The Ethics of Piracy in the Music Industry

Q2 Arts and Humanities Journal of Information Ethics Pub Date : 2009-09-01 DOI:10.3172/JIE.18.2.14
S. Ponelis, J. Britz
{"title":"The Ethics of Piracy in the Music Industry","authors":"S. Ponelis, J. Britz","doi":"10.3172/JIE.18.2.14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Piracy in the music industry is now a growing global phenomenon, a fact repeatedly bemoaned by the major record companies. Piracy has always been a problem but the rise of new information and communication technologies (ICT) have made it a straightforward and relatively uncomplicated exercise to commit. Piracy through file sharing and illegal downloads alone may have cut album sales by as much as a quarter in recent years (Edgecliffe-Johnson, 2005) with as many as 40 illegal downloads for every legal one (Chaffin and Van Duyn, 2006:1). In response the music industry has campaigned for stricter intellectual property rights (IPR) laws enforcing their rights over music it records, produces and distributes. But the question remains: what does piracy by consumers signal to the music industry and society at large (if anything)?In order to answer this question this paper will be structured in the following manner: first, a broad introduction to the problem will be offered, namely, how music companies have skewed the balance between the creators and consumers of music with the resulting circumvention of financial compensation by means of piracy that is enabled by ever-improving ICTs. Second, piracy and the causes thereof as found in literature are discussed. Third, ethics, in particular normative ethics, is elaborated upon. Last, against this background the ethics (or lack thereof ) of piracy is discussed and possible answers to the question are given. Note that this paper does not attempt to address piracy on a commercial scale, but rather focuses on the individual who either perpetrates piracy by supporting counterfeits or bootlegs and/or engages in digital piracy. Neither is the issue addressed for geographic locations where IPR is not inherent in the cultural and legal tradition although the levels of music piracy are not insignificant.Music, the Music Industry, and Intellectual Property RightsMusic predates the written word with different cultures developing different styles of music which vary widely not only between cultures but also within a particular culture over time. The purpose for which music is composed and performed today ranges from religious or ceremonial to entertainment where it is sold as a product in the marketplace.The music industry creates, performs, promotes, and preserves music (note that the term does not encompass traditional music or the system of courtly patronage). Music is created by musicians and two main categories can be distinguished: amateur and professional. Amateur musicians compose and perform music for their own personal pleasure and do not attempt to derive income from music; as such, they are not part of the \"formal\" music industry until they become professional. Professional musicians attempt to derive income from their efforts in order to support the creation of further music; they can be employed by institutions (such as symphony orchestras, music schools, etc.), perform freelance work, or transform their work into a product to be sold in the marketplace.Musicians' work is protected so that the act of creation can be supported and stimulated by means of compensation for their creation (Prakash, 1999). These creations are referred to as intellectual property (IP), which is defined as the means of acquiring ownership over a particular resource that is intangible in nature. Du Plessis (1999) defines intellectual property as incorporeal or intangible property that comes into existence through the mental or intellectual activity and creativity of a person; once created the property has an independent existence separate from and outside of the person of the creator and has commercial value and thus merits legal protection. Most Western societies have accepted the social contract that in effect states:If you create intellectual property that will ultimately enter the public domain, and, thus add to our society's store of knowledge, we will give you an artificial and temporary monopoly over that property [Conlon, 2000:12]. …","PeriodicalId":39913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Ethics","volume":"18 1","pages":"14-26"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3172/JIE.18.2.14","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Piracy in the music industry is now a growing global phenomenon, a fact repeatedly bemoaned by the major record companies. Piracy has always been a problem but the rise of new information and communication technologies (ICT) have made it a straightforward and relatively uncomplicated exercise to commit. Piracy through file sharing and illegal downloads alone may have cut album sales by as much as a quarter in recent years (Edgecliffe-Johnson, 2005) with as many as 40 illegal downloads for every legal one (Chaffin and Van Duyn, 2006:1). In response the music