Cable companies aren’t “forcing” people into piracy
Just to be clear, there is no moral right to copyright. It's a legal artifact we created to advance society by rewarding artists and other creators for content created in the hope they'll create more/better stuff.
However, it's now being used to hold back society, via actually preventing people from accessing the copyrighted content. Worse, copyright is being used to justify restrictions and prohibitions on new methods of distribution and entire new technologies.
They may not be forcing people to copyright, but they have lost the moral standing to complain about it.
This argument strikes me as missing the point. Piracy isn't a morals problem, it's an economics problem. Exhorting pirates to stop being pirates is likely to be about as effective as Don't Copy That Floppy or trying to fight drug cartels with Mr. Mackey and DARE -- they don't think what they're doing is wrong, or they don't care, and you're not going to change their minds.
Which leaves you with an economic choice. Either copyright holders can have more availability and less piracy, or the other way around.
Now maybe they decide they want less availability and more piracy -- maybe they think (almost certainly incorrectly) that that will make them more money. But if that's the case then you might as well go ahead and give up on the pirates, because that's the decision you've made: The decision to create a supply shortage and therefore a market incentive for piracy sufficient to create a critical mass of pirates and commercial enterprises reliant on piracy who, once established, will fight for their own continued existence.
The best case scenario is that the outcome is less violent than the organized crime families created by prohibition or the drug cartels created by the War on Drugs.
Or you can make sure everybody can get their fix from legitimate sources. Then piracy becomes less profitable because it has less of an advantage over purchasing, and some existing pirates discontinue their pirating, which reduces the strength of the pirate community, reduces the demand for illicit releases and thus the incentive to supply them, etc.
But hey, it's your decision. Do whatever you want. If you want you can fight the market and then wail about morality when the inevitable economic consequences ensue. But I wouldn't.
The validity of Marco's argument rests on the fact that "if you just wait, you can get the media through a legit source".
The problem is that there are things that never are going to eventually become available, for example:
- Culture specific or non-mainstream programming - Reality TV from other countries
Given that you're never going to even be given the option to pay for something, I think the argument breaks down.
I'm getting sick and tired of these "and if enough people do X, it will REALLY send a message" exhortations.
People are lazy. The only way to really get them riled up is if they fear for their future. Otherwise the whole "if enough people do it" argument is moot.
Want to make a difference? Hit people where it hurts. The legality and morality of how you do so is up to you, and is entirely dependent upon circumstance.
Actually, here's an "if enough people do it" argument that actually works: If enough people pirate shows because they can't find them via legitimate sources in the way they want, they'll expose a market opportunity. Now get off your goddam high horse.
So I'm in the market, looking for the next season of my favorite show not yet aired here in Finland. Clearly I can't watch it from the TV. Netflix does not offer the show in here in Finland. What options do I have?
Legitimate content providers have failed in a game called free market. Last time I heard free market was quite popular in the USA.
By not watching the shows at all HBO (or other companies) cannot aggregate consumer demand for their show. If you are interested in watching a show and find it inconvenient then blatant pirating can actually help a cable company quantify the demand for the time and mediums of distribution. (yes those companies track aggregate pirating stats)
I think there is an obligation to obey the wishes and rights of the content providers regardless of your respect for those obligations and whether or not those arrangements serve you fairly.
To demand the ability to dictate terms of the arrangement and disregard the terms offered to you is enlightenment. (The special case of this is when an entity represses another with a monopoly, but that doesn't apply here as there is no single monopoly on all entertainment.)
You may be the shows, musicians, entertainments, etc's target audience but you are not in the current target market. As others routinely point out, content providers need address this. It is a failure for them to not capitalize on an audience.
The pragmatic solution is to sponsor organizations and entertainment that you are the both in the target audience and target market. Ad supported media, Humble Indie Bundle, Pay-what-you-want entertainment and Kickstarter projects are all ways you can easily support content on more respectable terms.
By pirating, you really are letting content providers off the hook by not forcing them to compete with providers that you favor. There is an opportunity cost that you pay by not investing in media where you were the target market and those vested parties respect you.
Edit: grammar
Most of my video consumption is through legal means, be it recording to my HTPC, or when I cannot, buying from Amazon Instant Videos (it fits my needs: iPad/Roku/Bluray player apps).
When the video isn't available that way, you bet I pirate. If your business model relies on your customers to avoid activities that are convenient, easy, and get them exactly what they want and the only argument against not doing it is that to the consumer, the activity rises to the standard of "morally questionable" at worst, your business model needs to be fixed. Everything I pirate is a lost sale not because the pirated version was available, but because the legal version was not. And the pirated version will always be available.
