Preventing File Sharing for Fear of Illegality is Stupid
I came across this news article. I will start with a disclaimer that this article does not explicitly state any of the things on which I am about to rant. With that out of the way, I have a serious problem with networks and internet service providers (ISP's) killing all usability of torrents. They can do this through a number of ways, but I am not going to get into the technical details here. My problem is that they cannot distinguish between what is a legal file download and an illegal one. Someone could very easily use a torrent to download the latest version of Ubuntu which is quite legal. They might also be downloading the latest movie at the same time which is very illegal under most circumstances. However, it is not illegal under all circumstances. Thus, most files cannot even be filtered simply based on what they are. The reason being is a file download can be legal for one person and illegal for another person. The result is if you are going to attempt to seriously hinder file sharing to prevent software piracy, you are also preventing legal uses of it.
Most universities use bandwidth shaping tools to limit how fast a file can be downloaded via P2P clients. I will not fight too much against the argument in which a school wants to keep bandwidth available for web browsing which tends to be more conducive to school-related activities than file sharing. Though I will say a computer science major can learn as much by downloading the latest Ubuntu .iso as a sociology major can learn on Facebook. Regardless, when a university prevents file sharing to check its illegal uses since apparently college students are the number one software pirates in the world, things become stupid. I will admit most policies are put in place because some government agency is breathing down their necks, but stand up for yourselves already!
Why do I have a problem with eliminating P2P file sharing on a network? Let me ask you this: why do we not prevent FTP on those same networks? It can be used for illegal file sharing. It tends not to be used because it is less efficient, but it has the same illegal potential. However, I will point out to you in another way just how absurd this whole idea is. If Microsoft slanders Apple in a commercial on the ESPN channel on your local cable, who is responsible for the breaking of the law? Is it Microsoft for slandering Apple? Is it ESPN for allowing such an advertisement to be aired? Is it the cable company for allowing ESPN to air such a commercial? I am guessing most of you think it is Microsoft. However, preventing P2P file sharing because someone might attempt to acquire a file illegally is the equivalent of putting ESPN at fault. All P2P file sharing does is present the content. It is not illegal until someone uses it in an illegal way. Thus, any network or ISP preventing file sharing amounts to a coward afraid to stand up to the lobbying RIAA mongrels.
Why do I cite the RIAA as mongrels? They started by attacking the poor, defenseless college students sharing files. They tried to make it a responsibility for universities to give up their students who were sharing various files the RIAA was monitoring. Some universities fell for this gag. Some students were wrongly punished because of this. Then some people started to stand up to the RIAA, and we all laughed because they finally got what was coming to them. It turns out college students are not always as defenseless as people like to think they are. Counter lawsuits ensued. I will not go into the full history because I am not as well-versed in it as I would need to be to do it justice. So now the RIAA is trying to shutdown file sharing. Good luck with that one. There will always something along the lines of FTP at the very least due to the need to push files to servers. The internet would die without such a technology. The RIAA just happens to be stupid enough to believe it can somehow win this fight. In the words of Agent Smith, "you are only delaying the inevitable."
My biggest pet peeve about attacking people ranging from random people on the street to The Pirate Bay is the entire concept. Let us say I leave my school bag and a cd unattended on a table in the union at my college because I want to go get food and I have a friend coming by any minute to borrow the cd. Some random person walks by and steals the cd. You might argue I am stupid for leaving it there, but I do not think you would say I am at fault with the law. Am I accomplice in the stealing of my own cd? It seems a bit ridiculous does it not. I am allowed to loan my physical cd to a friend under law. The only thing I have done is left the cd in a place where it can be easily taken by someone who does not have legal rights to possess it. This is the same situation in file sharing. I am not asking random people on the internet if they want a particular file. I am merely leaving the file in a public place for appropriate people to pick it up.
If this is illegal, I argue any computer possessing copyright information or confidential data and connected to the internet is illegal. I will paint another picture for you. Pretend I have a server at home with various music files on it that I purchased through iTunes. This is obviously only hypothetical since I would never use iTunes. I decide to open SSH to the world so I can work on some things on the computer while I am at my grandma's house for the holidays. Have I broken a copyright law? Someone could illegally acquire the music by hacking my SSH login and obtain the file. The only difference here is I put a security barrier between the file and unauthorized users. However, if it is illegal to share files because people might download them illegally, then is it not also illegal to setup SSH? I am providing an opportunity for a hacker to illegally access my system. I should be ashamed of myself! The only difference is the amount of security I have setup in an effort to prevent unauthorized users. Just as I had no security to prevent my cd from being stolen off the union table. In case you are worrying, no, I have never had a cd stolen from me at college.
