This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
CMU Weekly Editor's Letter
Editor’s Letter: A week of internet drama
By Andy Malt | Published on Friday 20 January 2012
The chances that you’ve missed the clash of opposing sides in the ongoing debate about web blocking this week, I would guess, are precisely zero.
The proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (or SOPA) which would introduce web blocks in America, and which has been working its way through US Congress for sometime, was the subject of a mass protest led by Wikipedia, which took its English language pages offline for 24 hours on Wednesday, with sites such as Google, Wired.com and The Cheezburger Network also joining in to varying degrees.
Wikipedia’s protest got its point across very well (even if not everyone quite understood it), laying out the online encyclopaedia’s reservations about the legislation on a black shroud over any page accessed. And the fact that, despite the apparent black-out, it was actually still very easy to gain access to the site made the point that, actually, web blocking measures aren’t generally that difficult to circumvent. (In this case, accessing the site via the mobile web, using cached copies of pages in Google search, or simply hitting the escape key before the page was blocked did the trick).
By the time the protest began, support for SOPA was already wavering in US political circles afterthe White House announced that it would block certain measures within it, and Congressmen continued to drop support as Wednesday’s protests spread throughout the web. Then earlier today it was announced that any vote on both SOPA and its cousin, the seperate but very similar Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA), would be postponed indefinitely, but only so those behind the bills can rework their proposals to address the specific objections the protestors raised.
So SOPA and PIPA, or at least the key aims they set out to achieve, are not dead. The music and movie industries will continue to lobby on the matter of web blocking, both in the US and elsewhere – Spain’s SOPA-esque Sinde Law is already in place, the Irish government is expected to launch some sort of anti-piracy measure later this month (though the major labels are already suing because they think it won’t go far enough), and in the UK one injunction to force ISPs to block a specific copyright infringing website based in another country has already been sought and granted (though rights owners would like a cheaper-to-use fast track system too).
And, of course, we had proof just yesterday that US rights owners can already make dramatic strikes against companies they believe are operating commercial operations based on piracy, when American authorities shut down MegaUpload completely and arrested several key execs. Given the severity of the US action against the Mega companies some have wondered why exactly the content companies need SOPA or PIPA in the first place, though the US authorities could only target MegaUpload in the way they did because – although a Hong Kong based company – most of Mega’s servers were in Virginia, within the juridiction of the US courts. SOPA and PIPA specifically deal with sites based abroad, where such dramatic swoops are not possible.
It’s also worth noting that the seemingly major scale of the operation against MegaUpload – including extraditions from New Zealand – is in part due to the other serious charges made against the Mega companies, including racketeering and money laundering, and it is those allegations which, if proven, would mean the company’s execs could be in prison for 20 years (the maximum sentence for copyright infringement in the US being five years).
And reading the charges against Mega, and its founders, including Kim ‘Dotcom’ Schmitz, you can’t help thinking this is exactly the sort of company over which content owners should have powers to act, wherever they may be based. The Anonymous group would clearly disagree with me, of course, having moved yesterday to take down the US Department Of Justice, RIAA and Universal Music websites in retaliation for the Mega arrests. Presumably that’s because they view anyone who dishes out free content to people online without permission as Robin Hood type characters, the good guys helping the little people against the big copyright owning conglomarates. But that viewpoint is to see everything in black and white with no shades of grey whatsoever.
Remember, this is a company that has, if the court papers filed against it are to be believed, made millions of dollars in profits from content it does not own, boosted its video service by downloading and re-uploading files from YouTube, and looked into incentivising users who upload large amounts of illegal content. Meanwhile, Kim Dotcom, who already has various convictions for fraud and embezzlement, has been driving around in a fleet of expensive cars with numberplates such as HACKER, MAFIA, and, er, POLICE. Surely even the most cynical major-label-hater can see why Schmitz et al have pissed the music and movie industries off? And we’ve not even mentioned the ‘Mega Song’ yet.
