Day 1

Von Hit

            Today is the start of a debate that goes much deeper than people think it does. The controversy of file sharing affects millions of lives and millions of dollars. It constantly takes money away from hard working artists by making their art and masterpieces available for free to the public. My hit singles have hit top 10 on iTunes and I’ve enjoyed much success over the years. However, that success is withered thanks to file sharing music programs such as Napster and Limewire. People can download my songs for free which for most artists is bad but in my case is devastating. Napster’s Shawn Fanning tries to argue that it’s the record companies that are most upset about all this since they want to make a dime off the artists (Jost 2000). This isn’t true, I am here today to show that I am the one that is upset and that I am the one suffering the consequences of letting people share free music. The main problem for artists like me is that I will probably not be in the industry as long as others with only a few singles keeping me afloat. There are a lot of laws about this whole thing that get in the way of the big picture. Laws such as the Audio Home Recording Act and Digital Millennium Copyright act (Jost 2000). None of this legal stuff should matter; it is an injustice to give people’s art away for free. Napster’s file sharing community has enough recordings to rival any institutional collection in the world (Jost 2000).  These types of companies should be shut down. It is ridiculous that a company has access to that much music that they let people share for free. Please be on the side to abolish file sharing, and do a lot of artist’s justice.

The Underground kids

            File sharing is one of the most revolutionary features that a computer can have today. We make a lot of music and it is something that we love to do. We want people to hear as much of our music as they can so they will be turned on to what we do. In our eyes it is common sense, when people hear your music and like it than they will want to hear more. This concept is especially beneficial to us. Fourty nine percent of people ages 12-22 say that they download music off file sharing sites as opposed to 54 percent of 23 years or older who say they do not and 34 percent that say they are not even online at all (Greenblatt 2003)! Our music appeals to young people who have the greater percentage of downloading our music. Perhaps our opinion is a little skewed since we do not have a record label concerned with our sales. We’re unsigned right now but we do produce albums and we do fairly well for ourselves. Let’s put it this way, we are losing less money letting people download are music for free than we would if a record label was collecting their 30 percent cut (Greenblatt 2003). Any artist that argues that file sharing should be eliminated is clearly brainwashed by record labels and big music selling companies. After everyone takes their cut for selling music produced by an artist under label contract, the artist’s cut comes out to about 12 percent (Greenblatt 2003). Think about how much one song costs on a site like Amazon.com, about a dollar, the artist gets 12 cents of that. Artists shouldn’t be crying over losing money to file sharing they should be asking record labels to take less of a cut and start loving music making instead of money.

MP3 Company CEO

            The music industry has dawned a new era in the way people listen to music these days. My colleagues and I are reaping the benefits of a more advanced music and technology industry. Why clutter your car with millions of CDs and worry about changing them all the time? Why carry around a bulky CD player that is unreliable and tacky? Mp3 players carry much more music and are much more mobile. We’ve been accused of promoting illegal file sharing since our program makes it easy to convert Limewire songs to mp3 files to put on our device. We are not responsible for record company losses. Mp3 device sales are at an all time high. One in five Americans over the age of 12 and now own an mp3 device and one in twenty now own more than one (TEMPO 2006)! We are all for music sharing and do not believe that it violates any rights. People should be free to share files and take advantage of the technology we have available in this day and age. What kind of society would we be if we didn’t take advantage of the most advanced technology we had available? We must advance in technology not hinder what we have already created. We can also argue that most songs aren’t even available on sites or programs that sell music. People can’t get all the music they want on their Ipods that only allow you to download through iTunes. It is absolutely ridiculous to think that you can’t have certain music available to you for sale. We say if a company doesn’t have something available than why should people not be allowed to go get it elsewhere. In conclusion we are on the side of “for” for file sharing. We believe it will help America grow as an advance society.

Itunes Rep

            We are living in a selfish and unjust society. Our sales are at an all time low and companies are beginning to lose their trust that music sales are the way to go. In recent years NBC Universal has ripped a lot of material from our program (Wireless innovator 2007). In recent years we have also had to raise our prices due to the decrease in sales that illegal file sharing causes.  We believe these companies should be taken for all they’re worth since they have stolen a lot from artists and record companies. Apple believes that copyrighted music should be contained and controlled to a point where artists are getting their just rewards. We are not at all promoting our own self worth; we want to provide an outlet for artists to create music and a living for themselves at the same time. The fact of the matter is, file sharing is illegal and should be shut down immediately and forever. File sharing doesn’t just hurt the music industry; it hurts the movie industry as well. DVD’s are encrypted with codes to not let them be copied or sent to other people and these programs crack the encryption and distribute the DVD’s. If production companies wanted their DVD’s to be distributed for free than they wouldn’t even create the codes on the DVD. People argue that iTunes doesn’t have all materials available or that our material is overpriced. The fact of the matter is if we don’t have something available it is because the rights to it are not for sale (Wireless innovator 2007). If the rights aren’t available that is the artist’s choice and they probably have a reason for why they don’t want people to have it. iTunes is clearly against file sharing and we will do anything to assist in the elimination of file sharing completely

