I have written three books.  I still get royalty checks from my publishers.  I open the envelope typically every six months to find money that rewards me for my original work.  It’s like someone is printing money and sending it to me.  Although my royalty checks are printed from a rather small printing press, there is great satisfaction in creating intellectual property and, through that skill, receiving compensation for it.

What if one of my books suddenly appeared on some rogue web site?  “Hey, wait a minute, you can’t do that!  You’ve stolen my property!”  Or, what if someone in, say, China republished my book to look exactly like mine and made it available for much less than my book?

These are some of the issues behind the House of Representative’s Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the U.S. Senate’s version of the same issues called Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA).

Those opposing these bills in congress are not suggesting that we should support piracy or steal intellectual property.  Rather, they see that the way in which these bills went about protecting intellectual property and preventing piracy could end up becoming one big censorship engine that might have far reaching negative implications to society.

Remember the discussion about “Death Panels” during the debate about Obama Care?  These bills would set up processes where by review panels (government agencies or even private review boards) would judge which Websites were “illegal” and shut them down or which factories would be closed that are generating some pirated CDs, DVDs or books.

The problem with this solution is that it’s not far from censorship:  some with power can wage war on those they don’t like and use “invasion of intellectual property or privacy” as a means to control others.  How about if only “certain allowable results” were allowed in Google’s or Microsoft’s search engine?  Who’s to decide?

So, what’s the solution to the problem?  How do you establish laws or systems that do protect intellectual property while, at the same time, do not allow censorship to rage war on some but not others?  How do you protect artists that create great songs, producers and directors who create great movies, programmers and developers who create great Websites and authors (and their publishers) who create great books?

The problem is more difficult to solve.  Here’s an example.  Let’s say I go to Barnes & Noble and buy “Killing Lincoln” by Bill O’Reilly and Martin Dugard.  It’s a fascinating read by the way.  But, I know a civil war history buff so I give it to him to read.  Innocent enough. We’ve all done that.

Or, let’s say I buy a CD of a popular artist like Adele.  I then rip it into iTunes and sync it with my iPhone and iPad.  No problem.  Then, my friend says he loves Adele, so I give him the CD.  I don’t need it any longer so what’s the harm in giving it to a friend?  In each of these cases, the fact is that the actions have actually pirated someone’s intellectual property.  But, society doesn’t generally get upset when someone does this on a small scale and doesn’t do it for financial reward.

We generally allow everyone who buys a book, CD or DVD to have some personal distribution rights to share it with a few friends.  That’s because there isn’t intent to mass produce and distribute the work or make money through the process.  For example, Apple gives everyone the right to share a purchased song or album on five computers.

I believe there are a number of different ways in which we can approach solving the problem of protecting intellectual property and preventing economic gain from piracy.  Here are a few:

Digital Rights Management (DRM).  This is where the intellectual property is wrapped with security so that anyone can gain access but only those who have paid can use the property.   This has been tried a number of times in music with poor results.  Technically, this is great but logistics and broad implementation have proved difficult.  Perhaps we can put together a new form of DRM that will work and protect intellectual property.

Taxation.  In this approach, a tax is placed on all access to content, so that it doesn’t matter if someone steals intellectual property as long as the tax is collected on the distribution of the property.  This ensures that artists and those that create intellectual property get paid for those who access their property.  Since thieves don’t like to be taxed, they find ways to go undetected.

Value Added Services.  This method is currently the one that seems be gaining popularity.  In this method, the original intellectual property is given away free but is surrounded by additional valuable services in which money is collected.  A music site might offer free streaming of music but offers other services that, in effect, pay the artists that created the songs.

Embargo.  Here, the site that is attempting to distribute stolen intellectual property has an embargo created by both government and private industry, so that outsiders can’t easily get access.  This is close to censorship as someone or group has to determine which sites should be under embargo, although with an embargo, the site is not ever actually shut down.

Throttling.  In throttling, Websites that distribute illegal content stay live, but access to it is slowed down.  Or, the books are still printed but the truck’s engine is throttled to a very slow speed.  Obviously, this is very difficult or, in some cases, impossible to manage.  Most colleges manage access to sites that distribute rich media.

I call on President Obama (or Mitt Romney if he becomes President) to convene a council of smart people from Hollywood (movie and music producers), the publishing industry (authors, their agents and publishers), Silicon Valley (Google, Apple, Facebook, and others) to use their knowledge and experience to create a way (law and governance) that will protect intellectual property, prevent piracy and not act to censor right verses wrong.

We have to reach a point whereby access to intellectual property remains unlimited but illegitimate use and financial gain from such use is prevented.
 

Written By:

J. Gerry Purdy, Ph.D.
Principal Analyst
Mobile & Wireless
MobileTrax LLC
gerry.purdy@mobiletrax.com
404 855-9494

Dr. Purdy writes a weekly column via eWeek, a leading online & digital publisher with millions of readers. Some of these columns are distributed via Inside Mobile with approval from eWeek.