File Sharing: Whose Side Are You On?

File Sharing: Whose Side Are You On?
Patricia Gaile Cotaoco
Media Ethics class

Fact: The Internet is a very useful tool. It can be used for promotions, marketing, business transactions, communication, entertainment, and even personal recreation. But, so far, it has been most useful as a means to send and receive information.

This capability of the Internet comes in many forms. The most basic are e-mails and instant messengers.
However, times have changed. Technology has evolved and new programs are being developed and improved every minute. Now, people do not just exchange mere sentences and paragraphs over the World Wide Web. They share files: movie files, music and even software. This new concept, termed as “File Sharing,” is the latest trend that conquers a lot of people. Imagine being able to acquire the latest movies, the complete season of a television show, and the hard-to-find music albums with just a few clicks and an hour to spare for the downloading process. Also called Peer-to-Peer (P2P) network, it allows computer users to upload and download files from other people. Thus, these users instantly become peers or friends, even if the person whom he is getting the file from is living in the other side of the world.

On one hand, it may seem harmless. One may think that there is nothing wrong with file sharing. In fact, it can be advantageous for a lot of people as they are exposed to things they originally do not have access on. On the other hand, artists, authors, musicians, recording and movie companies think that it is just a way for online piracy to thrive. Using file sharing, people can get hold of music or video files without paying for them. For them, it is a way to rob artists of their royalties and intellectual properties. File sharing, for them, is theft. Thus, it is a crime.


Where It All Started…
According to the Computer Desktop Encyclopedia, a P2P network is a network of computers configured to allow certain files and folders to be shared with everyone or with selected users. In the case of the Internet, it is considered as “the world’s largest file sharing network.”

It was during the 1990s when the use of the Internet started to flourish. At about the same time, authors, artists, etc. realized its capability of reproducing and distributing digital copies of their works. Of course, they were threatened. And so, to combat this problem, the United States Congress enacted the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in 1998. This law illegalizes and penalizes the making and use of computer programs that will enable users to reproduce and distribute copyrighted works.

It was ironic that barely eight months later, Napster was born. Napster was a computer program made by Shawn Fanning, a college drop-out. Using Napster, users could share their music files or MP3s to other people. One could share whatever MP3 he had on his hard drive and, at the same time, search through a list of MP3s shared by the other users. That way, one could get a copy of the very first album of Smashing Pumpkins or Radiohead without even standing up from his seat.

As some people described it, Napster spread like a wild fire. From 30 people, whom Fanning first shared the program to, it spread to more than 30 million users all over the world. Less than a year after it was launched, Napster became a household name.

But musicians and recording companies did not like what was happening. They thought it was unfair for Napster and its users to just reproduce and distribute their copyrighted properties without paying them a single cent. And so, they brought the case to the courts and after a quite long battle, they got their victory. Their claim: besides the fact that Napster was pulling the record sales down, it was not just ethical to get something without paying for it. The courts ruled in their favor. Napster was closed down.

But that was not the end of their battle. For a lot of people, it seemed practical to use Napster. Since millions of people were already part of the file sharing network, it did not seem wrong anymore. According to Trevor Merriden, author of Irresistible Forces: The Business Legacy of Napster and The Growth of the Underground Internet, people even argued that if there was a way to get music for free, then why else should they pay for it. And so, even if Napster was closed down, it did not stop other computer programmers to come up with a more untraceable, convenient and “spoof-proof” (less viruses and corrupt files) file sharing programs.


Economics101: High Demand, High Supply
Nobody says no to free. Since Napster, organizations like Creative Commons and OpenOffice.Org have been established. These non-profit organizations campaign for the use and reproduction of copyrighted works as long as it is not used for commercial purposes or piracy. Piracy, as defined in Republic Act 8293 or the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, is the unauthorized copying, reproduction, dissemination or distribution, importation, use, removal, alteration, substitution, modification, storage, uploading, downloading, communication, making available to the public, or broadcasting of protected material, electronic signature or copyrighted works including legally protected sound recording or phonograms or information material on protected works through the use of telecommunication networks, such as, but not limited to, the Internet, in a manner that infringes intellectual property rights.

But not many people know what Creative Commons or OpenOffice.Org are as there is still a whole gamut of file sharing programs which most computer users are more familiar with. Limewire. Gnutella. Mininova. BitTorrent. eDonkey. Kazaa. They come in different, weird names. They also have different distributing processes, but they still do what Napster originally did: they allow users to upload and download movies, MP3s and software without paying for anything.

