In the chapter “Six
Faces of Piracy” by
Ramon Lobato, Lobato
discusses digital piracy within the context of theft, free enterprise, free speech,
authorship, resistance and access. Aside from the section on theft, his
portrayal takes on a largely neutral and sometimes positive form, leading the
reader to believe he is likely not opposed to piracy, or at least does not
actively advocate against it. Since the MPAA propagates a one-sided, completely
negative view of piracy and is almost equally opposed by pro-piracy advocates, Lobato’s expansion of
piracy from its two dimensional playing field is refreshing. However, even
though his commentary on the societal implications of piracy within a subtly technologically
oppressed regime is insightful, people still tend to focus almost exclusively
on piracy as theft. In fact, some people will go to great lengths to reinforce
this concept, as
one company has revealed.
Recently, the owner of the
file-sharing site UploaderTalk.com revealed that the site was a honeypot designed
to accumulate information about users and the file and web hosts. It has since
been purchased by the anti-piracy company Nuke Piracy, and the owner claims to
be working for the company now. The
owner, WDF, seems quite proud of his operation, declaring “I collected info on
file hosts, web hosts, websites. I suckered shitloads of you”. WDF used to be a
moderator of another file-sharing site, WJunction, where members could make
money from uploading content. It is unclear if members could do the same at
UploaderTalk, but based on the small member population (around a thousand) it
seems unlikely. WDF has not yet announced what will be done with the
information gathered during the sites one-year run, but it is likely not going
to be good for its members. It seems obvious that WDF and Nuke Piracy take the
viewpoint of piracy as theft, however, in congratulating themselves they have
conveniently avoided the fact that UploaderTalk encouraged piracy.
 |
| UploaderTalk would've been a Facilitator |
Until it was announced that
UploaderTalk had been a honeytrap, it had been a file-sharing website where
members could upload and download largely pirated content. According to WDF,
this certainly constitutes theft and is therefore wrong. However, he does not
take into account that he is the one who made it all possible; he created the
site, therefore he enabled all the activities that occurred under its domain. Doesn't
this make him guilty as well? He went to great lengths to set up an operation
that would “catch” distributors of pirated content, but in the process he
ensured that content would be accessible to more people. The MPAA makes the
issue of piracy seem like “good guy” versus “bad guy”, with them and their
anti-piracy counterparts playing the roles of “good guys” in their attempt to expunge
piracy from the face of the Earth. However, as WDF has proved, it is rarely
that simple. As Lobato pointed out, the financial losses to the media industry
due to piracy, while often exaggerated, remain substantial. Isn’t
there a better way for anti-piracy groups to go about their mission without deceiving
and entrapping users who are completely unaware of their ulterior motives? Two wrongs
don’t make a right, and here it looks like no one comes out on top.
No comments:
Post a Comment