Here's an example from my own life abiout of how people's attitudes about media availability are shifting:
When I was in middle and high school, I understood that you had to pay for music or you were breaking the law and stealing from the music artists (or at least, the record companies.) I didn't question the validity of such a system. When I was in high school I loved to get iTunes gift cards. I was excited about how easy it was to buy any song I wanted. But later, Pandora and Spotify changed me. Now I expect to get my music free and legally. And I do. I may not ever go back to buying CDs (or iTunes songs.)
My experience is a small example of the sense of entitlement to movies, songs, pictures, etc. that members in our digital society are developing. The powers who make money selling their media and the growing masses demanding the right to use that media on their own terms are warring over the borders of the public domain.
Are we really entitled to us other people's work? Under what conditions?
The unspoken argument in favor of asserting someone's right to use media regardless of copyright is,
"Because we can."
They're right that we can. But isn't it possible that technology may have temporarily outrun our collective morality?
My experience is a small example of the sense of entitlement to movies, songs, pictures, etc. that members in our digital society are developing. The powers who make money selling their media and the growing masses demanding the right to use that media on their own terms are warring over the borders of the public domain.
Are we really entitled to us other people's work? Under what conditions?
The unspoken argument in favor of asserting someone's right to use media regardless of copyright is,
"Because we can."
They're right that we can. But isn't it possible that technology may have temporarily outrun our collective morality?
No comments:
Post a Comment