By Dr. Philip Baczewski, Director of  Academic Computing and User Services

Internet Issues Illuminated

It was reported today that the Monastery Monk Scribes of Allemagne (MMSA) filed suit against Gutenberg Printing for infringing on their sole right to copy sacred texts. Their argument states that printing with movable type might induce the illegal copying of all sorts of scribable texts and have asked that movable type be ruled illegal. If successful, the MMSA suit could greatly reduce the use of printed materials, and deny bragging rights for some libraries and rare book collectors 500 years in the future.

OK, I made that up. But what would have happened if the producers of the media (scribes) had objected to and suppressed this new way of distributing content? No printed text, no typewriters, no teletypes, no computer text, no e-mail, no Internet, no World Wide Web. On the bright side, Rupert Murdock wouldn't have been able to build his newspaper publishing empire and start up Fox News.

Supreme Arguments

Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments about the use of peer-to-peer (p2p) Internet software and the alleged exchange of copyrighted media content. Lower courts have ruled that as in the case of the VCR, the technology cannot be banned just because it has a potential copyright violating use, especially when it can be shown that the technology has demonstrated or potential legal uses.

The group that originally tried to ban the VCR, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) along with its bedfellow, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) are apparently trying to get the "Betamax rule" overturned. Not content with that, the RIAA recently announced that it was suing 25 students at 18 different Internet2-connected Universities. Watch out Gutenberg -- you could be next!

Supreme Hyperbole?

The RIAA all along has claimed that file sharing and Internet downloads have accounted for the drop in sales of Music CDs. A recent study of Canadian music sales seems to negate this argument. The article points out that there may be other reasons why sales, measured in total dollars, may have declined between 1999 and 2004. These include the beginning and rise of DVD sales and less inclination of people to listen to music, in favor of activities like cell phone conversations, video games, watching movies, and surfing the Internet.

This study seems to echo the findings of an earlier one done by researchers at the Harvard Business School and the University of North Carolina. In fact, they found that downloads actually correlated with increased sales of the most popular songs and that file sharing could not explain the decline in CD sales from 2000 to 2002.

Supreme Arrogance?

I find it interesting that the commercial news media seems to have collective amnesia regarding the past actions of RIAA member companies, choosing instead to cast out-of-control college students as the villains in these modern dramas. It was only a few year ago, however, that five major recording companies settled a price-fixing lawsuit with 39 states in the U.S. According to a USA Today Article, "Attorneys general in the two states, who were joined in the lawsuit by 39 other states, said that the industry kept consumer CD prices artificially high between 1995 and 2000. . . ."

When you take away someone's ability to cheat their consumers, lower profits will probably be the result. Combine this with the centralization of radio music programming, and the apparent unwillingness of the major labels to deviate from the cookie cutter formulas that feed that programming, and I think you might have an explanation as to why CD sales have waned. As Shakespeare might have said (if he just could have found a technology to reproduce his works), "the fault, dear labels, is not in your sales, but in your stars."

Supreme Paradigm Shift

I think that there's another force in play here which will result in a steady decline in music CD sales regardless of how many people the RIAA sue. People want the convenience of online music. Apple Computer has illustrated that, given the chance, people will buy their music online. They don't want to steal it. The same pattern can't be far behind with video. It's the convenience that people are after, and devices like the iPod mean that you no longer have to carry around the media to enjoy the content. As hard drive sizes increase, you won't need the DVDs to take the movie with you.

Technologies catch on because they are more useful, efficient, or accessible than their predecessor methods. The British Library relates about Gutenberg's printing that "the book had such neat lettering that [Cardinal] Carvajal would be able to read it without his glasses." You can't underestimate the power of convenience. I think the RIAA and MPAA better put on their glasses and read the handwriting on the wall.

Webliography

States settle CD price-fixing case
David Lieberman, USA TODAY

Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation Settlement

CD Sales Not Reduced by File Sharing, Say Researchers at Harvard Business School and University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Supreme Court may redefine file swapping
John Borland, CNET News.com

Piercing the peer-to-peer myths: an examination of the Canadian experience
Michael Geist, First Monday

RIAA cracks down on Internet2 file-swapping
John Borland, CNET News.com

Gutenberg's Life - The years of the Bible
British Library

Return to top