The attack on MegaUpload will have given the music and movie companies something to smile about in an otherwise tricky week in their long running fight against piracy. In the ideal world they’d like to see more dramatic attacks against those websites that prolifically infringe copyright. But such largescale actions won’t always be appropriate, partly for the aforementioned jurisdiction reasons, partly because the level of the charges against other sites may not be so severe. And it’s in these cases where the rights owners would say web blocking can come in – an easier less dramatic solution, which is less effective too (remember web blocks can always be circumvented), but at least makes a stand against those building businesses on infringement.
So, as I say, the campaign for web-blocking measures isn’t going to go away. Though nor will the opponents, who proved this week they are a major force to be reckoned with. There was much talk about defending the “free and open internet” amongst said opponents this week, which is something it’s easy to get behind, though I suspect many of us aren’t really sure what that means exactly.
I mean, just how free is the internet anyway? Most of us are concerned about fraud and viruses, and the distribution of pictures of abuse, and concede our online freedoms may be curtailed a little to tackle those issues. Millions of us use Google and Facebook to help us navigate the web, but in return we give up elements of our privacy to these major conglomerates. And how free and open is an internet where hacktivists can block an organisation’s ability to speak to the world just because they disagree with what that organisation says?
The content industries have to except there are limits to what can be achieved in combatting piracy, and that even justifiable systems for taking down genuine rogue operations (like MegaUpload, if current allegations are true) must not take out legitimate or even ‘grey area’ platforms as collatoral damage. And to that end naming your proposals Stop Online Piracy – as if an all out abolition of piracy whatever the cost is achievable and/or desirable – is probably unwise. But likewise, those who oppose SOPA should accept the internet can only by free and open to a point.
SOPA itself is clearly flawed – though not necessarily in all the ways opponents have claimed – there has been quite a bit of misrepresentation, either deliberate or due to laziness. Some people say uploading a video to YouTube could send you to prison under new laws, which is wrong on numerous levels – the proposed new laws would attack websites not individuals, YouTube is US based so would not be targeted via SOPA, and anyway the Google video platform is licensed and operates a takedown system assuring protection under the DMCA.
But – misinformation aside – SOPA was badly written, not least because it was far too vague as to what kind of websites, and what kinds of infringement, would be targeted, and failed to explain how websites that are fundamentally legit – even if some infringing content routinely appears – could ensure they were not suddenly hit with high speed web blocks.
As much as The Pirate Bay claims to be just like Google, there is clearly a difference between what the two sites do, even though both do link to unlicensed content. What we need is an anti-piracy system capable of applying common sense and distinguishing between such sites, and one which then introduces blocks that stop casual access to the infringing service without hindering other platforms that are basically, if not 100%, legit. SOPA was clearly not that system.
But that doesn’t mean said system cannot exist, it’s just that both sides in this debate need to be willing to budge a little. And actually, the content industries do seem willing to do some budging just now, even if that’s because they are suddenly on the defensive. But much of the anti brigade need to do some budging too, or at least give some serious and realistic thought as to what a “free and open” internet really means. A little bit of work, and perhaps that workable fairer system can be identified.
So there you go, that was almost an optimistic conclusion to all this, wasn’t it? Though record company people, please do remember that even if we find the more balanced solution to allow some moderate web blocking, this does not mean your traditional CD business – or even the digital equivalent (ie iTunes) – is suddenly going to spring back into life and carry on as before.
Going after rogue players making millions by infringing your rights is a justifiable thing to do – but it’s not a solution to the record industry’s woes. Ensuring legitimate music services are better than illegal ones, offering added value to core fans, and better integrating the various strands of the wider music business are all key to the successful future I still believe this industry can achieve. Things have moved on massively in recent years in this domain, but we’re not there yet, and there are still stumbling blocks – reluctant individuals and relic processes – which are hindering growth. You can have every web block you’d ever want, but without addressing those issues, we’re going nowhere.
Anyway, I didn’t even mean to write about the web block debate again this week – and I realise some of this is old ground well trodden before, both here and elsewhere in CMU, and beyond. But there’s been a lot to talk and think about regards piracy this week. So let’s talk and think about it, find better solutions for tackling this problem, but then get back to the business of pursuing new ways of developing, distributing and selling great artists and great music. If only because – if I can be selfish for one minute – artistic and commercial innovations in music are much more fun to write about than lawsuits and lobbyists.
