This post by Rick Falkvinge made me think about the history of my own digital consumerism. Rick makes couple of very good points filesharing and about the human nature of sharing but I feel he anchors one of them to basic need for survival by making an analogy to monopolistic access to water sources. At that level he is, of course 100% correct – sharing for survival is a very strong trait in human nature, we’re designed to survive and as a race, we’ve done a great job at it so far.  However, for my own part getting to see the latest episode of a popular TV-show, downloading those mp3′s of that cool new artist or getting that videogame everyone else is playing is not about survival, it’s about entertainment and I’m not entirely sure if I can agree with that part of Rick’s reasoning. I fear the reality of it is somewhat more mundane. Perhaps I agree that at its core it’s not about the money, but it certainly is about the feeling of ownership.

To sidestep for a moment, one general argument that always pops up in filesharing discussions (and this is also true by looking at the comments section of Rick’s article) is the “copying is not stealing” argument. Let’s get that out of the way first so you know where I stand.

Overly simplified, the scenarios are following: You go to a record-shop, take a CD and walk out without paying. You just stole something, because now the original owner don’t have the copy anymore and they didn’t get paid for it either.  The second scenario is: You go to your favorite filesharing site and download the same CD. You just made a illegal copy, but the original owner didn’t lose anything in the process, they still have the chance to sell the product and make profit out of it. Of course it could be and often is, a copy of a copy of a copy, since digital copying doesn’t downgrade the quality. But when you download the file you don’t know what number your copy is and you don’t care. It’s also usual to latch on arguments about how companies and artists need to adapt to the new “infinitely copiable future” by changing their business models.

While there is certain amount of wisdom in that line of thinking, it is far too easy suggestion to a problem that is very complex.

I’m not at all sure the motive is the human need to share  and I think they are, when it comes down to personal level, the very same activities – stealing, even though that might not be semantically correct. There are many arguments the “pro-copyright” people use that I don’t agree with – I don’t agree that the punishment for sharing copyrighted material illegally should be the same (or higher) as physically stealing a product. I’m not sure every shared file automatically translates to lost revenue. I don’t agree that copyright should last forever. Or even 80-years. Or 20. It makes no sense to me. I love creative commons and open source licenses. But I believe copyright (or -left) on some level is still needed and I still think downloading illegally copied files is – on your personal level – analogous to stealing. If you personally downloaded and consumed something you should have paid for, then you “stole” it. Not that I really care if you do, that’s your business, that’s just how I label it and I’m tired of arguing semantics around it. So now you can label me and put me in “that” camp.

For my own history in this – I used to be pretty heavily into the “scene” when it came to having access to the latest and greatest files. I had root access a “0-day dump” (basically FTP server that was used as a distribution point for copied games, music and video – warez), I did some coding for IRC bots that would control and distribute the stuff on channels and I could have access to any game, TV-serie, movie or album released in the last 24h in just minutes – for free. My gaming consoles and other devices were always equipped with chips and configurations that allowed me to play the free stuff without restrictions. For my very subjective and anecdotal view, it was never about sharing as much as “hoarding stuff”. Collecting. For free. The size of your filestorage was something cool, something you’d brag about, your access to new material was something your friends, online acquaintances and colleagues were jealous of. Pretty far from the “sharing water for survival”-human trait here. Simply, having the latest and greatest entertainment without having to pay a dime for it was “the thing”. Now, I eventually came to the realization that it wasn’t entirely ok and I stopped. Got rid of all my illegally copied material, replaced my chipped consoles and devices with “legal” ones and started paying for the stuff I consumed.  I still break the rules occasionally; for example by ripping DRM from stupid things like games that simply refuse to work with the DRM, but I actively try to avoid “pirating” when I can. I try to consume whatever I can legally afford in my monthly entertainment budget, which doesn’t really amount to very much in comparison to the old days, but at least I don’t have to worry about the police shock troops kicking my door down for copyright infringements.

But – and again, this is only anecdotal – from what I see and hear, filesharing is very much mainstream now. People who don’t work in IT, who have no idea what IRC is and generally only have the very basic grasp on how to operate their home computers are sitting on fat broadband connections downloading stuff like there is no tomorrow. The latest films are always there, entertainment for their families is free and just couple of clicks away – and it’s just fantastic with all this free stuff on the Internet!  The nuances of the copyright discussion haven’t really filtered to the masses, but in all of my discussions with people – who generally have only a very basic knowledge of computers – one thing is fairly clear. They all know uploading stuff is bad and could get you in trouble with the authorities, but downloading stuff is somehow safe, generally accepted and (after a short argument with their nagging conscience) “legal”. So they always ask (since I work in IT) if I could check their DC++ or torrent settings so they’re not uploading anything by mistake.

I feel people’s propensity for collecting things is the human trait driving filesharing, much more than the human need for sharing things. Also the cynic in me would probably add collecting things “for free“, but I try not to listen to him too much, since he’s a real bummer. The fact that they have “stuff”, even if it’s just digital copies of copies makes them feel like they “own” things. And by owning things they can tell their friends and neighbors ”yeah, I’ve got that file, want a copy?”, which makes them feel important and somehow ahead on the Collecting Things Ladder. It’s about whole culture that has put forward an idea where consumerism and “having a lot of things” is good thing and something we want and need. Ironically, this idea has been pushed hard by the very same entities who are now opposing filesharing.

As I said before, it’s a complex problem. Rick is right about the decommercialization – making copies is effortless these days and doesn’t cost very much after the initial investment to basic computers, broadband and software. So from the big-business point of view the question of  the correct price for a song is hard, because the alternative is always free and we’ve been trained into a culture of collecting. The pro-copyright people argue that even stricter laws should be passed to combat this, however as long as there’s a perceived need to collect and own, no law can stop that. And since the price of creating a copy is zero – spending big money on creating content becomes the real issue for the argument. And we can already see how many original tv-shows are getting cancelled and replaced by cheap reality-tv shows. How music is mass-produced to a mold on the cheap. How most blockbuster movies already follow the very same patterns that dumb down and blend things cheaply for the maximum exposure. One might argue of course that this would have happened anyhow as businesses try to increase their profit marigins, but I believe this trend will become more and more prevalent as content companies try to struggle for those elusive alternative business models everyone is talking about, but no one has seen implemented on the scale that would be needed. That leads us on downward spiral of cheap, empty, dumb content to a future I’d rather skip.

So while I believe we must have a copyright reform of some kind, I also believe we need a content reform and perhaps more than anything, a filesharing reform (or perhaps more accurately, a culture of ownership reform). I don’t really want to see a future where the content producers, artists and distribution chains squeeze themselves into a existence of constantly having to pump out reality-tv, video games based on reality-tv licencing and recycled top-40 hits. And I’m not even talking about the big Hollywood content mafias. The small guys, the obscure bands, the alternative documentaries and ‘zine publishers. It’s very hard for them to actually make their voices heard in the current buzz of culture of mass ownership.

I’d rather have quality content and I’d very much like to  pay for it so you can afford to make more. I just want to consume it, I don’t have to own it.