On the TV news I heard about the intervention and closure by the effective and evil FBI of Megaupload, one of the most used internet download sites in the world. “The bad guys,” those who wield freedom as a paradigm, with allegations of piracy, encroached the also alleged right of millions of citizens of the global village to download content that they know they should not — or cannot — pay for.
The issue is extremely complicated for me, a semi-surfer from a semi-connected country. I assume that the technologies have developed faster than the copyright laws and I assume that these illegal downloads don’t affect the artists themselves so much, as it geometrically multiplies the distribution of their work (provided there is no plagiarism and credit is given) as a form of advertising.
It’s true that there is a symbiotic relationship between art and the marketing that puts it in the hands of the consumers. But to see art as a commodity has resulted in the promotion of products of dubious quality at the expense of other values. I don’t consider myself an elitist nor an expert; the simple perception of success and popularity, reveals very aggressive publicity campaigns. You can come up with your own examples.
At some point, a balance must be achieved between both interests. Although more democratic, the Internet is also moved by the market.
But what moved me to write on this subject was the beam in the eye of the news report that “informed” me. Again, you can come up with your own examples.
January 23 2012