Pintmaster

File sharing vs. legality. Why we do it, and how to fix it.

This post is going to be a little longer than usual.

I would like to try and tackle this huge issue and succinctly explain the major reasons people pirate content on the internet. I wont spend time defining piracy. There are three major categories that make up the majority of downloads on the internet: music, video, software. The decision to pirate vs. pay for these items is a combination of several factors: desirability, price, accessibility, respect for the copyright holder.
Desirability
This one is pretty straightforward. I'd define this as 'how much the person wants the material'. For example, pirate A is a huge Nine inch Nails fan and wants to get hold of the new album ASAP! The album appears on the net a month before hitting the shelves. There is much free content out there, but most of the time, the marketing to make us want the expensive stuff serves its purpose and people find a way to get content, one way or another.
Price
The price is someting that is hotly contested by avid pirates. Keep in mind that most pirates are males between 14 and 25. This demographic has the brains, but not necessarily the disposible income to buy all the latest "media". What determines the price of a CD, or the price of a piece of software (Microsoft Office 2003 Pro lists for $499). This media - music, dvds, software has almost NO resale value. I recently sold Prince of Persia - sands of time for XBOX for $5 when at the time of purchase (approx 1.5 years ago), the software was worth $45 - $55. All of these products lose most of their value as soon as you unpack them. The lack of resale potential combined with the high initial price makes these products a pretty unappealing purchase.

Accessibility
I can download The Da Vinci Code, Microsoft Office 2003, "The Strokes - First Impressions of Earth" any time I chose. If I want to purchase these items for my consumption, I can go to the movie theater for a single use experience of The Da Vinci Code, but I have to drive there, find parking, go for a specific showing and bring money. It is not a simple affair to see the movie. Certainly not as simple as downloading it. If I want Microsoft Office, I can go to a store and buy it, or I can buy it online and have it shipped to me. Both of these take more effort than downloading. For the CD, "The Strokes - First Impressions of Earth", I have two good choices. I can download from a pirate site, or I can download from the iTunes music store with high quality, properly tagged and extremely easy access to the material. The success of the iTunes music store is proof that accessibility is a key factor in an individuals decision to buy vs. pirate. I can certainly say that software that is inexpensive (less than $50) and downloadable online is much more likely to be purchased by me. I am less likely to drop $4 - 500 on Microsoft Office when it is quicker and easier to download it.

Respect for the Copyright Holder
Let's face it. The RIAA and MPAA are not making any friends by threatening and strongarming money out of their potential customers. Their mentality to punish those who do different than what they dictate is the norm is straight out of a dystopian science fiction novel - 1984, Brave New World - etc... Most young people feel that the prices the record companies set are unfair and unnecessary. For a while, I thought it might be good to send Artists money directly after downloading their songs, but found this was too challenging. The record companies certainly play a part in bringing new music to market, but they have had their day and dinosaurs will die. The movie studios use the US as a test market for new releases and then adjust their strategies for marketing to other regions. This is not possible anymore, especially for blockbusters that will be downloaded. The consumer refuses to be the guinea pig anymore. The consumer refuses to eat what is for dinner. The consumer is fed up with being tossed around and told what to listen to, what to watch, what to buy. The organizations making movies, music, software churn out crap that is the minimum amount of effort for the maximum amount of return and then convince the consumer to pay for it. After years of being spoon fed, the consumer is now a teenager and does not like being told what to consume. The "Copyright Holder" has lost the respect of the consumer and now expects to win it back by attacking the consumer, by trying to extort money from the consumer. This is reason enough to not support these copyright holders.
These items combined help people make the decision to pirate or not pirate. Let's run through a scenario and take "The Da Vinci Code" movie that just came out. The movie received terrible reviews but still made a killing in its opening weekend. The poor reviews made the movie less desirable to attend. The price of taking my girlfriend, all included would be about $20. I would have to drive to the movies, park and decide on a specific time to go. There is currently no other means to see this movie. I dont think that a movie like the Da Vinci Code which has bad reviews, and is probably bad (I havent seen it) should get my money. Im interested to see it, but dont want to send the message to hollywood that they can churn out crap and I'll pay for it. If I do see the movie, I wont see it in the theaters. The pirated copies at the moment are terrible quality - probably being filmed in the theater, so I will wait until the DVD release. Dan Brown also seems like a scumbag and has already made a boatload of money. One of the interesting things about media is that after a certain point, every additional unit sold is just more and more icing. Let's face it. Dan Brown doesnt need my extra money. Sony Pictures doesnt need my money, they already made enough to cover their costs. Isn't it just greedy if they want more icing on their cake? I know, I know... it has to pay for all the unsuccessful movies they make. Simple answer to that is, get better at your job. Dont put out shitty movies.

Enough with the bitching, where's the solution?
Alright. Well, I think iTunes is halfway there. The copyright holders are still too greedy though. The solution to this whole dilemma is to make copyrighted material available for cheap, and make it easily accessible. Dont get greedy. If more people want it, lower the price. Dont milk the consumer because you can. Microsoft sells office 2003 pro for $499 because they can. Yes, it is expensive to produce, and yes they deserve to recoup their costs. As unit sales go up, the cost should come down. This should hold true for Music, TV, Video Games, Software, Movies. Im a demanding consumer, and I want things when I want them, and how I want them. I want to watch my TV shows without commercials. I dont want to have to pay $10 to see a new movie in a theater, and I dont want to pay $55 - 60 for a video game I will play only a few times. I definitely dont want to pay $499 for software that Microsoft has created a monopoly with by locking out competitors.

Succinctly, and briefly, the solution is: focus on meeting the consumers wants and needs. Stop trying to milk us like we are a herd of cows. If software, music, video games, TV, movies were available in excellent quality, and not expensive - then there would be no pirates, because it wouldnt be worth the extra effort. Until then, there are a lot of users out there who will find compelling reasons to consider piracy as an alternative to paying. No amount of lawsuits can or will stop it.