Just to drive the point home, if you want to be stupid, try to prevent file sharing because someone might use it illegally. Ooo! Maybe we should shutdown the internet because somebody might use it illegally!
Most universities use bandwidth shaping tools to limit how fast a file can be downloaded via P2P clients. I will not fight too much against the argument in which a school wants to keep bandwidth available for web browsing which tends to be more conducive to school-related activities than file sharing. Though I will say a computer science major can learn as much by downloading the latest Ubuntu .iso as a sociology major can learn on Facebook. Regardless, when a university prevents file sharing to check its illegal uses since apparently college students are the number one software pirates in the world, things become stupid. I will admit most policies are put in place because some government agency is breathing down their necks, but stand up for yourselves already!
Why do I have a problem with eliminating P2P file sharing on a network? Let me ask you this: why do we not prevent FTP on those same networks? It can be used for illegal file sharing. It tends not to be used because it is less efficient, but it has the same illegal potential. However, I will point out to you in another way just how absurd this whole idea is. If Microsoft slanders Apple in a commercial on the ESPN channel on your local cable, who is responsible for the breaking of the law? Is it Microsoft for slandering Apple? Is it ESPN for allowing such an advertisement to be aired? Is it the cable company for allowing ESPN to air such a commercial? I am guessing most of you think it is Microsoft. However, preventing P2P file sharing because someone might attempt to acquire a file illegally is the equivalent of putting ESPN at fault. All P2P file sharing does is present the content. It is not illegal until someone uses it in an illegal way. Thus, any network or ISP preventing file sharing amounts to a coward afraid to stand up to the lobbying RIAA mongrels.
Why do I cite the RIAA as mongrels? They started by attacking the poor, defenseless college students sharing files. They tried to make it a responsibility for universities to give up their students who were sharing various files the RIAA was monitoring. Some universities fell for this gag. Some students were wrongly punished because of this. Then some people started to stand up to the RIAA, and we all laughed because they finally got what was coming to them. It turns out college students are not always as defenseless as people like to think they are. Counter lawsuits ensued. I will not go into the full history because I am not as well-versed in it as I would need to be to do it justice. So now the RIAA is trying to shutdown file sharing. Good luck with that one. There will always something along the lines of FTP at the very least due to the need to push files to servers. The internet would die without such a technology. The RIAA just happens to be stupid enough to believe it can somehow win this fight. In the words of Agent Smith, "you are only delaying the inevitable."
My biggest pet peeve about attacking people ranging from random people on the street to The Pirate Bay is the entire concept. Let us say I leave my school bag and a cd unattended on a table in the union at my college because I want to go get food and I have a friend coming by any minute to borrow the cd. Some random person walks by and steals the cd. You might argue I am stupid for leaving it there, but I do not think you would say I am at fault with the law. Am I accomplice in the stealing of my own cd? It seems a bit ridiculous does it not. I am allowed to loan my physical cd to a friend under law. The only thing I have done is left the cd in a place where it can be easily taken by someone who does not have legal rights to possess it. This is the same situation in file sharing. I am not asking random people on the internet if they want a particular file. I am merely leaving the file in a public place for appropriate people to pick it up.
If this is illegal, I argue any computer possessing copyright information or confidential data and connected to the internet is illegal. I will paint another picture for you. Pretend I have a server at home with various music files on it that I purchased through iTunes. This is obviously only hypothetical since I would never use iTunes. I decide to open SSH to the world so I can work on some things on the computer while I am at my grandma's house for the holidays. Have I broken a copyright law? Someone could illegally acquire the music by hacking my SSH login and obtain the file. The only difference here is I put a security barrier between the file and unauthorized users. However, if it is illegal to share files because people might download them illegally, then is it not also illegal to setup SSH? I am providing an opportunity for a hacker to illegally access my system. I should be ashamed of myself! The only difference is the amount of security I have setup in an effort to prevent unauthorized users. Just as I had no security to prevent my cd from being stolen off the union table. In case you are worrying, no, I have never had a cd stolen from me at college.
Just to drive the point home, if you want to be stupid, try to prevent file sharing because someone might use it illegally. Ooo! Maybe we should shutdown the internet because somebody might use it illegally!
Labels: Computer Science
posted by Shawn Sparks at
8:25 AM
2 Comments:
The RIAA is an easy target for being stupid, but most of the arguments people make for file-sharing of music are simply rationalization for taking something and not paying for it.
If you see error in my logic, I encourage you to point it out.
I see the music industry going the way of IT. Open Source is gaining ground and IT is shifting as a result. I feel music will shift to tours and things of that nature as the primary revenue source. Nine Inch Nails has already embraced this. I feel RIAA is more worried because the new form of music industry will cut out the middle man.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home