fans, and the corporations. Somewhere in there are the artists, too.
We're talking movies, and music, and the ongoing battle to combat piracy in the digital age of file sharing.
This isn't a diatribe to promote either side, or convince you to do something--or not do anything, for that matter. It's not even about what I think is right (or, conversely, wrong). It is, however, about some interesting points--food for thought, if you will. The only disclaimer, dear analyzer, that I will provide is a couple of these thoughts are cribbed from unknown sources, the true inspiration for this hard hitting and well thought out expose you are currently reading.
Music is the easiest to illustrate, so let's step back into time, shall we? Records. Plastic discs with grooves on them, that, when a needle is applied, produce the sound of voices and instruments to be enjoyed by a listener. People bought them, listened to them, and the record companies smiled. Sure, you could share your record with someone, but you couldn't copy the music for them. There wasn't an affordable, everyman method to do so.
Until the age of tape, and more specifically, cassette tape, arrived on the scene. The same vinyl records could be bought on a cassette tape, and the same voices and instruments could be enjoyed by a listener, on a cassette tape player (at home, in the car . . . those early 8 tracks were the height of technology. Imagine--no longer a slave to the sounds the dj spins in the studio, but the listener now had the ability to play exactly what they wanted, when they wanted to.)
But it's not quite the cassettes that are the crux of the matter . . . rather, it's the player, which ushered in the record button. Now there wasn't just a play function, but a record function. And with a blank tape, you could record sounds--voices, and instruments, to be enjoyed when you wanted. You could even record your favorite top 40 hits, right off the radio. And the radio waves were brimming with things to record, and the stores had plenty of blank tapes for you to buy and record with.
Record anything you want.
And keep it, or give it away. Songs you could certainly buy in the store, but you could also record them. If you had a second tape player, (or, gasp!) a dual tape deck, you could record cassettes you (or someone else) bought in the store.
To keep, or give away.
THEN, compact discs came along. Super high quality sound, trouncing cassettes, the defunct 8 tracks, and (to some) the classic vinyl, whose days were numbered by many with the advent of the musical delivery system referred to as compact disc. The record companies could resell you your entire collection of music, because it sounded better on compact disc, or cd. And fans were happy, too--happy to purchase their favorites all over again.
And of course, there were also blank discs, with which you could record anything you want.
And keep it, or give it away. Songs you could certainly buy in the store, but you could also record them if, say, you had a friend's cd collection. In fact, you could even record your (or your friend's) cd's to cassette, with the right setup. And the stores had plenty of blank cassettes and discs to sell.
You can still do all this recording at this very moment, if you have the right equipment--and most everyone has some sort of ability to do it. And, more to the point, you can still buy blank cassettes, albeit in limited fashion compared to the juggernaut of blank cd's which are labeled--appropriately enough--for music.
FOR RECORDING MUSIC.
Where, prey tell, does this music come from--the source, shall we say--that you can record.
And keep.
And share.
Yes, blank media has other uses as it can easily store general data (documents, photos and such) as well as the music files. Perhaps that's the slippery slope corporations find themselves on when considering the blank media platform.
But we ALL know, don't we?
And we also know, in this day and age, that blank media--though still used, and purchased, and viable--isn't the preferred method of storage.
You show me your hard drive, I'll show you mine.
While hard drives increase exponentially in size--I wonder how the salesperson about 10 years ago touting the 20 gigabyte hard drive to me, stating, "You'll never fill that up," would feel about that sales pitch knowing we now have access to 2 and 3 terabyte drives--they certainly aren't alone. Mp3 players and phones get bigger and better, and faster, to hold and do more, as the digital age winds us up into an easily accessible storage frenzy.
The players have come a long way from those record players, back in the day--in the palm of your hand you can hold and listen to a record collection that would fill a room.
Except, there aren't any records, or tapes, or compact discs.
It's all data.
That you can buy at the online store.
And record.
And share.
But it's not really "recording" anymore. It's "copying," as in "cut and paste." Because it's just data, and you are making a duplicate of it, if you take it from your laptop and put it on your Ipod to listen to while being nimble and being quick.
Isn't recording and copying one in the same?
(!)
The same thing can be said of movies . . . movie theater->televison->vcr(blank vhs tapes)->dvd (blank dvd)->computer (streaming)->handheld device . . . for reference, the laser disc is the 8 track of the video world, so we'll skip over that part of our Cliff Notes history of video entertainment (or for you hipsters, the Wikihistory).
Way back in the beginning, I stated that the original inspiration for this came from an unknown source. During a discussion of the recent federal shutdown of a well known file sharing site, a commenter noted that when they finished reading a book, they would give it to someone else to enjoy. The point being, should he or she be prosecuted for passing along an item that was paid for but not by the person it was given to?
That led me back to a different discussion from elsewhen, and a point made by someone that I'll paraphrase and embellish: if we aren't supposed to copy music and movies (and all), why do they legally, willingly and openly sell us the means to do so?
And that started me thinking.
Right, wrong or indifferent . . . I'm just sayin'.
See you next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment