[Note: Be sure to listen to the "enhanced-with-extra-goodies" audio for this post. Scroll down to the bottom, click on "Play" or download as MP3. Enjoy! You're welcome! - Terry ]
So, what is the result of all the commotion about SOPA in the US? A day after WikiPedia went dark, we see that millions (literally) have responded. So what does this mean for you and me in our intellectual property?
Over 13 Million people fought to stop SOPA. This was a huge groundswell of anger over stifling free speech. Many felt that SOPA was dangerous and rightly so.
First of all, I produce a lot of intellectual content. As a professional speaker, an author, a blogger and Editor-in-Chief of a major corporate blog, this is very personal for me. I live in a few tribes where others are also producing content. This is information we’ve created and, no, we don’t want it stolen, even if it is relatively easy for the bad guys to steal. Stealing is immoral and wrong. This is how we earn a living and for someone to take what is another’s is simply not right.
However, in a world where we can easily take something that is digital and create fairly accurate copies of it (unlike a VCR copy of a tape years ago), the dynamics have changed.
The movie studios, who were behind a major portion of the SOPA push, have created content that they don’t want stolen. Understood. However, the way they tried to address it is all wrong and even counter-productive. You don’t make it the government’s role to shut down an entire website because of a theft. You wouldn’t shut down Macy’s because someone shoplifted some merchandise. You also wouldn’t shut down the whole section of town where that Macy’s store is located.
Too often government takes a sledgehammer to try and get rid of a problems with flies.
As a society, we’re still learning and groping for answers on how to handle all the confusion that comes from this new world of the digital frontier. Hey, some of it is like Indiana Jones in the first movie where, when he was asked by the lovely maid as he was confronting the bad guys, “Indiana, what are you gonna’ do?” His reply? ”I don’t know. I’m making this up as I go.”
Well, we’re doing that as we proceed now. That doesn’t mean it is a free for all and it is okay to steal. We still build upon previous knowledge and experiences. This is what the human race has done since we crawled out of the caves eons ago. We’ve learned that theft is not right for some very pragmatic reasons. If one steals from another, that other has less incentive to produce. That also means that what was stolen seems to make it okay for others to steal. And no, two wrongs do not make a right.
The answer? I’m not completely sure, but we do know that we have certain precepts on which to build. 1) Respect for others and their work. 2) Theft is wrong, 3) In the digital world, we have to adapt and change based on reality while still retaining principle #2.
Government usually starts with very good intentions and ends up with very bad results because of unintended consequences. The free market has many options and the more we explore what can be done without initiation of force, coercion or fraud, we’ll achieve a better solution. I think we have to be proactive as producers so that if someone steals something they 1) end up advertising for us with our material and 2) Don’t get everything they need in one package. I talk about this more in my coaching program but these are the basic concepts. Are we perfect? No, it is often difficult to be legal, but we have to make a strong effort to do what is right and correct when we err.
Congrats to Wikipedia and other sites who made a statement (like Google blocking their name). Jimmy Wales at Wikipedia is a strong believer in the morality of producing and being paid for what is yours. Thank you, Jimmy! Reddit also joined in the block while other sites like LifeHacker (one of my personal favorite sites) did not. Ultimately, this is what free choice is all about. Some will go dark while others, who might have the same opinion, will chose to be up and running while protesting. Free to Choose.
For the future, let’s keep up the conversation. Hey, that’s what social media is all about. Let’s be polite. When you disagree, be especially polite. That’s really the only way real change takes place. Somehow I think we’ll work this one out in time with full understanding of practical, legal, moral and other implications.
So what do you think? I’d love to hear from you and your thoughts on this very important issue. I look forward to hearing from you.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
{ 21 comments… read them below or add one }
It’s a vexed question Terry and I think you summarise the situation and the options very well.
I reckon that it all started when lots of people went somewhere in Asia (before the internet) and bought a pirated movie or a copied bit of music and we all tut tutted but did nothing about it. Because, like you, I am in the business of producing intellectual property I can say (hand on heart) I have never knowingly bought or played pirated material or copied something without the copyright owner’s permission.
But I believe I’d be in the minority.
By not taking action earlier we have kind of legitimised this electronic stealing.
So its gunna take real concerted action and education to get the “end stealers” (the users, the people who buy or download our material) to understand that they are stealing… and, boy, that’s a huge task.
But just as more and more people understand that we shouldn’t rape the environment so as they are educated will they come to understand that we shouldn’t pillage intellects.
Terry,
There is not doubt about it something needs t be done to protect the rights of authors and their intellectual property. As a few others have already referred to the concept of this problem needs to be solved by thinking at a higher level. A solution that provides some kind of motivation for people to do the right thing.
Great point, Phil. Perhaps the idea of a “digital dongle” would be appropriate. A user can download the content (whatever it is) but to get the full version (or better version) it requires the authorization which can be obtained from your receipt when purchased. Something along those lines could be the solution. For instance, an MP3 song could be downloaded at poor, say 8-bit, quality. If the user wants to upgrade to full 128K version, it requires a registration code. I’d want to run this by some who are much more knowledgable than me on this but this concept might work with various digital material.
Always good to hear from you, Phil. Thanx for the comments.
Yes, Randy. That is what happened. They started with good intentions but it could have had very negative results. Fortunately the public outcry stopped it in its tracks before it was law. All the more reason to remain vigilant and Net-savvy! Always nice to hear from you, Randy!
Hi Terry,
Well said. I agree with all your comments in the blog. Heavy handed legislation is not the answer.
Here are a few random thoughts…..
It seems that many people believe that ‘copyright’ means the right to copy. I think that part of the solution is education of consumers that infringing IP is theft and therefore socially unacceptable and wrong. How many of the people who illegally download films and music would be comfortable going into a physical store and shoplifting a DVD? Yes, there are ‘bad guys’ out there but I believe that society has a role to play.
In olden days there was a device called a dongle. A physical key that unlocked software. In an age of digital downloads it is impractical to require a special bit of hardware to use software. Is there some way of creating a similar idea that you can copy stuff but can’t view it without some sort of authentication? Just a thought.
Phil
So nice to hear from you, Shelle. Hope you are Misha are doing well. Please give him my regards.
Glad you liked my post. Yes, we must work to secure IP (intellectual property) but it is way beyond the scope of any government. The government in country A can pass a law saying something is illegal. However, if country B doesn’t enforce that and people in country B violate that law, their is little that country A can do about it. Ultimately the solution is up to the producers (that’s you and me!). We have to be extraordinarily creative and we are doing it now! Whoo Hoo!
Thanx for your comments, Shelle!
This was another case of something that did need to be addressed, but government overreacting with a Draconian measure that would gut the Bill of Rights and invade our privacy. It really did look like a done deal, so it’s very encouraging to know that the outcry actually did stop the bill.
-RG
Thank you for your comments, Doug,
You raise some good points. Yes, like in the Indiana Jones movie, we are making it up but we also hold some principles sacrosanct. 1) No theft. 2) Freedom of speech, 3) Genuine care for others and their well-being. We’re at a point where technology blurs what is possible and that creates some dissonance between points 1 and 2. However, as we “make it up as we go along” strongly guided by these principles, we will arrive at a workable solution. That solution will properly compensates producers fior their intellectual property and preserves the all-important free speech.
By the way, did you get a chance to listen to my enhanced audio of the post? You might find that helpful as well. I’d welcome your comments.
And yes, I firmly agree with your last sentence that technology is moving too fast for the government. That is a good thing. A bumbling leviathan Hobbesian bureaucracy can never hope to keep up with nimble, quick silver-like agility that the free market provides in any culture.
Thanx for your very astute comments, Doug. I look forward to hearing from you more.
Terry
some of it is like Indiana Jones in the first movie where, when he was asked by the lovely maid as he was confronting the bad guys, “Indiana, what are you gonna’ do?” His reply? ”I don’t know. I’m making this up as I go.”
Is that not stealing intellectual property? You are using it to make a point. You are using it without their permission. This has always been the case, its what we do as humans. Its like telling a joke that you made up, sooner or later (if its a good joke) it is repeated.
