[ox-en] "Digitized Music between Pirate Copy and Societal Alternative"
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 21:55:44 +0100
Hi list!
Soon I'm invited to a panel discussion about music P2P and so on.
Below is a long form of a 10-minute statement I'm planning to
contribute and I'd love to have any feedback on the thoughts presented
there.
Mit Freien Grüßen
Stefan
--- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< --- 8< ---
Digitized Music between Pirate Copy and Societal Alternative
============================================================
Stefan Merten
Background: Oekonux
===================
Free Software as Germ Form
--------------------------
Oekonux uses Free Software (aka Open Source) as starting point
Very short overview over the theory
o 1st basis: Selbstentfaltung
Basis of the mode of production
Selbstentfaltung is something beyond self-realization
Integrates the societal aspect of human activity
o Fundamental: Creative development
o 2nd basis: Digital copy
New technology
Internet as global remote copy facility
o Produces abundance of information goods
Abundance is enemy of scarcity
Challenges commodity characteristic in a lasting way
o Success through quality
Mode of production is a pre-requisite for this
Mode of production does not work under alienated conditions
such as wage labor
Free Software may be destroyed but not integrated
o Germ form for a societal alternative
Free Software points beyond exchange society
Mode of production useful for many (all?) creative labor
http://www.oekonux.org/
Free Software and Music
=======================
Selbstentfaltung in Music
-------------------------
o Similarities to Free Software
o Individual motivation
For music this leads to considerable investments in
instruments, equipment, and education
o Creative expression
o Difference to Free Software
o Artist subject vs. Free Software community
Bourgeoise notion of art puts individual in the focus
Questionable because new things are always created on a
societal basis
o Patches are unusual
However: Modern music forms rely on this
What is analogous to sources in music?
o Musiscians usually earn little/no money with music!
Many Free Software developers earn money in this area
900 persons in Great Britain make a living by composing
Very few would get into trouble if they earn less money
for their music
Selbstentfaltung is a basis also for music
Exploitation in Music
---------------------
o Similarities to software
o Digital product
Is thus subject to the features of digital copy
In particular: Replaces scarcity of material substrate
with global abundance
o Copyright violation by "pirate copies" and P2P
Not for Free Software!
Not for Free Music!
o Concerts as service
As a live event concerts are not digitizable
There are many service offers around Free Software
o Established exploiters
Software industry exploits software
Music industry exploits music
Valorizers are not identical with the creative persons
o Differences to software
o Fair use / collecting society
o License to use on basis of works
Has always been the case for software
Was unnecessary for music because exploitation worked
by binding music to a material substrate
Exploiters have a problem - not the creative persons
DRM, P2P, CC, CF
================
DRM (Digital Rights/Restriction Management)
-------------------------------------------
Copy protection or play prevention, respectively
Most of all: far reaching plans for computers
o Goal: Enforcing of exploitation interests by technology
Thus is of interest for music industry
State as classic protector of exploitation interests does
play a small role
o No problem in the framework of market economy
Exploitation interests need to be protected in market
economy
Does not need direct force
o More just than collecting societies
Collecting societies made sense in the analog era when
individual billing of uses of works were not possible
DRM can be more to the point than measures of
collecting societies
o Problems of todays DRM attempts
o Tendency to supervise each and every use of a work exactly
Deep intrusion in private sphere
BigBrother
o With TCPA the principle of the computer is cut massively
Its strength is just the universal digital copy
o Fair use is not taken into account enough
Private copies, science, education
Why not unobjectionable forms of DRM?
This would be the solution matching market economy by
individual billing
Apple iTunes shows that success is possible with such models
P2P (Peer to Peer)
------------------
I.e. peer to peer networks such as Kazaa, eDonkey, etc.
