The Ethics of Filesharing

Below are two really good videos on the ethics of filesharing. No matter which side of the argument you support (pro-artist/revenue model or pro-consumer/free model), these expert interviews are thought provoking, providing an intelligent discourse without emotional pleas from those that just want to have it their way. As I've stated before, there has to be a middle ground. Both videos come from Artists House Music, which is arguably the best site out there for indie musicians and I highly recommend you subscribe to their feeds.

The first video, an interview with Professor Russell Rains discuses the general ethical issues surrounding filesharing with an emphasis on the legality of filesharing.

The second one is with Lawrence Lessig, also an attorney and a professor, and the founder of Creative Commons. He discusses the pros and cons of filesharing. Note how he believes that filesharing is currently being misused and he does not support that kind of activity, but he also offers insight into a potential middle ground between utilizing P2P filesharing networks as a technology, while at the same time protecting the rights of the artists. I couldn't agree with him more, and I've been saying this for years, as that's what it will take to make it viable for both parties. While it's an older interview, it's still very good and applicable, and should be watched by all consumers and musicians:

IMHO, P2P as a technology will only continue to grow, but it may not remain free. As Professor Lessig alludes, P2P filesharing networks will become an integral part of the Internet, but there will also be built-in technology that will protect the rights of the artists - it's just a matter of time before that part of the equation is developed, and no, I'm not talking about DRM.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Comments

[netvalar]

Watching these videos brought to mind the possibility of arranging P2P network that works similar to Digg voting. Then copyright holders could just browse the top DL and request they be removed. Not sure how the removal would work though. This would retain the benefit for those who wanted it, grant the P2P community better control and give Coyright holders a means to remove thier product once it is obvious to be damaging.

[Snap Music]

Actually, Professor Lessig is suggesting a proactive opt-in. Meaning, if a musician/band wanted to join a P2P network, than they would opt-in to do so. However, their music would not be available until he or she had done so. What you are referring to is called opt-out, which would not work in the present state of a P2P filesharing environment.

[Brian]

I have known some bands/musicians that have put their catalog on p2p networks after being dumped by record labels. That introduces a grey area, where the labels will want to claim ownership to something that the artists are giving away for free. As far as I know, these have been artists that the corporate machine has discarded, so they don't seem to care. Once a "major artist", with 20+ years of recordings, starts seeding a torrent of everything they've ever made, we will really have a showdown.

[Snap Music]

Brian: What you describe above is a legal issue, as the band would have breached their contract. What you present is not an issue about free music, but about contract law.