Computer users are aware that downloading files from an unsecured website can be dangerous as it can infect their computers with viruses. However, studies say that people who use file sharing programs are not wary of this danger. Despite the possibility of getting viruses, they still patronize these programs. One study actually says that if a user finds that he gets viruses or corrupted files from a particular program, he or she just switches to another one, which he thinks is safer and more reliable. A statistical example that file sharing program users increase by the minute is exhibited in the Mininova website. According to its latest statistical report, there are more than 600,000 torrent files in its database and more than four billion downloads.


Owners Versus Users
For users of file sharing programs, their philosophy is simple: music CDs and DVDs cost a lot, and so it is just right that they use the available means to acquire the things they like. As one of Merriden’s interviewee has said, “Music should be made for the sake of music—it should be free. Come on…15$? Some people can’t afford a CD.” This just shows that people are not really worried of the ethical, or even the legal, consequences of file sharing. While they know that illegally downloading a movie or music file is a form of copyright infringement, they do not really care. They are aware that the act is illegal, but do not really see it as “wrong” because, not only do they have a justification, but the rest of the world is doing exactly the same thing.

However, for certain groups, such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), that is just not right. For them, file sharing programs are tools of copyright infringement. Although administrators serve only as the middle man and are not aware whether copyrighted works are being passed on from one computer to another, these groups argue that they still promote infringement or the unauthorized use of material protected by copyright. It is because those who use file sharing programs can make duplicate copies of files and then, sell them commercially.

Pro-copyright groups emphasize that royalties should be paid because artists work hard to produce songs and movies. Recording companies also proclaim that record sales decrease dramatically because of file sharing programs. They say that with the proliferation of illegal downloading, many people who work for the recording and movie industry may lose their jobs. Low record or movie sales may mean low salaries for producers, artists and the rest of the staff who work for a record company or movie outfit. On a larger scale, it can actually damage the economy. And so, they continue bringing cases to court against people whom they suspect are guilty of online piracy and companies who promote the use of file sharing programs. However, even the mere act of suing file sharers poses to be a challenge for them. Despite copyright laws, it is still very difficult to pin down administrators and users. Worse, filing cases against users also risks loyalty from consumers.


The Best of Both Worlds
One of the main attractive points of file sharing is that you can acquire the rarest-to-find movies and songs and out-of-print books in just a couple of hours. Of course, the fact that it is free of charge makes it even more attractive and addictive. It is because of file sharing that the unreasonable prices of CDs and DVDs have gone down. And so, now, everybody has the chance to buy the music or movies that they like.

As for the low record sales, it should be noted that there are studies which refute that claim. P2P Control, a study conducted by Allot Communications, maintains that downloading files using file sharing programs is not the culprit of low record sales. In fact, “(f)ile sharing actually increases CD sales for ‘hot’ albums that sell more than 60,000 copies. For every 150 downloads of a song from those albums, sales increase by a copy.”

Come to think of it, file sharing has been in existence even before Napster, even before the advent of computers. The mere act of borrowing and lending things is already a kind of file sharing. The only difference is that, before, it only involves a few people. And now, people use a different kind of tool, but still share things.
Another factor to be considered about file sharing is that it builds communities and fosters friendship among its users. According to Sharman Networks, operators of Kazaa, “P2P file sharing is good for consumers as it is about more than just movies, music and games. P2P lets people share new ideas, collaborate on projects and communicate more efficiently.”

Meanwhile, putting on the artists’ and producers’ shoes, the issue of copyright would mean a lot. If it happens that composing music is what someone does for a living, then of course, he or she would want compensation for his or her work.

Then again, the world is in the digital era now. And it is inevitable that every creative work will be reproduced and passed on to every corner of the world, for free. Instead of battling the Internet and programmers, it is about time that people adapt to it. It just seems right then that governments and the industries concerned update copyright laws and make them work the people whom they deem as most important—their consumers.
The world will never run out of creative and intellectual minds. This is evident in the makers of the Open Office suite, a collection of programs similar to Microsoft Office. The only difference is that Open Office can be downloaded for free. This fact gives computer users more options other than subscribing to the pricey Microsoft Office, which, currently, monopolizes the computer industry. And so, it is just right to give at least a leeway for those who want to use and copy copyrighted works. It would be better if pro-copyright groups focus only on those who sell copyrighted works illegally. In the meantime, there should be more advocates for organizations like OpenOffice.Org which promote the use of free information and entertainment files. This way, not only cheaper alternatives are promoted, but budding computer programmers as well.