Piracy and the Great American PublicMost people believe in protecting intellectual property, but are they practicing what they preach?Although nearly all Americans believe that trial by jury is an important right that needs to be protected, less than 30 percent are willing to serve on a jury. And that, says any number of social critics, is a typical outcome in the contest between consistency and expediency, between profession of belief and real-life behavior. NOT EXACTLY SEAMLESSStudies over the past year regarding the future of digital rights reveal a similar struggle: Everyone has had to become geniuses, in the F. Scott Fitzgerald sense, by being masters at holding two contradictory ideas at the same time. The two ideas are 1) people are good, honest, law abiding folk and 2) people can be comfortable breaking the law, as in sharing a password with an unauthorized user for access to someone else's property. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, passed in 1998, addressed a number of the issues surrounding the protection of intellectual property in the Internet Age. Those who see the balance between users and owners as becoming, well, unbalanced, have criticized it as too biased toward the needs of the big content companies (think Hollywood and recording companies). The proposed Security Systems Standards and Certification Act is another step in getting more concrete about what constitutes legal and illegal use of intellectual property. To some it is a further abuse of influence and deserves urgent rebuttal. (One popular columnist, Dan Gillmor of Silicon Valley's San Jose Mercury News, headlined his anti-SSSCA column with "Entertainment control freaks are showing their faces again.") In terms of the broader questions, critics say that the current drift of policy appears to be headed to "enclosing" a cyberspace commons in a way that enriches a handful of business interests at the expense of society's capacity for innovation and creativity. SURVEY DATAMeanwhile, the Washington-based Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) and KPMG have released a survey on Internet users that takes the hysteria out of the debate and aims to introduce some cold facts for consideration by both sides of the argument. The results of the survey ring true and suggest a place for users to start thinking seriously about the conformity of belief and practice in the digital rights arena. The admitted goal is that the report will encourage a national campaign regarding online copyright, both in education and enforcement. For the SIIA and its allies, the driver in the economy is incentives; take away incentives by gutting protections for intellectual properties, and the flow of new products abates. Although most users surveyed acknowledge the need for copyright, large numbers violate the law and have a "shared belief ... that everyone who uses the Internet eventually violates copyright laws." And consider this: The report revealed that more than half of the business respondents have no idea if their companies even have any specific policy with regard to unauthorized access to or distribution of subscription content or if redistribution is permitted. Is this any way to run a railroad — excuse me — superhighway? REDEFINING SELF INTERESTA few years ago, I was in London for a dinner with two American attorneys and a group of businessmen from Europe and the Middle East. As we were seated at the table, the American lawyers (one of them was based in New York and the other worked at a competing London firm) began to jockey for eminence. The chatter was in good taste, to be sure, but it was also a serious contest, underway before the rest of us even had a chance to finish our introductory pleasantries. At that point, the chairman of a company that had done business with both of the attorneys leaned away from the table and whispered to me with a smile, "This is great. As long as you Americans fight each other, the rest of us have a chance." All business sectors have buyers and sellers, owners and users, and manufacturers (creators) and distributors whose incentives at any moment in a transaction can be widely different. But the big picture of their own self interests will usually lead them to resolve differences in ways that do not encumber the vitality of the economic system. The same outcome is needed to promote technological innovation and access to innovative services and cultural products. LOOKING AHEADAt some point, when faced with the tool and opportunity that is the Internet, we have to get organized so that everyone feels fairly compensated and treated. Public opinion or, more exactly, informed public opinion, can play a role that increases the odds of an enduring and dynamic solution. The takeaway is straightforward: Get informed, search out different opinions, collect your own thoughts, and then write someone, call someone, and be heard. Nicholas Imparato [imparato@hoover.stanford.edu] is research fellow at the Hoover Institution, a professor of management and marketing at the University of San Francisco, editor of Public Policy and the Internet (Hoover Press, 2000), and a director or advisory board member of several firms in the IT sector. |
 |
Most Popular This Week
IE Weekly Newsletter
Subscribe to the newsletter
| |
|
|