industry has campaigned for stricter intellectual property rights (IPR) laws enforcing their rights over music it records, produces and distributes. But the question remains: what does piracy by consumers signal to the music industry and society at large (if anything)?In order to answer this question this paper will be structured in the following manner: first, a broad introduction to the problem will be offered, namely, how music companies have skewed the balance between the creators and consumers of music with the resulting circumvention of financial compensation by means of piracy that is enabled by ever-improving ICTs. Second, piracy and the causes thereof as found in literature are discussed. Third, ethics, in particular normative ethics, is elaborated upon. Last, against this background the ethics (or lack thereof ) of piracy is discussed and possible answers to the question are given. Note that this paper does not attempt to address piracy on a commercial scale, but rather focuses on the individual who either perpetrates piracy by supporting counterfeits or bootlegs and/or engages in digital piracy. Neither is the issue addressed for geographic locations where IPR is not inherent in the cultural and legal tradition although the levels of music piracy are not insignificant.Music, the Music Industry, and Intellectual Property RightsMusic predates the written word with different cultures developing different styles of music which vary widely not only between cultures but also within a particular culture over time. The purpose for which music is composed and performed today ranges from religious or ceremonial to entertainment where it is sold as a product in the marketplace.The music industry creates, performs, promotes, and preserves music (note that the term does not encompass traditional music or the system of courtly patronage). Music is created by musicians and two main categories can be distinguished: amateur and professional. Amateur musicians compose and perform music for their own personal pleasure and do not attempt to derive income from music; as such, they are not part of the "formal" music industry until they become professional. Professional musicians attempt to derive income from their efforts in order to support the creation of further music; they can be employed by institutions (such as symphony orchestras, music schools, etc.), perform freelance work, or transform their work into a product to be sold in the marketplace.Musicians' work is protected so that the act of creation can be supported and stimulated by means of compensation for their creation (Prakash, 1999). These creations are referred to as intellectual property (IP), which is defined as the means of acquiring ownership over a particular resource that is intangible in nature. Du Plessis (1999) defines intellectual property as incorporeal or intangible property that comes into existence through the mental or intellectual activity and creativity of a person; once created the property has an independent existence separate from and outside of the person of the creator and has commercial value and thus merits legal protection. Most Western societies have accepted the social contract that in effect states:If you create intellectual property that will ultimately enter the public domain, and, thus add to our society's store of knowledge, we will give you an artificial and temporary monopoly over that property [Conlon, 2000:12]. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
音乐产业中的盗版伦理
如今,音乐行业的盗版已成为一种日益严重的全球现象,各大唱片公司对此一再表示遗憾。盗版一直是一个问题,但新的信息和通信技术(ICT)的兴起使它成为一个简单而相对简单的行为。近年来,仅通过文件共享和非法下载的盗版行为就可能使唱片销量减少多达四分之一(Edgecliffe-Johnson, 2005),每合法下载一次,就有多达40次非法下载(Chaffin和Van Duyn, 2006:1)。作为回应,音乐产业一直在争取更严格的知识产权(IPR)法律,以加强对其录制、制作和发行的音乐的权利。但问题仍然存在:消费者的盗版行为对音乐产业和整个社会(如果有的话)发出了什么信号?为了回答这个问题,本文将以以下方式构建:首先,将对这个问题进行广泛的介绍,即音乐公司如何扭曲了音乐创作者和消费者之间的平衡,从而通过不断改进的信息通信技术使盗版得以规避经济赔偿。其次,讨论了文学作品中的盗版现象及其成因。第三,对伦理学,特别是规范伦理学进行了阐述。最后,在此背景下,讨论了盗版的道德(或缺乏道德),并给出了问题的可能答案。请注意,本文并没有试图解决商业规模的盗版问题,而是关注那些通过支持假冒或盗版和/或从事数字盗版来实施盗版的个人。在知识产权并非文化和法律传统固有的地理位置,尽管音乐盗版的程度并非微不足道,但这个问题也没有得到解决。音乐,音乐产业和知识产权音乐在文字出现之前,不同的文化发展出不同的音乐风格,不仅在不同的文化之间,而且在一个特定的文化中,随着时间的推移,音乐风格也会有很大的不同。今天,音乐创作和演奏的目的从宗教或仪式到娱乐,在市场上作为产品出售。音乐产业创造、表演、推广和保存音乐(注意,这个词不包括传统音乐或宫廷赞助制度)。音乐是由音乐家创作的,主要分为两类:业余音乐和专业音乐。业余音乐家为自己的个人乐趣创作和演奏音乐,并不试图从音乐中获得收入;因此,在他们成为专业人士之前,他们不是“正式”音乐产业的一部分。专业音乐家试图从他们的努力中获得收入,以支持进一步的音乐创作;他们可以受雇于机构(如交响乐团、音乐学校等),从事自由职业,或者将他们的工作转化为在市场上销售的产品。音乐家的作品受到保护,这样他们的创作行为就可以通过对其创作的补偿来支持和刺激(普拉卡什,1999)。这些创造被称为知识产权(IP),它被定义为获得某种无形资源所有权的手段。Du Plessis(1999)将知识产权定义为通过一个人的精神或智力活动和创造力而存在的非物质或无形财产;财产一经创造,就具有独立于创造者个人之外的独立存在性,具有商业价值,理应受到法律保护。大多数西方社会已经接受了这样一种社会契约:如果你创造的知识产权最终将进入公共领域,从而增加我们社会的知识储备,我们将给予你对该财产的人为的、暂时的垄断。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Information Ethics
Journal of Information Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diversity Matters: Economic Inequality and Policymaking During a Pandemic A Survival Guide to the Misinformation Age: Scientific Habits of Mind Intellectual Privacy: Rethinking Civil Liberties in the Digital Age Hate Crimes in Cyberspace We Believe the Children: A Moral Panic in the 1980s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1