9 Because One Private Jet Just Isn't Enough...

The term Problematic Internet Usage (PIU), as Caplan describes it, encompasses, “maladaptive cognitions and behaviors involving Internet use that result in negative academic, professional, and social consequences.” While for the most part this seems to indicate an addiction of sorts, I believe that Internet usage can be problematic in more than just the immediate way (compulsive behavior, psychological need, etc.). A form of Internet usage that has been causing more and more problems for people that engage in it is Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing and so-called “illegal” downloading. These phenomena and their negative consequences are becoming more relevant at Cornell, as 16 students were served lawsuits for illegal file sharing activity.

Now, I personally do not believe that file sharing should be illegal, instead I think it really helps bands that don’t have the mass-market resources of big record companies and established acts, and that this free advertising is what truly scares the industry. However, for the present and the foreseeable future, the activity is going to remain classified as against the law. Because of this illegality and because of the increasing aggressiveness of the RIAA in pursuing even the odd infrequent downloader who just happened to be unlucky enough to import the wrong Metallica file, file sharing comes into Caplan’s definition of PIU through the “social consequences” part. No, we do not see people losing relationships and academic performance to the Internet with this phenomenon, as we do in online gaming or perhaps Facebook addiction. This online activity does, however, have a much different pull than gambling and Facebook. Namely, it offers us a chance to exercise some consumer muscle and only select tracks we might want to hear as opposed to buying an entire CD for just a few songs, combined with a lack of iTunes’ pesky Digital Rights Management software all for the low, low price of FREE. The opportunity to get something for nothing, while for the most part facing little exposure to real consequences (thanks to the perceived anonymity of the Internet) proves far too tempting for most casual users of file-sharing services. However, the damage being done to society by this heavily controversial issue is both tangible and intangible, and in both cases very real.

The students above each had the option to “settle” for the flat rate of $3,000 or face charges of $750 per song if they were sued and lost. For many, if not most, college students, this represents a rather daunting sum, when considered into the $160,000 we are already paying for the privilege of learning at Cornell. So file sharing, even when used very casually, can have very negative fiscal consequences and leave its user holding a very intimidating bag. Furthermore, the RIAA adopts a seemingly random policy of legal action, pursuing those users it can, oftentimes ignoring the bigger fish for the smaller ones just to prove a point. This hurts smaller, underexposed bands as explained earlier, and also fosters a sense of distrust between the consumer base and the artistry itself. How can we believe that a band is “all about the music” if they are so preoccupied with losing money to “illegal” downloading?

The issues around copyright infringement and file sharing are still the subject of much debate in the world right now and I encourage all of you to do more than just participate in it. Get involved. Become aware of both your rights and risks.

http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/11/9-harmless-or-harmful-look-at-online.html

http://comm245red.blogspot.com/2007/11/assignment-9-neverending-hunt.html