Piracy as Progressive Taxation?

jtsuited

Following on from RealEstate's excellent blog post about the ethical intricacies of internet piracy, here's an article I found a while ago which really throws up a lot of interesting questions.

Piracy as Progressive Taxation

Thankfully, most people have realised that the 'piracy is stealing' statement is logically invalid, so let the rational debate commence.

Btw, anyone who wants to take the moral highground (which there's nothing wrong with imo) and say piracy is wholly wrong etc. , I would ask if they have

a) ever taped something off the radio as a kid (or even as an adult for ye OAP's on here),
b) ever made a tape of an album to give to a friend
c) ever given a copy of a CD to a friend knowing they would rip it (or tape it)
d)got a lend of a cd from a friend and taped/ripped it.
e) moved music from a computer that isn't yours on to your ipod.
f) let someone connect their ipod to your computer to copy music from

I'm sure you see what I''m getting at.

ya see this is a big complex question. Personally I spend a good bit of money on Beatport every week and I actually get great enjoyment out of doing so.
I know I can get pretty much anything I legally purchase somewhere else for free (illegally), but it's a small price to pay to know I'm supporting my favourite artists and labels.
And I know that for small labels and artists, it really is helpful to have real revenue coming in.

I know there's a strict policy on boards about espousing the positive attributes of piracy so mods feel free to delete any bits of this post that are a bit iffy.

fitz

Personally, I think people are much happier to pay for music when it's independent. What the record companies don't say is how the artists they're supposedly "protecting" from piracy get bugger all revenue out of sales.

I'd love to see a label operated as a service provider to it's acts.
The act selects from a catalogue of services they want the label to provide, for a set fee or a set percentage, with the profit (less percentages if applicable) going to the artist. I think people would be a lot happier supporting artists by paying for their music via this kind of route.

One thing that really gets on my wick is labels and IRMA saying they've lost €X million due to piracy. That's assuming that the people who download stuff cause they can get it free would actually make a purchase if there was no other way of getting music but legit purchasing. It's a ridiculously faulty assumption, and just goes to show how out of touch they are.

jtsuited

fitz wrote: »

One thing that really gets on my wick is labels and IRMA saying they've lost €X million due to piracy. That's assuming that the people who download stuff cause they can get it free would actually make a purchase if there was no other way of getting music but legit purchasing. It's a ridiculously faulty assumption, and just goes to show how out of touch they are.

Excellent point.


I guess my main point is that music piracy is an issue which requires a more attuned and complex moral compass than is currently being shouted by Irma and the rest of them.

So in short, 'piracy can be wrong, but not for the reasons the "music industry" is shouting about'.