Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Proof
I can't say that I agree that the issue is about who's getting hurt and how, but whether or not the site owners are complicit in any way. In my mind this is really a slippery slope. Some of the content on TPB isn't copyrighted, and some is but the problem that I see is that if Ginsu's not liable for every person that's been murdered by their knives and if Hoffman-La Roche isn't liable for every sexual assault that happens because of Rohypnol, then how are the guys from TPB guilty of anything? TPB helps people commit illegal acts but what about movies that glorify violence?
I think that society's definition of complicity is way too vague to force these guys to pay $4,000,000 and a year of incarceration.
|
Well let's be real about this specific case. The website was designed largely for the purpose of sharing copyrighted material, all the way down to their name. I mean seriously - "Pirate Bay" is a pretty blatant announcement of their intent. And like any of the copyright law-abiding companies out there, they could very simply set up their site in a way that fights illegal sharing - employing filters that identify copyrighted materials, having site administrators who keep on the lookout for abuse, banning members who make copyrighted material available, etc. Simply because we live in the digital age doesn't mean responsibility is no longer relevant.
Don't get me wrong, I have no great love of big-ass record labels, or even big movie studios despite being employed by one. If I didn't need money to survive, I would be working on my own projects all the time, not on these gigantic, "four-quadrant", hundred million dollar movies. But that being said, people and companies are entitled to protecting their products and belongings. Pre-digital age, the equivalent of "Pirate Bay" would be something like "Shoplift Express", and they would be providing the means to remove those bulky old CD security cases that they used to use in music stores. But would we be having a debate about whether it was right or wrong to purposefully facilitate shoplifting? Probably not. Somehow, because we're talking about
digital files being stolen instead of
physical products, it's become something to support and even celebrate in many people's eyes.
And just in case anyone has missed when I've said it in the past, I also don't agree with the harsh measures being taken by large labels/studios - there's no justification to absolutely destroy Jane or John Doe's entire financial existence as retribution for having a few hundred illegally downloaded songs. They could just demand the cost of the illegal files along with a reasonable fine to discourage illegal behavior, and call it even. But to pretend that there's nothing wrong with stealing music or movie files is, in my opinion, ignorant, selfish, short-sighted, and typically damaging to small, independent artists. A company like Pirate Bay sets a horrible example, and I'm all for seeing them shut down, or forced to modify their business model to be in line with copyright laws. As a professional artist both in film and music, I've witnessed artists being screwed over time and time again when they didn't have proper copyright protections in place, so to see the power of copyrights being nullified is extremely disheartening.