Works Cited

"50 Cent: File Sharing Doesn't Hurt Music Industry." TorrenttFreak. Web. 15 Apr. 2011.
Anderson, Nate. "Harvard Prof Tells Judge That P2P Filesharing Is "fair Use"" Ars Technica.      Web. 15 Apr. 2011

Anderson, Nate. "Judge Administers Another Beatdown to P2P Lawyer, Severs Cases." Ars Technica. 04 Apr. 2011. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/judge-administers-another-beatdown-to-p2p-lawyer-severs-cases.ars>.

Borland, John. "Judge: File Sharing Legal in Canada - CNET News." Technology News - CNET News. Web. 15 Apr. 2011

"Downloading and Sharing Copyrighted Music, Movies, and Software." Illinois State University Helpdesk. 13 Sept. 2010. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. http://helpdesk.illinoisstate.edu/kb/index.phtml?kbid=1159.

Greenblatt, A. (2003, November 21). Future of the music industry. CQ Researcher, 13, 989-1012

Jost, K. (2000, September 29). Copyright and the Internet. CQ Researcher, 10, 769-792.

Howe, Jeff. "Wired 12.05: File-Sharing Is, Like, Totally Uncool." Wired.com. Web. 15 Apr. 2011

"Peer-to-Peer File Sharing: A Guide for Business." BCP Business Center. Jan. 2010. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. <http://business.ftc.gov/documents/bus46-peer-peer-file-sharing-guide-business>.

Siciliano, Robert. "Criminal Hackers Use P2P File Sharing to Commit Identity Theft - NextAdvisor Daily." NextAdvisor.com Compares Financial Services, Self-improvement Services and Personal Technology Services. 29 Apr. 2009. Web. 06 Apr. 2011. http://www.nextadvisor.com/blog/2009/04/29/criminal-hackers-use-p2p-file-sharing-to-commit-identity-theft/.

TEMPO (2006). Portable MP3 player ownership reaches new time high, Ipsos

Wireless Innovator (2007). Faultline: UMG plots Apple downfall on free music subscriptions on MP3 devices, Wireless Innovator

 

Day 3

My name is Professor Charles King and I currently teach business finance at Stanford University.  File sharing is a cultural phenomenon that has been greatly misunderstood by the business leaders of today.  Instead of trying to shut these programs down they should be embracing them.  Many users who were once afraid to go out to by different cd’s because they aren’t sure whether they would like them or not are now able to get some songs and test run them.  This is just one of many examples that could be laid out in favor of file sharing.  All the big companies who are trying to shut down file sharing are just short sighted and cannot see the true potential of these programs on their business as a whole.  The bottom line is this; the actions of these people are not even illegal.  I would even go as far say that it is unconstitutional for you to bring these people to court on these charges.  In no way does the sharing of music and movie files does it affect the rights of the owner of the original copyrights.  If there is no damage done then there is no reparation that is due to or can be legally given to the companies that are hounding their poor customers.  As long as these file sharers do not receive money for these songs, the whole transaction falls under fair use.  Dear Justices of the court you have heard testimony before mine that has spoken before against and for and at this point I am sure you are tired of hearing long drawn out debates whether it is making or losing money for the music and movie companies.  I would charge you to forget all those and look at this from only a legal point of view.  Look at our laws and truly devine whether this  action is an illegal answer. (Anderson)

If it pleases the court my name is Bob Forley and I am a movie director.  You are here to make a final decision on file sharing and I charge you is there even a choice to be made.  Forgetting the fact that this type of computer program is illegal, it is un-American.  When we are growing up in this great country we are told that if we work hard for our dreams they will come true.  How can we still say this is true when others can “share” your dream with any other Joe who walks down the street? It’s not fair to point out my wealth as a reason for me not needing any more money.  One if you work for it you deserve it, two I am not the only one who is affected by these thieves.  You ask me to show you where I am losing money by these file sharing techies.  You show me charts that say that opening weekend is bringing in the same amount that it was bringing in before this appalling program was created.  You do not factor in that it is taking more and more money to make the movie, that tickets are more expensive so it takes less and less tickets to make it to those totals or even the simple fact that there are more people residing in America than ever.  Factoring in these variables you are forced to come to the conclusion that the movie industry is being hurt by something and hurt hard. The answer to what is causing this atrocity is right before your eyes.  I am asking you, no I am begging you, give more power to the executive branch to go on out there and find these criminals.  Until more of the regular users are brought to court and made to pay for their crimes this will continue to stay a problem in America.(TorrentFreak)

