In last week’s Top Hat, the esteemed Max Yates wrote about a topic which has been discussed at length ever since the second round of lawsuits: The problem of digital piracy on campus and how to protect RPI students from the unending temptation to steal music. Their solution is Ruckus, the music service most students have never heard of.
Firstly, Mr. Yates would have you believe that, “… 80 percent of students actually wanted a legal music downloading service …,” a figure which was obtained from the Senate’s music survey sent out at the end of the last semester. His statement is either negligent or a huge lie. In actuality, if one looks at the results (which you probably don’t have—and can’t get), out of 8,253 people invited to take the survey, only 1,212 indicated that they would like to see a music service on campus. Of course, “… 14.7 percent of people asked to take the survey indicated that they would like to see a music service on campus…” doesn’t quite have the same ring to it.
Secondly, I disagree with his stance on why he feels that a music service will alleviate the problem of illegal downloading on campus. Three years ago, there was a website that indexed all the samba shares on the RPI network called Phynd. One could search Phynd and find practically anything they looked for. If you wanted to watch an obscure TV show from years ago, it was there. If a friend had committed the heinous crime of not seeing your favorite movie, two hours later, the floor would be crowded in your room watching it. Was downloading in this manner illegal? Yes. Would I have paid for it if I had the chance? Yes. The problem is that none of the currently available services come anywhere close to the speed, availability, and accessibility of this “digital deviance.” The problem with the Ruckus music service, and services like it, is that they are a step backwards in technology.
Persons that have suffered lawsuits have broken the law, and should not be at all surprised that they are being punished for it. The severity, source, and manner of these punishments can certainly be called into question. The fact remains, however, that they have broken the law. That aside, painting them as criminals hungry for their digital plunder is a shortsighted view.
Companies and people like Mr. Yates continue to perpetuate the belief that people who pirate software are amoral and evil. Instead of trying to capitalize on this method of distribution, they try to suppress it with crappy services and scornful rhetoric. This cannot be compared to “old moral issues,” because the desired service does not, and will not, exist in the near future. I, for one, was more attracted to the convenience of Phynd than getting things for free.
