Downloading music or films without paying is often compared to stealing from a shop, but this is an outdated view according to the document. New communication technologies have changed the cultural industry by allowing people to easily produce and share music, videos and art from home. Sharing cultural productions online should be seen as a new form of common wealth that is protected and expanded through practices like copyleft, rather than punished.
Downloading music or films without paying is often compared to stealing from a shop, but this is an outdated view according to the document. New communication technologies have changed the cultural industry by allowing people to easily produce and share music, videos and art from home. Sharing cultural productions online should be seen as a new form of common wealth that is protected and expanded through practices like copyleft, rather than punished.
Downloading music or films without paying is often compared to stealing from a shop, but this is an outdated view according to the document. New communication technologies have changed the cultural industry by allowing people to easily produce and share music, videos and art from home. Sharing cultural productions online should be seen as a new form of common wealth that is protected and expanded through practices like copyleft, rather than punished.
Downloading music or films without paying is as much of a crime as
stealing from a shop.
In recent years the new communication technologies, including
internet, have completely changed the cultural industry. Nowadays we can produce music, videos, films and any kind of art at home and we can share data folders with anybody in almost everywhere around the world. In my opinion that data bank shared by members of a virtual community it’s a new cultural form that has broken olds rules, so it supposes others protocols of production, circulation and consumption. I believe that only in an old- fashioned thinking can be possible compare downloading music or film with steal a shop.
Indeed, there are copyrights and property rights that should be
protected. But in most cases this protections only benefit the greatest companies that monopolises the editorial, films or music markets. For instance, for many independents producers one of the best forms of announces a song, a video work or any other independent production is to share its on socials networks. In addition, there are a lot of groups of internet usurious who campaigns for copyleft.
We can also think in cultural productions as common wealth.
Personally I think that copyleft guarantees the free access to this common wealth whereas punishing downloading music, films, literature or software is not.
Copyleft is the practice of “offering people the right to freely
distribute copies and modified versions of a work with the stipulation that the same rights be preserved in derivative works down the line”. Moreover, this kind of practice is considered protective because is a form of licensing that maintain the author conditions for works like computer software, documents, art, music, video. There aren’t direct economic benefits, but there are a lot of other benefit for educational institutions, ONG’s, independent musicians, filmmakers and groups of arts.
To sum up, I believe that downloading music, films, videos, images
or others kind of data is not a crime. In contrast, to share music, films and art productions on internet is a free, protective and expansive form of culture.