Usually there is no real exchange
o System to conceal illegal copies
At least for music it would be far simpler to have fat,
central servers
o Works as a form of distribution because publishing happens in
another sphere
MTV, radio, and co take over publishing of the products of
the music industry
Unique identification scheme necessary for searching is
given by a simple naming scheme (interpret, title)
More or less does not exist for Free Music
MTV, radio, and co could change this in principle
o Free Music / Free Content would not need P2P
Distribution and publishing similar to Free Software
Wiki-like systems could make available publishing for
anybody
Already today netlabels provide for choice / quality
assurance
P2P is not necessary for Free Content
Free Software is a good example for this
Marketing people wonder how Free Software gets known without
advertisement
CC (CreativeCommons)
--------------------
o Licenses for "some rights reserved"
o Attribution
o Noncommercial
o No Derivative works
o Share Alike
GPL is equivalent with SA+BY
o Big movement with good "marketing" (http://creativecommons.org/)
Apply for all sorts of content
Are adapted to the national law systems
o Noncommercial helps the Opus Magnus idea
"I enjoy contributing if it can not be used commercially
(aka alienated)"
CreativeCommons further the transfer the idea of Free Software
There is probably no initiative doing this with more success
CF (Content Flatrate) / P2P tax
-------------------------------
o Charges based on Internet access
o Redistribution to creators of P2P content
o Legalizes P2P copying of material under copyright
o (New) collecting societies as redistributors (VG online)
So far GEMA is the collecting societies for music in Germany
So far VG Wort is the collecting societies for text in
Germany
Collecting societies were created because it is impossible
to bill analog copies individually
In reality: Flat tax for using Internet
Needs to be enforced by state
Is not bound to concrete use
Critique of P2P tax (1/2)
-------------------------
There is a lot to say here...
o A lot of practical problems
o Just distribution of money gathered?
For different media
o Where shall be the limits?
Can every web page be registered?
Proprietary software?
Deeper problem: digital copy is universal
o Needs measuring just like DRM
Measuring without DRM methods are always wrong
o International use vs. national collecting societies
o Problems with "compensation" / money supply
o For the creators nothing changes
At least when the system does not differ fundamentally
to GEMA and co
Publishing companies and collecting societies cash
nonetheless
Money supply doesn't happen so far
Fundamenal problem: Creators act in a highly
competitive sphere and the P2P tax does not make this
vanish
o Flat taxation is unjust
Connection between arbitrary Internet use and P2P is
much less than for instance for CompactCassettes
o Different remuneration systems would be simpler and more
just (Street Musician Model)
Consumer pays creator directly
Individual billing is more just
Many problems and little use
Critique of P2P tax (2/2)
-------------------------
o Subtle effects
o Introduction of the long worried commercialization of the
Internet
Until now there is a clear distinction between Free and
commercial content
There would be a tendency that all content would be
subject to commercialization
o Creators interested in Freedom would be weakened
A number of musicians are for P2P etc.
o Missing
o Does not prevent DRM
DRM is not forbidden because of a P2P tax
Especially noteworthy: This is an official goal of the
P2P tax!
o Does not leave the logic of DRM
Only changes the finance model from individual to tax
based
o Does not strengthen Free Content
There is no more "uncompensated" content - even when
this is wished for by the creators
For the consumers the distinction between Free and
restricted goods is blurred
In practice consciousness for the problem copyright is
prevented ("Now I may copy it even legally - why should
I care about copyright?")
A lot of fundamental problems
Alternative perspectives
========================
Utopian Oekonux perspective
---------------------------
Important for a political orientation
o Make money supply superfluous
Selbstentfaltung as the central reason for creating works
o Abolish scarcity of information goods
Is not justified materially
Is not just because there are no genius information goods
o Exploitation is no super-historical right of creators
Something like this is decided upon in a societal process
and therefore this can change
The production outside the guilds was illegal but
nonetheless one beginning of the bourgeoise society
o Quality is higher under conditions of Selbstentfaltung
No looking to exploitation interests when there are no
exploitation interests
Free Software is successful exactly because of this quality
Long-term utopian perspective is clear :-)
Simply bear this?
Realpolitik perspective
-----------------------
o How far does DRM get?
o Technical realization is difficult
TPM, TCPA
Fundamental redesign of the computer
o Political implementation is limited
Fair use
o Not accepted
Un-CD campaign of c't
Widely missing consciousness of injustice
Which is understandable because nobody looses anything
because information goods get more when copied
o Useful acting
o No P2P tax
Blurring of the borders between old and new world is
the best way to integrate a germ form!
Enforces what the music industry seems not be able to
o Make possible coexistence of DRM and Free Content
o Strengthening of Free Licenses like CreativeCommons
Useful acting seems possible
Reform of revolution
--------------------
Old question for leftists
This time with real substance
o P2P tax has all characteristics of a social-democrat solution
o Kills the top of the new
o Integrates it into the old
o Prevents a new development
o Copyright system not useful for money supply?
At least under digital conditions
Completely new system of money supply for creators?
o Is music / P2P / music industry that important at all?
For the development of productive forces Free Science is
much more central
May be we are to impatient?
The basis for a fundamental change is there
However, each change needs time
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: projekt oekonux.de