The Daily Cannibal

---

Clogging the Tubes Posted: 19 Jan 2012 02:03 AM PST Don't be evil... “Declaring that all content should be free is unscalable and unsustainable,” says Hatto as he defends the media companies that support the SOPA and PIPA anti-piracy acts. So true! But not the point. Certainly Internet piracy harms American businesses, particularly the creators and distributors of art and culture. SOPA and PIPA aim to curb this piracy, specifically as it is enabled by foreign websites. As Hatto notes, “The West’s most vital weapon is its culture,” and the culture we export is in large part enabled by big media companies (like movie studios). But as we endeavor to protect intellectual property, it’s essential that we don’t shut off the most vital conduits of 21st century free speech and throw the baby out with the bathwater. Specifically, we need to resist attempts to break the long-established “common carriers” principle, which holds that carriers of information aren’t legally responsible for illegal content streamed through their “pipes.” Verizon isn’t responsible if terrorists use mobile phones to plan an attack, any more than GM is responsible if a bank robber uses a Chevy as a getaway car. Internet service providers are common carriers in the same sense, and by the next logical step, so are the websites, forums, and networks that are open to contributions of content from all citizens. The proposed measures would enable the almost-summary shutdown of an entire site simply because someone claims to have a “reasonable belief” that some part of that site enables copyright infringement. They’d be using the proverbial elephant gun to shoot the proverbial squirrel. The tricky thing is that these entities are a new species, neither elephants nor squirrels, a kind of hybrid. They are media, but with limited (or no) firm editorial control. There’s no easy solution to online piracy. But we need to find a way, as PIPA sponsors Senators Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand said in a conciliatory statement today, to “ensure a proper balance between stopping the theft of intellectual property and copyright infringement, and doing so without the unintended consequence of stifling or censoring the internet.”

The Great Web Blackout of 2012 Posted: 18 Jan 2012 09:03 PM PST In response to calls to “Stop The Wall,” PIPA, SOPA, and the great Internet blackout of 2012, we are witnessing the brainwashing of a generation. The Internet and democratization of information is remarkable and revolutionary. Those early visionaries and adopters that harnessed the power of the internet to establish new forms of distribution and community have profited immensely. Rightly so as pioneers they took the necessary balance of risk. vision, and execution in what has been a necessary transition into the dawn of a new information age. In due process there will not be one good, service, or industry that will not be touched by the power of the Internet. But with great change does come great responsibility. The Internet has been generally misunderstood and its power has generally profited those whose businesses revolve around the selling of advertising against the distribution of free content. Let’s be clear on the definition of free. Pandora streams music which appears to be free but actually is not. Through a simple subscription model or brand advertising they offer users the appearance of free music, when in fact they are paying the necessary artists unions or governing bodies in return. These governing bodies and unions are able to compensate the appropriate recording artist – a model similar to how radio operates. Many today believe that content should be free. This free content should not be measured on its merits in terms of units sold and best sellers lists, but rather social capital. The content with the most hash tags wins, or the more likes the better, or the ultimate online popularity contest for what? For the winner there is no Grammy, platinum record, Oscar, or even world tour. Just some simple web cred that has the monetary value as yesterdays movie ticket. There are also calls that “art” is to be edited, copied, pasted, reformatted, reprinted, remixed, rerecorded, and changed to allow the next person to make better with no representation, credit, or monies due or exchanged. Who supports these beliefs?  Unsurprisingly,  the very people that have already built their fortunes on pioneering the internet and structuring entire businesses on the distribution of free content. These very same people are preaching to the young impressionable masses who have sucked from the nipple of Google that big bad media companies want to shut down and censor the internet. The amount of analogies that come to mind are staggering…. The so-called big bad media companies exist for one reason: to make sure that people who make art happen get paid,  from the janitor cleaning the sound stage, to the sound mixer, to the graphic designer of the film poster. Here is the best part, if a studio makes a flop, those people still get paid and the studio takes the loss. Here is another twist, though a patriotic one. The West’s most vital weapon is its culture. Even today the likes of the Beatles, Marilyn Monroe, and The Great Gatsby are our most powerful form of propaganda and defense to the world. “The American Dream” was born out of the gold paved roads of Hollywood and distributed by the exact same big bad media companies being attacked today by the online community. These artists faced adversity every step of the way and it took support, money, and teh complex infrastructure of large corporations to make sure that their talented voices were heard. Why if it works for Pandora can it not work for everyone else? Why if it can work for Itunes can it not work for Google? Google can tell me how many time the word fart was searched in Angola in the last five minutes but it cannot tell me how many times a song was played on YouTube? Pirate Bay brings in thousands of dollars of advertising dollars yet it cannot cut a deal with the RIAA? Content is not free to create, thus it should not be free to distribute. There are sophisticated systems in place, unions, and associations that exist to compensate artists and the people that help bring their imaginations to life. If users are willing to consume advertising for free content – then it is up to the providers. Declaring that all content should be free is unscalable and unsustainable. Just close your eyes and imagine 50 years of free content….. I asked a fellow gentleman of 25 years “what was the single most talented work to spawn from the Internet?” with excitement and glee he responded assuming that there was no argument to be had, “Justin Bieber” not understanding the look on my face he added “He has an excellent voice and can play guitar.” All I can think is that it is OK. This person simply holds his standard of music to standards that differ from my own…but of course for him content is free, disposable, and fleeting. For me listening to Jimi Hendrix on vinyl is permanent, lasting, and incendiary. Fingers crossed that the next great artist is playing at your local bar, as they only way they’ll be able to survive is through tips – it’s Paris fin de siecle all over again.

You are subscribed to email updates from The Daily Cannibal To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610