I for one dont like the fact that many speakers such as yourself are limiting the amount of content on YouTube of your speeches. I utilize YouTube to pick the speaker for my next conference. Just a little thing, but thats what I use it for.
I think technology is moving too quickly to be able to control through the Government. It has to be the person creating the content. You have to be smarter than your competitors.
Hi amigo Terry,
Excellent blog this morning. I had been thinking… yes but what about us who produce intellectual content? If not the sledgehammer approach, then what? So part of me is relieved that we are all just making it up as we go along and another part is reassured that if we do get it wrong, we will surely hear about it! And another part doesn’t know what it’s talking about anyway.
Your blog added a lot of clarity for me.
Hugs from Berlin,
Shelle
Diane, you’re so good! Thanx! And you can link it anywhere you want!
Be well, my friend!
Thank you very much for your reply, Steve. I hear you loud and clear. I’m also an author of books and have seen this happen. We are agreed that we need to protect IP (Intellectual Property) for all works. However, SOPA was not the way to do it. They would shut down whole websites without question. Oh, and then there’s that “not guilty till proven innocent” thingy we have in America. That cumbersome “right to trial by jury” just seems to have been overlooked with SOPA.
Yes, we need laws, but we also have to realize the reality of a world where laws in American just somehow don’t matter to many in other countries. We, as creators have to adapt and come up with other ways to foil the bad guys who want to steal and we have to do it 1) peacefully, and 2) without relying on an incompetent government (but, I’m redundant). That is the point that we have to address the issue in a 21st Century way —- not in a 17th Century manner. Protection of your IP? Absolutely. It is axiomatic! SOPA? No way. Let’s come up with better, more creative, more “bad guy stopping” ways that halt them in their tracks. There are ways to do that. Let’s continue the exploration. Thank you SO much for your comments, Steve. I look forward to hearing from you more.
Thank you, Peter. Yes, it is quite complicated but doing the research and studying it more shows we have to do better than SOPA. Thanx for your kind words, Peter.
Yes, Diane. We understand why they wanted it but they went about it the wrong way. Much too heavy-handed and it hurts much more than it will help any struggling producer of content. Thanx for sharing, Diane!
Thank you, Al. Yes, it seems this is what often happens regardless of the government anywhere in the world. They really, really really try (notice the emphasis?) to do the right thing. But, because human nature is what it is, inevitable problems emerge from a top-own government-imposed “solution.” Thanx for sharing and Look forward to hearing from you many more times in the future.
“Government usually starts with very good intentions and ends up with very bad results because of unintended consequences.”
A thousand years from now, people will be quoting the venerable philosopher, Terry Brock.
Terry, in that quote, you have summed up the fate of government. Fortunately, we live in a part of the world where our government, no matter how flawed, is still the best man can find.
We have to remember your quote and let our voices be heard so these minor course corrections happen.
Thank you, Terry.
Well said, Terry. I concur. I support free speech and SOPA threatens this.
Thanks Terry. The headings of the bill which suggest copyright protection is the objective seem harmless enough. Having experienced the havoc wreaked upon songwriters by the unrestricted downloading of music without consideration of royalty fees, etc. I’m all for protecting copyright.
But after having read some of the comments by bloggers at the links you offered, I can see where the concerns are. It’s probably better to have no legislation (if it could end up infringing or hindering free expression) than to give government the authority to shut down sites they may someday find politically distasteful.
I, too, am a creator of books, audio programs, systems, and other forms of intellectual property. When someone steals my material, it’s the equivalent of being robbed of income and, potentially, my livelihood.
What you’re saying in your post — “theft is wrong”, “we have to adapt” to the “reality” of things — isn’t much of a solution. Why do you not want a strong law in place, a law with real teeth, that protects content creators like us?
Consider this example: One of my ebooks is currently being distributed by an overseas “file sharing” website. (Without my permission, of course.) As soon as it became available on that site, sales of my ebook dropped to almost zero. We tried repeatedly to contact the website owners — information not easy to find, by the way — but got no response.
So it’s not just big Hollywood studios that are impacted by IP theft. It’s also thousands of hardworking creative entrepreneurs, like you and me.
You’re good! Can I steal this? : )
You’re good….can I steal this? : )