a Little Light

Sharing is Caring
As file sharing runs rampant, the industry must adopt, not attack

    I’m a criminal, and you likely are as well. Regardless if you tried KaZaa once to hear the latest Kelly Clarkson single, or if you keep your uTorrent client humming to keep your ratio high with a private tracker, you and I are guilty by the standards of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). But as the RIAA scrambles to file lawsuit after lawsuit towards file sharers in an attempt to alienate the consumers, I mean, hunt down terrible criminals, maybe it’s time we evaluate the mindset of the youth today and adjust industry business models to reflect the new digital era.

    I would like to think of pirating music as a modern day library. You download, or borrow, what music you feel may be interested in. If you enjoy the product, you support the artist by spreading their talents by word of mouth, paying exorbitant fees to attend live concerts, purchase merchandise, or buy a higher quality version of their work via vinyl or DVD. If you don’t, well, that’s the last time you’ll give those guys a spin. The issue today is that artists are perceived to be “rich enough” and are producing lower quality work. As we witness the homes of artists through shows such as “MTV Cribs,” it can become difficult to emphasize and feel remorse over stealing their music. More importantly, music in America today has gone downhill. I’m sorry, but if you think you can squeeze another $16.99 out of me by telling me to “crank, super soak, or superman dat hoe,” for four straight minutes, you are sadly mistaken.

    The newest iPod classic now has 160GB storage capacity. That’s nearly 40,000 songs or $40,000 if you use the iTunes to purchase your music. Oh, and by the way, the music you purchase there is crippled by Digital Rights Management (DRM), has a relatively low bite rate, can only be stored on one iPod and played on 5 platforms. Meanwhile, the content found on OiNK and other sites are of studio quality, can be played on any platform, and most importantly, free. It doesn’t take a genius to realize what route the average competent consumer will obtain their content, legally correct or not.

    As the public has made their choice clear, I only wish that Washington State University would reflect this new standard. Schools such as the University of Washington inactively monitors file sharing traffic, and does not attempt to vilify individuals who elect to file share. In fact, programs such as DC++ run actively on the University’s bandwidth, almost encouraging file sharing. Users only get in trouble if the RIAA sends a pre-settlement letter, and UW will only forward pre-settlement letters to individuals accused of copyright infringement when they are reasonably identifiable. To date, 15 letters have been passed along to students, according to the university’s official website. In contrast, WSU’s ResNet actively monitors traffic looking for file sharers. If found, the offenders’ network access is immediately shut down, must take a class, and have their hard drive thoroughly inspected. Furthermore, violators could be submitted to the student conduct board or to law enforcement officials. Without stating file sharing is okay, I would like to see WSU revisit their current outdated, unrealistic, and cumbersome policy. Instead of wasting time inspecting and clearing hard drives, it may be more beneficial to perform other tasks such as solving the computer issues of students in a more timely fashion.

    Times have changed, it’s time we see the industry reflect and accommodate this change.