The Digital Home

Ever since I interviewed the RIAA and wrote a column detailing the true nature of that horrible organization, I've kept myself abreast of all the news that shapes our understanding of piracy and anything that surrounds it.

And after reading an article in ArsTechnica earlier today where it cites a survey, which suggests that "people aged 14 to 24 still love their music and are willing to pay for it--but only on their own terms," I was excited to see what would happen next.

According to the survey by British Music Rights -- an organization that represents the music industry -- 80 percent of P2P users said they would gladly pay for a file-sharing service that allows them to download DRM-free songs as often as they'd like for a flat rate per month.

And although you may have expected British Music Rights to condemn the results of this study as more proof that we're living in a world of foolhardy pirates, the organization was actually quite happy with the outcome.

"The music industry should draw great optimism from this groundbreaking survey," said Feargal Sharkey, head of BMR. "First and foremost, it is quite clear that this young and tech-savvy demographic is as crazy about and engaged with music as any previous generation. Contrary to popular belief, they are also prepared to pay for it, too. But only if offered the services they want."

In the ongoing war between file sharing and opposing organizations, we're constantly reminded by just how ridiculous some of the battles really are. Case in point: the "three strikes and you're out" regulation that has been flying around lawmaking bodies in Europe and now, possibly Canada.

According to the experts, lawmakers are desperately trying to find ways to stop file sharing and with the help of organizations that can't stand the thought of songs or movies being downloaded "illegally", they're doing everything they can to go after the wrong people. Simply put, the "Three strikes and you're out" policy stipulates that if an Internet user is caught file sharing three times, ISPs will be forced to terminate that subscriber.

"The policy - occasionally referred to as "graduated response" - received support last fall from French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who pressured the private sector to negotiate an agreement to implement the three strikes system," Michael Geist wrote in an article describing the rule. "The policy soon attracted global attention as the United Kingdom, Japan, and Australia all announced that they were contemplating a similar approach."

As this policy spreads across the world, what can we expect from it? My guess: nothing.

For the past decade, one of the most important debates raging in the tech industry is on the topic of piracy. Some people say that it should be stopped with the help of lawsuits and others suggest it can only be done by being slightly nicer by forcing people to pay for media. But whatever happened to the common sense route? Surely it has been espoused before and some even follow it. Why are some organizations so far behind?

As Amazon has proven, allowing people to do what they want actually works in an environment where they can easily get the same song elsewhere for free. In other words, why fight city hall when all you really need to do is agree?

Believe it or not, there is a way to almost entirely wipe out piracy once and for all. No, it's not by suing those responsible or forcing people into situations. Instead, it's by giving us what we want in a nice package for an affordable price. Does that sound so hard?

A bunch of suckers

(Credit: Digital Home)

As anyone who has been following the NBC saga knows, the media company has laid down some heavy fire over purported copyright violations on the part of "bastions of piracy" and has even gone to Congress to ask lawmakers to pass laws that make copyright enforcement even more stringent.

But with the recent news of NBC violating copyrights by not asking for rights to play the song featured on Andy Samberg's latest viral video, "I Ran So Far," isn't it ironic that this company that supports such draconian laws has violated those laws itself? Because the company did not ask for permission to use the Aphex Twin sample used in the video, will it gloss over it like so many have before or will it put its money where its mouth is and admit that it's a pirate? Either way, I'm going to love watching this one unfold.

In news that comes just weeks after iTunes' loss of Universal Music Group, NBC has officially canceled its contract with iTunes, citing the need for stricter piracy controls and higher pricing that Apple was unwilling to provide. That said, NBC will still continue to sell its programming on iTunes until its contract runs out in December.

In other words, January will be the month that NBC sees a severe increase in the piracy it's trying to so hard to curb.

Bozos of the month

(Credit: NBC)

I'm not quite sure what any of these companies are thinking. First, Universal Music Group steps away from the third-largest music retailer in the world because it thinks iTunes is suffocating it, then NBC walks away to make more money and stop people from stealing its media. But what both companies don't understand is that they need Apple far more than Apple needs them.

Let me paint a scenario for you of what happens as soon as NBC pulls its programming off iTunes.

Finally! For the first time, I can say that the government has gone after the group of people it should be targeting: large pirating cartels.

Earlier this week, US and Chinese officials announced they successfully nabbed a group of Chinese individuals who were allegedly in possession of $500 million of software. That's right -- the government finally took the fight to the bad guys and moved away from the battle against 75-year old Aunt Sally who doesn't know any better.

For years, this has been a pet-peeve of mine. Just like the RIAA in its bid to rid the world of illegally downloaded songs, the federal government and other regulators have been trying to put the kibosh on illegal software distribution. And while I agree this is a necessity for the benefit of all of us, the groups were targeting the people they could pick on most easily: individual citizens.

I'm not trying to let criminals off the hook and say that they were innocent in any way -- they broke the law and they deserve reprimanding. But what about the people who make a copy of Windows for their backup needs or those individuals who want to backup their CDs in case of hardware failure? Is it fair for those people -- pirates under the current law -- to be targeted as criminals for the "crimes" they have committed?

Sure, these people cost us all money when we buy legitimate software because companies need to install protective measures to keep pirated material away from the general public, but would you rather have the big fish crying uncle or the little one?

Simply put, it was easy for groups like the RIAA to attack the little guy because the little guy won't fight back. The little guy doesn't have an AK-47 in the back room just waiting for the organization to walk in and order them to stop. The little guy was an easy target and they took it. And while the little guy was being eradicated, the larger groups like this Chinese cartel were free to profit from an extremely lucrative business. Is something wrong with this picture?

These pirating rings weren't targeted as well as they should have been because of their immense size and power. Believe it or not, the software piracy industry is not made up of a bunch of geeks hanging out in their mother's basements copying another disc of Windows. These groups are true crime cartels with a hierarchy and severe punishment for any wrong-doing. Their cronies are professional criminals who buy one installation of legitimate software, copy it onto hundreds of discs and walk away with a huge profit. Simply put, these groups are dangerous.

But in one of the most important developments in this entire struggle against software piracy, a large cartel was brought to its knees. And while I'm not naive enough to believe another gang won't step up and take it's place, this string of arrests has put the criminal enterprises on notice: we are watching and we will take you down.

And while I know this isn't the end of ridiculous arrests of octogenarians or ten-year old kids, this is a significant step for the battle against piracy. And maybe for once, the powers-that-be will realize that the battle isn't just with individual citizens, the battle is against a formidable opponent who will do everything it can to thrive and succeed.

Every Thursday, Don picks a current-events topic and discusses how it will impact us. Check out more from Don's Future Implications series.