Column: In defense of copyrights

By John Ostrowski

Have you ever imagined what it would be like to witness a conversation between the average file-sharing college student and an Recording Industry Association of America mercenary (yes, they probably exist, and they are quite philosophically minded)? Probably not, but you can be sure it would go something like this:

Student: I download music because I love music and seeing as how I’m just a poor college student and no one is hurt I’m obviously justified.

Mercenary: The pirate may not directly impact the producers’ coffers, but obviously it’s short-sighted to disregard the human energy and investment required to produce the album.

Student: Do you really think that the fat cats in the recording industry need my money? They are the only ones affected and they are rolling in cash already.

Mercenary: First of all, that is a generalization. Accepting this assertion, there are still several glaring ethical problems with your position. First of all, copyrights have been protected by U.S. law since the founding of this country. One would have to be incredibly selfish and incredibly short-sighted to think that casting copyright laws aside is perfectly fine.

Get The Daily Illini in your inbox!

  • Catch the latest on University of Illinois news, sports, and more. Delivered every weekday.
  • Stay up to date on all things Illini sports. Delivered every Monday.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Thank you for subscribing!

Student: Laws are arbitrary.

Mercenary: So says the moral relativist, the denier of absolutes and universal truth. A self-defeating position to hold, no doubt. There once existed the idea that laws were to be based on morals, not arbitrary social constructs. Believe it or not, this idea still exists among people, though the intellectual elites of modern society write them off as archaic fools.

Student: Welcome to the new millennium; we left those outdated notions in the last one. Besides, it doesn’t hurt the musicians. That’s who I care about and most of their income is made on concerts. Music sales have actually gone up since the revolution that Napster began.

Mercenary: Claiming downloading music doesn’t hurt sales is absolutely ludicrous. Just because sales have increased, does not mean that they would not have increased by more in the absence of file-sharing. You ignore confounding variables in that assertion.

A paper by a Harvard doctorate student on the economics of file-sharing confirms what is common sense: file-sharing hurts music sales. Admittedly, the top sellers are hit the hardest, while the lesser known bands actually benefit.

Student: Aha! You see, file-sharing benefits the artists fighting to be recognized, fighting against a corporate machine that despises talent and rewards mediocrity.

Mercenary: Superficially, yes, the lesser known artists benefit. However, recording companies can invest in bands with niche appeal primarily because of the profits they turn from more popular artists. You drain this source of income, and their investment in smaller acts may dry up as well. It is easy to see the logic behind copyright laws emerging. Protecting the expression of ideas fosters creativity.

Student: So hurting the big names also hurts the small ones?

Mercenary: Yes, but we have now entered the realm of consequentialism. It is important to realize that file-sharing is ethically wrong not because of the result it produces, but because there is something inherently immoral about it.

Student: In this glorious new age of moral relativism, you still talk of right and wrong. Regardless, what is morally wrong with simply wanting to stick it to the executives? I don’t really care about the smaller artists. My guilty pleasure is indulging in mainstream trash.

Mercenary: Of course, many people hold this ridiculous view and they are primarily motivated by envy. In the case of file-sharers, it seems that their ethical conclusions are motivated primarily by emotion. They want the pleasure music brings them, they don’t like the rich and they have no problem justifying file-sharing. Stepping back to look at the ethical dilemmas raised by file-sharing with a rational mindset yields a much different result.

Regardless, we are not here to debate the ethicality of this issue, we are here to arrest you.

John Ostrowski is a junior in Communications. His column appears on Tuesdays. He can be reached at [email protected].