Post on 18-Dec-2014
description
MAC281 robert.jewitt@sunderland.ac.uk
1
Early discourse surrounding file-sharing fell into 2 camps: 1. File-sharing threatens the livelihood of artists 2. Fan-friendly celebratory explanations on how to
‘do’ file-sharing
First point reconfigured as: 1. File-sharing threatens the livelihood of
conglomerates (Rodman & Vanderdonckt, 2006: 245-6)
2
3
4
download music = lost sales revenue a limited economic notion
music is prone to personal, cultural, social & political meaning processes
5
Bagdikian (2004) claims that media monopolies not only know this, they count on it. Fans &‘their’ favourite band/artist/song/etc
6
7
1. The reasons given by social scientists as to why people file share
2. Explanation how music gets online
3. The reasons given by pirates as to why people share files
8
Between 3-10% of artists recoup industry expenses (Leyshon, 2005: 187)
EMI sales down by £50m in 2006 Profit of £110m
Industry is not interested in merely making a profit, but in maximising profits
9
Users seek ‘to redress perceived moral and economic wrongs’ (Rojek, 2005: 362) Rich vs. poor Music industry vs. music fans The suits vs. the scene
10
The industry not only makes money from music, but from the hardware used to pirate it
(Rodman & Vanderdonkct, 2006: 253-4)
Social bandits don’t see themselves as criminals
‘Normalization’ thesis (Parker 1998, 2002)
11
(Rojek, 2005: 365)
12
‘Owners of Mac computers were presented with a product that extended the performance of their computers. The issue of law-breaking was obscured by Apple-Mac’s tried and tested “Think Different” advertising campaign, which privileged Mac users as distinctive, creative mavericks operating in consumer culture which, by implication, was portrayed as bland and docile’
A collection of secretive Release Groups Kudos for being the 1st with a pre-
release piece of: Software CD/DVD Video games eBooks code
13
14
15
16
17
18
Exclusive invite-only private torrent community
Specialised in high quality sound recordings
Registered in the UK, hosted in the Netherlands and had users from over 150 countries.
19
20
21
22
Air: Pocket Symphony Release date: March 5th 2007 Arcade Fire: Neon Bible Release date: March 5th 2007 LCD Soundsystem: Sound of Silver Release date: March 19th 2007
Kings of Leon: Because of the Times Release Date: April 2nd 2007 Explosions in the Sky: All of a Sudden I Miss Everyone Release date: February 26th 2007
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
The ‘Hydra’?
1. File-sharers resent years of overpriced products (expensive CDs & ‘filler’)
2. Pre-release exclusivity 3. Discover new music/ lost classics without financial risk 4. Community spirit (private sites, social networks, blogs) 5. Very easy to do and low risk! 6. Reaction against mainstream mass-produced pap/pop 7. Fan ownership of musical products & free will vs. industry 8. DRM encourages passivity and limits future
development/creativity 9. The sound quality of legitimate digital music is insufficient
for many audiophiles 10. Music consumption has changed
31
Gillespie (2006) identifies users of various technologies have tampered with them to produce innovative and imaginative results (culture of hacking)
Remixing? Mash-ups? Bootlegs? Intellectual property vs. end-users
(see www.eff.org) ‘Fair Use’ law
32
33
DVDs: RCE; CSS; Macrovision
HD-DVD restrictions Microsoft Vista
Last.FM, Pandora, MySpace, etc
34
35
Mackay & Gillespie, 1992: 698-9
‘People are not merely malleable subjects who submit to the dictates of a technology; in their consumption, they are not the passive dupes suggested by crude theorists of ideology, but active, creative and expressive – albeit socially situated – subjects. People may reject technologies, redefine their functional purpose, customize or even invest idiosyncratic symbolic meanings in them. Indeed they may redefine a technology in a way that defies its original, designed and intended purpose … However, the appropriation of a technology cannot be entirely separated from its design and development: technologies are designed for particular purposes’
36
B. Bagdikan, 2004, The New Media Monopoly, Boston: Beacon Press. Tarleton Gillespie, 2006, ‘Designed to “effectively frustrate”: copyright, technology and the agency of
users’ in New Media & Society, Vol. 8, No. 4. Courtney Love, 2000, ‘Courtney Love does the math’ available at
http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/index.html Hugh Mackay & G Gillespie, 1992, ‘Extending the Social Shaping of Technology Approach: Ideology
and Appropriation’ in Social Studies of Science, Vol. 22, No. 4. H. Parker, J. Aldridge & F. Measham, 1998, Illegal Leisure: the Normalization of Adolescent
Recreation Drug Use, London: Routledge. H. Parker, L. Williams & J. Aldridge, 2002, ‘The normalisation of “sensible” recreational drug use:
further evidence from the North-West England Longitudinal Study’ in Sociology, Vol. 36, No. 4. Gilbert B. Rodman & Cheyanne Vanderdonckt, 2006, ‘Music For Nothing Or, I Want My MP3: The
regulation and recirculation of affect’ in Cultural Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2-3. Chris Rojek, 2005, ‘P2P Leisure exchange - net banditry and the policing of intellectual property’ in
Leisure Studies, Vol. 24, No. 4 Robbie Williams, 2003, ‘Music piracy “great”, says Robbie’ available at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/2673983.stm http://www.eff.org/
37
Background links
38