The Devaluation of Illegal File-Sharing
As technology
advances at a rapid pace, the law must deliver innovative concepts to deal with
its exploitation. When the internet launched, it generated an entire range of
new crimes, such as piracy and illegal file-sharing which can be committed
online. In 2009, the RAND Corporation released a report titled ‘Film, Piracy,
Organised Crime and Terrorism’ (Treverton et al., 2009), implying that with one
simple click of ‘download now’, one will be seen as a dishonourable criminal
who can be compared to the likes of a terrorist. However, there is a split
within the industry itself, where some artists support file-sharing and others
oppose it, which questions whether file-sharing truly is a crime (Martin et
al., 2010).
In order
to persuade the audience and convey a certain message in relation to piracy and
file-sharing, the media uses methods which focus upon inhibiting outrage. These
methods involve covering up the action, devaluing the target, reinterpreting
the events by lying, minimising, blaming and framing, the use of official
channels to give a perceived appearance of justice and intimidating people
involved (Martin et al., 2010). An interesting method which powerful
perpetrators will often employ is the devaluation of their target with the use
of derogatory labels, discrediting information or setting them up in
compromising situations (Martin et al., 2010). In response to this, targets may
use validation in order to overcome perceived injustices (Martin et al., 2010).
Devaluation
can be very persuasive and influential when used in the media. This is
exceptionally true in the case of piracy and illegal file-sharing. As one can see,
the images that correspond with illegal file-sharing are shocking, scary and
intimidating. They instil fear within the viewer and portray an image of evil
criminals who have no sense of morals or values. Jack Valenti, former president
of the MPAA, is known for his ability to equate the struggle against
file-sharing and piracy to a ‘terrorist war’ (Logie, 2003). There are many
stereotypes which have been associated with illegal file-sharers and they all
involve demeaning and downgrading connotations.
The tactics
which have been used within the media in relation to piracy are effective and
frightening. Personally, when I watch a movie and view an advertisement which
aims at prohibiting piracy, I feel scared and anxious. The advertisements begin
with criminals committing various crimes, such as stealing a car or a handbag,
which are then associated with the theft of movies and music. It automatically
places illegal file-sharers in a category of sinful people or within the stereotype
of criminals. By creating a connection between criminals and illegal
file-sharers, the media is demonstrating that every person who partakes in this
activity has the propensity to rob a bank or steal a vehicle.
In
response to these attacks, targeted parties may exercise ‘validation’ in order
to maintain their credibility. This involves raising the status of the person
involved (Martin et al., 2010). File-sharing participants are validated when
they are given faces or show their true intentions and their personal details (Martin
et al., 2010). This allows them to be seen behaving like normal human beings
rather than criminals and are often perceived as rather different from a stereotypical
criminal (Martin et al., 2010). Artists have openly supported file-sharing and
have used it to promote their music, such as 50 Cent, Radiohead, Nine Inch
Nails and The Smashing Pumpkins (Martin et al., 2010). This tactic challenges
the industry’s attempt to devalue file-sharers as it demonstrates support from
well-respected musicians within the industry (Martin et al., 2010).
In addition
to the theft of music and film, replica designer handbags and jewellery are
also being condemned within the media. When logging into my Facebook homepage,
I am bombarded with advertisements suggesting that I buy a designer handbag in
their online store with an eighty per cent discount. It perplexes me as to how
anybody would believe that a five-thousand dollar bag could legitimately go on
sale for around two-hundred dollars. There are hundreds of online stores who
promise that your designer item will arrive within the original packaging and a
certificate of authentication. However, it is just as easy to replicate a
certificate as it is to replicate a handbag. Despite the police presence on the
streets, these illegal vendors are selling their stolen designs online in order
to make it more accessible. The picture below displays two Louis Vuitton
wallets. One is fake and one is real, but is it truly easy to guess which one
costs forty dollars and which one costs seven-hundred and seventy five?
The first
wallet pictured is the fake one and is made out of cheap, replica leather as
opposed to the bottom, which has been created out of Louis Vuitton’s signature
monogram canvas. While the quality may be different, they look undeniably
similar and the resemblance is uncanny. This demonstrates the simple task of
replicating designer brands, which is similar to the ability that people have
to access illegal downloading websites, such as ‘The Pirate Bay.’
In response
to these crimes, Manhattan Councilwoman, Margaret Chin, is aiming to inflict
harsher penalties on the trade of counterfeit items. She has proposed a Bill
with greater consequences and harsher fines which seeks to further criminalise the
theft of design. However, with the internet so easily accessible these days, it
may be quite difficult to regulate every online store selling imitation designer
items, just as it would be to completely end illegal file-sharing and piracy. The
media therefore must use additional methods, such as devaluation, in order to prevent
people from committing crimes involving piracy and participating in illegal
file-sharing.
