Analysis

"Sharing 2999 Songs, 199 Movies Becomes 'Safe' in Germany"
By enigmax
August 14, 2008
TorrentFreak

This article addresses the German music industry's concern about copyright infringement due to file-sharing. File-sharing refers to the transfer of digital files though a network. One of the most common ways to do this is using a peer-to-peer (P2P) network. Examples of P2P's include Limewire or Napster. To stop this activity, the industry has been threatening legal action against any offenders that have been identified for them by anti-P2P tracking organizations such as Logistep AG and Digiprotect. According to the article, in many cases the legal action is not carried out, but used as leverage to get the offenders to pay for the downloaded files. Prosecutors in the Nort-Rhine Westphalia area are being overloaded with these cases. Their solution has been to refuse to prosecute any cases where less than 3000 songs or 200 movies have been shared.

The issues in conflict here are music industry revenue losses vs. the freedom of sharing music or movies purchased for personal use. The music industry is concerned that if people can get songs for free on the internet, they won't buy cd's, and they will go out of business. They are fighting for their livelihood. On the other hand, people who have purchased the music and just want to share it with their friends don't see the problem.

An alternative way to deal with this issue could be for the music industry to market a non-copiable cd/dvd for a lower price, and raise the price of the one without copy restrictions. Customers may be willing to buy the cheaper cd and avoid the threat of legal action for having too many files-share files on their computer. Those who still want to share their music can pay the higher price. In chapter seven of Code 2.0, Lessig describes this as an example of using the market and architecture constraints to regulate behavior.

The difference in value or issue conflicts are the same in both solutions. The music industry wants to protect it revenue stream, and it uses copyright law to do so. On the other hand, customers who have legitimately bought music and want to share it for personal use only, feel they should have a right to do so. Who is wrong? I don't agree that any copyright law has been violated if a purchased cd is shared with friends or family. I do agree that commercial use of the cd should be prosecuted as a violation. Wiser heads than mine have been debating this problem for years, and the 'right' solution has yet to have been discovered. We will just have to watch and see how this plays out.