User:Mderrick
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ethics of file sharing is a subfield of ethics specifically relating to the ethical implications of file sharing over computer networks and the Internet.
With the invention of the internet many ethical issues that need to be dealt with have arisen, and one of the biggest is file sharing. File sharing is when people who are connected to the internet use programs to download music, movies, video games, and other copyrighted electronic material from each other.
Contents |
[edit] Types of File Sharing
There are many options for sharing files on the internet. One of the most popular is peer-to-peer networks, or P2P networks. Some of the most popular networks are Kazaa, Ares Galaxy, Morpheus, Grokster and StreamCast, to name a few. With these networks, the user downloads a program to their computer that allows them to connect to the network. Then with this program the user can search the shared media on other users’ computers and download it from them across the internet. These networks allow the sharing of just about every type of file imaginable, from songs, to DVD quality feature length movies, to video games. However, these types of networks are mostly used for music.
One of the most popular ways to get very large files like movies, computer applications, and video games is to use Bittorrent, another type of peer-to-peer network. With BitTorrent the large media files are broken down into smaller chunks which are then transferred to the peer depending on the fastest possible connection to the missing piece; all of this is done while the peer is uploading the pieces it already has to other users. This type of file sharing is most popular and useful for large movies and games. It can also be used for music, but usually users download music by the album or artist instead of a couple of songs.
[edit] Justification
Those who illegally share files often believe that it does not cause harm. Advocates claim that in fact sharing helps the affected industry by allowing the consumer to sample the product before spending the money to purchase it. This in turn generates new fan base as many discover bands that would be impossible to discover otherwise, thus generating far more accurate album sales. This often the case with movies and video games too, because downloaded games and movies are often not at full quality, or they lack some materials like an instruction manual or DVD bonus features. So once the consumer is allowed to sample it, they might decide to go out and buy the full legal version, where as they might never had bought it have had they not been allowed to sample the media on their computer first.
In the case of music, another argument is the alleged overpricing of CDs. It is often claimed that CDs are far too expensive, and the consumer should not have to pay the entire cost of a CD when in fact only one or two songs are wanted from the album.
Another justification for file sharing is that the companies from which the intellectual property is being stolen are large and generate high profits, and can thus afford the price of some copies being obtained illegally.
Another reason people feel that sharing files is not illegal is due to the fact that nothing physical is actually being taken. Most people would feel very differently about going into a store and stealing a CD, than they would about going online and downloading an album, even though it is essentially the same thing. Downloading files from the internet just does not feel the same as physically stealing for most people. File sharing is not necessarily illegal. Nearly all shareware, freeware, and open source software may be shared as much as the end user wishes, depending on the end user disclaimer for that specific piece of software. Other non-software related intellectual property may be shared legally in any way the end user desires. Content in the public domain can also freely be shared
[edit] Detractors and Industry effects
The music and other files that are downloaded are the work of the artist, programmer, or film director that made them, not public property. When people share files, one song that someone shares can be downloaded by another person and shared by them, then two copies can be shared and the process repeats to effectively create thousands of digital copies of a song from the one original file. Thus the band that recorded the song does not get paid for any of the thousands of illegal copies that were made.
Not only does sharing files decrease the income of the actors and bands, it especially affects the staff that works for them. For the film industry it is the set builders and makeup artists that take the fall. If someone downloads a movie from the internet, that person will not go to see the movie in theaters or buy the DVD. If that happens then the production studios do not make as big of a profit and then do not have as much money to pay their employees.
File sharing could also have a larger consequence on the economy as a whole, as well as on the music, film, and gaming industries. If file sharing is allowed to continue unchecked and grow even larger, eventually more and more people will not feel the need to buy the media they want; instead they will download all of it. If enough people switch to downloading instead of purchasing, then the media industries will not make enough money to keep producing. This will result in fewer people being interested in going into the film, music, or gamming industries, because there would not be as much profit in it for them. For example, if people were allowed to steal cars from car manufacturers without consequences, the car makers would not make any money and eventually would stop making cars because there would be no profit in it for them. On the very extreme end, media industries might be forced to fold; this would cause a massive loss of jobs and gaping hole in the economy. This probably would not happen but there could be a massive reshaping of the music and film industries and how they try to sell their product.
One thing that the media industries might do to compensate for a lack of sales is to raise prices. The film industry might raise ticket prices at movie theaters and the cost of DVDs, the music industry might start charging more for CDs, and the computer gaming industry could start charging more for its games. All of these things are already fairly expensive, and increasing their prices would hurt the consumer even more. As the prices become higher and higher people will start looking for cheaper ways to get this media and more people will turn to downloading files from the internet, causing an even greater downward spiral.
- Further information: Copyright infringement
- Further information: www.mredkj.com
[edit] Legality of file sharing
In 2004 there were an estimated 70 million people participating in online file sharing Delgado. With that many people sharing files online it is virtually impossible to stop all of them by tracking them down one by one and prosecuting them. It is often the case that only file sharers uploading large quantities of illegal files will be prosecuted by authorities, if they can be located at all.
One of the reasons there are so many file sharers online is that the general opinion is that file sharing is not wrong. Fifty-eight percent of Americans who follow the file sharing issue consider it acceptable in at least some circumstances CBS News. Nearly 70% of 18 to 29 year olds think that file sharing is okay in some circumstances CBS News, and the 18 to 29 years olds are the age group that does the majority of the downloading.
Even though there are so many people file sharing that do not believe it is wrong, the music industries are still trying to crack down on it. One of the biggest ways that the media industry, especially the recording industry, has been trying to crack down on file sharing is by going after the peer-to-peer networks. The most noticeable case was when the recording industries brought down Napster in 2001, and since then they continue to pursue the P2P networks. In 2005 the United States Supreme Court heard a case between MGM and Grokster, a P2P network. The Supreme Court ruled that the creators of P2P networks can be held responsible if the intent of their program is clearly to infringe on copyright laws MGM Studios v Grokster. There are more cases pending against other peer-to-peer networks, such as Kazaa. The downfall of P2P networks could deal a major blow to internet file sharing. However, there are so many different P2P networks it would be very hard to stop them all; besides, P2P networks are not the only way to share files, and more ways could be discovered.
[edit] Alternatives
Because of the general outcry by the big media industries about file sharing, there are fully legal alternatives to downloading music, movies and games that are being developed. For music, Napster and iTunes are arising as ways to legally download music from the internet. Napster is a service that charges $9.95 a month to download an unlimited amount of songs from their list of over 1 million. iTunes charges a flat 99 cents per song, and lower that price when you buy a whole CD. While both of these services require you to pay, they are relatively inexpensive and they encourage people to download musical legally. There are also similar services for movies and video games, like Netflix, Blockbuster Online, and Game Fly, where you pay a monthly fee to rent a few movies or games at a time and as soon as you return them you receive new ones. These movie and gaming services do not allow you to own the movie or game, however you can keep them as long as you wish.
In the end, the fact remains that online file sharing is great resource for obtaining free songs, movies, and games. In the case of music especially it is a great way for people to grow their tastes and discover new artists. Ultimately though, the decision of whether to purchase or download is left up to the individual and their convictions about their actions.