Meanwhile, if you’re looking for some recommended reading while you think and talk about all this, here are some articles from this week, arguing on both sides, that it’s well worth checking out.
Wired UK: Sopa 101 – a guide to the USA’s proposed anti-piracy legislation
BBC News: Viewpoints – sites go offline in US piracy protest
Index On Censorship: Why is Wikipedia down?
Wikipedia: The Wikipedia blackout is over – and you have spoken
Billboard: SOPA anti-piracy controversy exposes Hollywood-Silicon Valley divide
Mashable: SOPA and PIPA won’t stop piracy
Stop The Wall: An open letter to Washington from artists and creators
The Register: White House shelves SOPA… now what?
The Guardian: What if the culture industry shut down for a day?
Andy Malt
Editor, CMU
Elsewhere on CMU this week…
PODCAST
This week’s podcast was recorded just before news of the MegaUpload shutdown and arrests broke, but Chris Cooke and I did discuss SOPA, the EMI sale opposition, the cancellation of the Big Chill and Big Day Out festivals, Michael Jackson’s musical based on the life and works of eighteenth century Scottish poet Robert Burns (really), and Alex James’ amazing investigation into the fast food industry. Look out for it all, ready to download here later this weekend.
IN THE NEWS
We’ve always known there would be opposition to the sale of EMI’s recordings and publishing divisions to Universal and Sony/ATV respectively, with pan-Europe indie label trade body IMPALA announcing it would call on European regulators to block the deals almost as soon as they had been announced. This week the UK’s Association Of Independent Music asked its members to write to their MPs opposing both deals, but perhaps more interestingly, Warner Music in the US hired a law firm that specialises in anti-trust cases, suggesting that it too might be preparing to launch an attempt to block one or both of the deals, presumably in the US.
Grooveshark was busy this week, launching an HTML5 web-based mobile app, which will allow it to get around the problem of having its conventional apps blocked from the Android and Apple app stores. Then it issued a subpoena to Digital Music News demanding information on the person who claimed in a comment on the blog that staff at the streaming service routinely upload unlicensed content to its servers. Then the Groovesharkers rounded off the week by withdrawing the service from Germany, claiming that the country’s publishing collection agency GEMA was demanding too much in royalties. GEMA responded by saying that there had been no negotiations about royalties whatsoever.
In the world of festivals, it was announced that this year’s New Zealand leg of the Big Day Out, which took place today, would be the last, as ticket sales drop and costs prove too high. Closer to home, this year’s Big Chill was cancelled, with organisers claiming that its proximity to the Olympics was making it difficult to book acts (because most musicians also complete in sport at an international level, presumably).
Not really news, but my favourite thing to appear in a newspaper this week was Blur bassist Alex James’ latest food column in The Sun. Heading down to the “beefy docks”, he examined how fast food is made, deducing that the manufacturing processes of companies like McDonald’s are brilliant and amazing. Also, McDonald’s food, it turns out, is almost exactly the same as you’d find in a Michelin-starred restaurant. Almost exactly.
FEATURES AND NEW MUSIC
This week, I spoke to Enter Shikari frontman Rou Reynolds as his band’s third album appeared at the top of the midweek charts. As well as that, we discussed politics (and his distaste for the term), the pros and cons of major labels, and the future of rock music. Porcelain Raft, whose debut album is out next week, put together a ten track playlist for us, which is wonderful. You should listen to it right away. And in his column this week, Eddy TM broke down the difficulties he’d had trying to select his favourite album of 2011.
In the Approved column, we had a full stream of Porcelain Raft‘s album (which like his playlist is wonderful), plus new tracks from New York techno producer Nicolas Jaar, Danish pop star Asbjørn, and London indie troupe Colours.
Elsewhere, we also brought you a full stream of Wiley‘s new album ‘Evolve Or Be Extinct’ (via The Guardian), new videos from Rusko and Stooshe, and new tracks from Sleigh Bells and Oberhofer.