As the gatekeepers to the content, the movie/TV industries could provide an incredible product with an amazing customer experience and make money hand over fist. Doing that would push piracy off to only the "digital hoarders" who wouldn't be buying it anyway. But they aren't even getting the very basics. Start with giving consumers a way to pay for the product. I'm probably just a simpleton here, but to me the equivalent of their business model would be like walking into a grocery store and seeing a pile of fresh oranges with a sign that says "If you want one today, you'll have to steal it. Come by next Tuesday at 8:00 PM and we'll let you eat one while listening to a guy talk about how good bananas are for 4-6 minutes. We don't sell these". Not a perfect analogy since the act of stealing the orange doesn't make fewer oranges available, it just keeps the store from receiving more money.
There's a TV show called "Ed" that I enjoyed growing up. Because of a licensing mess surrounding the background music in several episodes, it will likely never be released in any format. I'm a rabid fan. I'd pay $200 a season for a legal release in any format that I could playback somewhere. Instead, I've got these horrible SLP VHS to overly compressed MPEG versions that I recorded when it originally aired. I still watch them, but on my larger television the picture is nearly indistinguishable from a Jackson Pollock painting.
undefined
"If you can’t watch something legally until it comes out on Netflix or whatever service you use, you have only two justifiable options: either wait, or don’t watch it."
Or, alternatively, if you're going to anyway what's the problem again?
Mass media is meant to be a convenient, efficient market. When it isn't the moral failing is not on the part of consumers.
I'm not sure I see the point in arguing that piracy is or isn't justifiable. It's happening and it seems to be increasing. The sad fact is that it's easier to pirate than it is to pay. I pay for cable, HBO, Showtime, etc. but exclusively use a Mac Mini and torrent everything. Do I feel that what I'm doing is justifiable, no. Is it easier for me, yes.
Downloading TV shows is actually not illegal in many countries. Usually, only uploading is illegal.
Morally, is is questionable. You can program your video-recorder (if you still have device like that) and let it record the TV show when it airs and watch it later. Or you can skip recording it yourself (because constantly recording everything is boring and wasting resources) and download it from piratebay. Is there really a difference? And if the show in question is inaccessible in your country, should you wait years for it? I would not.
You can do this, but unless you complain too, most companies are not going to notice for a long time.
I suspect most of these companies still don't really understand the problem - for example I don't want to wait 6 months (in the UK) to see something that's already on TV in the US. I'd happily buy the series on DVD rather than wait. It's not about cost, but if I watch another way, no one who made it will get any money.
Marketing campaigns make people "want very badly" what they can't have. Yet they can, and they don't even have to pay for it.
At some level, the copyright issue is just a question of "wants" vs "needs" of humans. When does "wanting something badly enough" become "needing" it? Are we addicted to content -- are Big Media the dealers leeching off our habit?
This argument is, I think, completely correct, but also to a certain extend irrelevant.
The real discussion should, in my opinion, be held on the supply side of digital content for it still seems to be crowded with companies who for better or worse can not or will not deal with the ramifications of our new networked world and keep dwelling in poor service whilst preaching that piracy is sinful. Companies, whom I might add not so long ago, were happy to push for legislation that would alter the way our basic democratic freedoms work, all in the name of copyright.
I find anti-piracy crowd to be highly similar to politicians or policy-makers who advocate abstinence. In principle the argument is correct, you only need to forget that in the real world people don't quite work that way.
Piracy, in the end to me, is not a moral problem, but a service problem. If you care to fix it, that is.
Nothing really "forces" people into piracy. They "choose" to do it.
Realistically, many shows will never make it to my country. So my two choices, in fact, are: 1) Don't watch it. 2) Watch it. It's not that I'm cheap or impatient. It's not even that I'm lazy (though I am), unless you count not being willing to move to the US.
Be sure to read the follow-up: http://www.marco.org/2012/11/29/the-wrong-movement
Marco has a point here. So, without further ado...
Hey Netflix stop saying you're sorry for not being available in Italy and please sort it out already.
I recently ditched my cable company but not because I felt they were forcing me into piracy. I agree with this article, though I do still occasionally pirate television. Mostly I use Netflix on my XBox, which I pay for, but Canadian Netflix is pretty lame. I agree pirating is morally questionable, though I don't feel bad the slightest bit when I do it.
Whether piracy is wrong or not is irrelevant. The fact is, as long as piracy is possible, people will do it. And it will continue to be possible for the foreseeable future. Complaining about it is as pointless as complaining about the weather.
If it's hurting your business, that sucks. Adapt.
Agreed. I do this, but I don't try to pretend that it's for some noble purpose. It's because I want to watch whatever and I'm not really interested in the arbitrary restrictions against that. I also happen to understand what's wrong with that. The attempt to paint this as some sort of moral crusade against Big Media is narcissism.