Sources:
Martin, B, Moore, C and Salter, C. (2010) ‘Sharing music files: tactics of a challenge to the industry’, First Monday, vol. 15, no. 12
Gregory F. Treverton, Carl Matthies, Karla J. Cunningham, Jeremiah Goulka, Greg Ridgeway and Anny Wong, 2009. Film piracy, organized crime, and terrorism. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation.
Images: http://www.google.com.au/imgres?client=firefox-a&hs=tuC&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&biw=1280&bih=920&tbm=isch&tbnid=yC6Qb9TOU07ewM:&imgrefurl=http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch001042.htm&docid=ES-K64VBuyOkpM&imgurl=http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/h/hacker.jpg&w=200&h=141&ei=qKYNUv2_B8rbkQWC0ICgBQ&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:47,s:0,i:228&iact=rc&page=3&tbnh=112&tbnw=160&start=47&ndsp=26&tx=116&ty=54
http://www.google.com.au/imgres?client=firefox-a&hs=tuC&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&biw=1280&bih=920&tbm=isch&tbnid=0deh7LHicWOxuM:&imgrefurl=http://paganwriting.wordpress.com/author/paganwoman/&docid=8H2xWwYlZrMgsM&imgurl=http://paganwriting.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/filesharing.jpg&w=366&h=275&ei=qKYNUv2_B8rbkQWC0ICgBQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&page=1&tbnh=186&tbnw=259&start=0&ndsp=20&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0&tx=408&ty=222
Louis Vuitton image source: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&ved=0CF4QFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nydailynews.com%2Fnew-york%2Ffeeling-believing-fake-handbags-article-1.1373364&ei=SqsNUvLGG4KPkwW2goDIBQ&usg=AFQjCNG7v5QVV0lTLy11WeYpxzmmpXhtOA&sig2=OrBaC4tnXGFzc-_IYbK_oQ&bvm=bv.50768961,d.dGI
I enjoyed reading your post and I like the many examples you use to back up your statement...I specifically like the example of two LV wallets... I must admit, I myself have bought a couple of each: real and replica...but nevertheless, I don’t see it as a wrong doing...because at the end of the day, we – I, indeed paid for those alternatives, nobody else. I know that many of us would argue the fact of being honest and ethical, but how many of us would like to pay $700+ just for the ‘name’? and I think that’s where the argument of devaluation comes in to practise.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, I personally think file-sharing is not too bad, honestly speaking; it’s not something that we as an individual could do to prevent it from occurring.
Ethical issue? Yes, perhaps on occasions, but it’s all to do with our conscious mind and on many occasions things are may be done unintentionally, therefore when I heard word such as dishonest, criminal, terrorist, etc. I think is a little ridiculous. Like you said, the industry itself indeed is confused, so who are to say it’s wrong to file share?
A very interesting blog, but I found it a bit long, sorry and do apologise for the stuff up with the previous 2 post :-)
Lauren, I agree with your statement that , “when the internet launched, it generated an entire range of new crimes, such as piracy and illegal file-sharing which can be committed online” and I also agree the technology is developing quicker than the law and loopholes are making it hard to both track and enforce the law. It is also confusing because some music artists are publicly condoning the illegal downloading of material that keeps them from earning money off it and also being able to track it in terms of sale milestones while some are leading the way by leaking their clips onto YouTube exclusively. It is also interesting that you raise the idea that calling it a crime implies “that with one simple click of ‘download now’, one will be seen as a dishonourable criminal who can be compared to the likes of a terrorist” and although I too agree it is not on the same scale but it raises the question that just because everyone is doing it, does that make it right?
ReplyDeleteThis post gave me really great insight into sharing files online! Great in-depth discussion! I agree with you in the way that when I see an advertisement about piracy I feel nervous and uncomfortable as well! It is confusing as well as the music industry employs devaluation and validation tactics to different artists. On one hand some artists are labelled criminals for file sharing and sampling and on the other hand observers in the industry praise artists such as Girl Talk who samples music from other artists! So as a society we are sometimes left sitting on the fence. I also enjoyed your discussion about copies of handbags etc :) Great work on including multiple examples to support your argument!
ReplyDeleteMorgan :)
Hi Lauren
ReplyDeleteI like your post and really enjoy reading it. You found many examples and did a lot of research, I should study like you do....
I think copyright is an issue that most of people care about, we all create things, like our blogs, I don't want any one copy it without any reference. I think some people are thinking copyright is not their business, they don't care about that, what they want is to make their own profit and prejudice the interests of others, but if one day, someone else copy what they created, they will start to think about what they did before.
Thank you for giving us a good post to read.
Linrong Li