As I am sure you already know my name is Rachel Cole movie star from such movies as Silent as the Lamb, Castle of Heaven, and No Ties Attached.  Rachel Cole’s whole career has been built on the public paying to see Rachel Cole in theater.  It also helps when they buy the dvds from the store.  Rachel Cole does tons of charity work for local and underprivileged kids and needs money to be able to continue these acts.  No sales, no charity for our local communities.  Rachel Cole is not threatening just explaining the situation.  If Rachel Coles fans can see Rachel Cole for free why would they pay.  They aren’t dumb.  They picked Rachel Cole for one.  Rachel Cole’s sales has gone down a whole 35% in the last couple of years since Napster and Orange Wire has come out.  This is not only hurting Rachel Cole this is hurting every other not as gifted actor and actress in the business.  Pretty soon we will all be broke and out on the streets looking for dirty jobs.  When this apocalyptic even occurs then what will the public download?  There will be nothing left for them.  So it is not only in Rachel Cole’s interest to delete these programs but also the general public at large.  I mean could you imagine a world where you could not go watch a Rachel Cole movie in theater?  I am sure you fine distinguished gentleman will be able to make the right decision and help show the less intelligent Americans out there what is best for them. (Howe)

My name is Natalia Hunts.  I have been a music producer since 1975 and have been there through all the major changes in the last couple of decades.  I know inside and out what hurts or what does not hurt the music business.  I am not opposed to being paid for the work that I complete but that being said I am a realist and am smart enough to not try to hold back a tide that everyone sees coming.  This file sharing problem is not going to go away so now what the music industry should be focusing on is turning this into a positive.  There are many opportunities for us to get our music out to more people and into more homes.  Like a radio station giving free advertisement to all our customers.  Concert sales and music videos are two ways we can recoup losses.  It’s a changing world and we must change with it.  If we get rid of file sharing at this point of the ball game we run the risk of alienating a vast majority of our fanbase.  I myself do not quite understand the lines between what is legal and what is illegal but as long as they are not selling our music and making profit off the sweat of my brow I do not see the problem.  I know you justices have the power of what is constitutional and what is unconstitutional, what is legal and what is illegal.  Please make file sharing officially legal and let us a business work with it and make it to our advantage.(Borland)

Day 2

Abu Jalloh

            On day two of this meeting we were able to hear the the opinions and statements of one of the creators of the popular P2P file sharing company Orangewire , two users of this program one for its continued use for so called “Mal purposes” as well as one against its use and a lawyer who has vast experience in file sharing cases. Tom Bryant is one of the main creators of the popular program Orangewire.

            Orangewire is a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) program in which it is possible to share music, video and documents, play games, and facilitate online telephone conversations. The technology enables computers using the same and or compatible P2P programs to form a network and share digital files directly with other computers on the network. Because virtually anyone can join a P2P network just by installing particular software, millions of computers could be connected at one time ( Peer-to-Peer File Sharing). This creates a controversy due to if one person buying digital products like music, movies , ebook, etc. having the ability to share it with a friend or a random computer across the internet for free. Which is believe to cost the music, movie industry along with radio and paid multimedia sites like i tunes a big sum. There saying if people can access there products for free with relatively ease why would they take money out their products to but something just because of it being morally right.

When Tom was asked about the abundant use of downloading licensed media for free from his software he said that though theses media devices are transferred through out network there is plenty of content you can share with our software that does not violate any copyrighted laws. This brings about a big dilemma which people are torn by should the everyday users of the P2P software such as Orangewire be held responsible for there own actions knowing they are doing something wrong or should the enabler of these be held accountable. Tom much like other creators of these file sharing programs believe they should not be held responsible which is why they are for the conditioned production of providing services of file sharing to all. We asked two users of the program one who admits using the program for Mal or illegal purposes like downloading music and movies Chris Paul a high school student and a user who only uses Orangewire for non illegal purposes Deron Williams a freelance artist.

            When Chris Paul a everyday high school student was asked how much did his extensive library of music and movies cost him he laughed a bit and said nothing. This is most likely a common theme around America the statement “everyone does it” and “out of millions what is the chance I get caught” brought up when asking everyday users of P2P software. Many people download music and movies using file sharing software. If you don't do it, you probably know someone who does. But the problem is that if you download copyrighted material without permission, you are breaking the  law (Downloading and Sharing Copyrighted Music, Movies, and Software ). Chris felt the same. On average he says he downloads about four to six new files of music a day and about a movie a week. With individual digital song titles going for around $.99 cents and digital movies about $8.99 thats is about $43.00 a week and about $15308.00 a year. If every user has similar activity on these P2P softwares that is billions of dollars that the music and movie industry are missing out on but those numbers do not seem to effect Chris's decision. He said that he is still for the use of these file sharing programs because some people mix and match there purchases and downloads and that having availability to more music allows people to discover new artist. Also he said that concert sales do benefit from the vast amount of people who listen to there music even if it was free. Statistics have also shown that the amount of people actually buying records has not declined but have stayed the same meaning that true fans even though they can access the content for free will still pay to hear music from there favorite artist or watch there favorite actor take on a new role in a film. Which is why Chris says he is for the use of file sharing unlike when we heard the thoughts of Deron Williams a freelance artist.

            Deron Williams a freelance artist is one who can see the positive and negative effects of a file sharing program which is why he is against the illegal use of it. As a freelance artist he makes money off digital artwork he does. When asked what if someone who did not pay for your artwork just simply clicked a button and downloaded all your hard work for fee his response was rather foul. It is not difficult to just type in my name and look for my work heck Blueprints for President Obama's private helicopters were recently compromised because they had been leaked to the wild, wild web(Siciliano). Whats the point he said nobody wants to or will work for free if you could just download food and clothes for free there would be uproar and file sharing would be banned quickly because it causes people to loose a lot of money. He said that if he ever uses a file sharing program he only shares his own content that he provides for free or download other content which can be used for teaching and learning content as well as non copyrighted infringed music and movies available. To help get a grasp on all these point of views we asked a lawyer Dwayne James who has a lot of experience dealing with cases of copyright infringement of digital media and other cases involved with P2P software.

            Dwayne has learned many things about the battle between the the ban on P2P software along with the blame on the user or the software itself. Dwayne says that this battle has been going on for over twenty years with the first trademark case being in January 1984 where fin Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.,[6] the Supreme Court of the United States that making individual copies of complete T.V shows for purposes of time-shifting is fair use This case would create some interpretative challenges to courts in applying the case to more recent file sharing technologies available for use on home computers and over the INTERNET(Anderson). Over the next two decades many P2P program companies were forced to shut down after being tried in court most recently one the the worlds most popular sites The Pirate bay was seized by the Swedish Government and forced to shut down along with Ta guilty verdict; each defendant is sentenced to one year in jail and a total of  3.6 million USD, 2.7 in fines and damages. Recently other Dwayne was involved in a case where P2P giant Limewire was asked to pay $75 Trillion. In all Dwayne can sum up knowledge from all his cases by saying “Peer-to-peer applications  are not illegal and you can use them to download material with the owner's consent or non illegal material (Downloading and Sharing Copyrighted Music, Movies, and Software) . So next time you want to download the next hit song or blockbuster movie ask yourself is it worth it because your actions one day may catch up with you.

The Begining

File sharing has been a major issue ever since the birth of the communication age.  File sharing programs such as Orangewire, Pirate Bay, and Bearshare, has been used by every day Joes and computer geeks to either receive or share music, movies, TV shows, and program files. In the summer of 2000 Napster was found guilty of copyright infringement which led to huge controversy.  This blog is recording the actions of a Supreme Court case in which these and other similar type programs which can be found on the internet should be allowed to exist or to be made legal here in America.  Many professionals in both businesses, along with some every day users and other random scholars, weigh in with their opinions bringing graphs and charts and other  sources of information to back up their opinions and try to sway the supreme court to their side.  The testimonies of these individuals took will take place over 3 days and we will be there every step of the way. Day one will feature an array of individuals deeply intergraded in the music industry. First of which is Von Hit, a hip hop and pop sensation who has had two top of the chart singles. Second will be an up and coming and unsigned group known as The Underground Kids. Third will be John Hardball, VP of profit records and sales for iTunes. Day one will conclude with Karrie Around, CEO of a mp3 company known as Sansa. Von Hit and John Hardball will be on the side of “against” file sharing whereas The Underground Kids and Karrie Around will be on the side of “for” file sharing.  On day two the opinions and argumentative thoughts of aP2P file sharing company OrangeWire , two users of the popular program one for its use and one against it, along with a James C. Wade a lawyer who has vast experience with copyright infringement and illegal digital media cases. During these three days we were able to capture a small part of the ongoing battle of illegal file sharing through both sides of the spectrum whether the stakeholder was for or against file sharing they each made strong cases for their arguments.  On day three the court will hear the testimonies of Proffesor Charles King of Stansford who will be speaking for file sharing, the famous director Bob Forley, the action movie star Rachel Cole,  and the movie producer Natalia Hunts who all will be speaking against file sharing.