So yeah, about Megaupload being shut down

I know this debate centers around movie production, but I still think it's very interesting to me and my (currently) only source of income. I'm a recording artist with an American record label, a label which has cut out the middleman format of CD, and only release digital/vinyl. This business model is ideal to me: I collect vinyl because of my love for the physical format, of which I find the CD incredibly inferior as I can only see it as a transportation device for the digital music, without the aesthetics and durability of the vinyl. These are actually attitudes I share with the public, as recent consumer behavior has shown a massive decrease in CD sales, a massive growth in digital sales, and a small, but significant growth in vinyl sales (!) The first four years before we got a label, me and my band-mate allowed free downloads of our songs, which resulted in great amounts of free internet publicity, and subsequently a vast number of gigs and a record deal. We still release free singles in "down"-times, with good results. The possibilities of exposure and distribution that the internet offers to small-time producers are amazing, but the resulting climate of the music industry can only be described as severely democratizing. Because of our tiny market segment, we are not harmed by piracy, and you'll have to look significantly beyond the people who barely make a living off something creative to find anyone being affected. These days, it's harder to make money off music in general, but the actual money in the entertainment industry will probably be distributed much more evenly. Is this a good thing? Some cultural theorists predict the death of the superstar, of the big labels and production companies, and attribute this to tendencies towards a narrowing of western tastes and a massive factorization of popular culture. Will the potential abolishment of big money opportunities in media discourage production? It's impossible for me to tell, as the economical incentive might not be as relevant for the artist's motivation compared to the businessman's, but if it works anything like the rest of the market, it might very well cause productive stagnation. I still think that the current situation of piracy of movies and music requires a sense of innovation from the industries that they have yet to display in any way. Several big companies work against piracy (in which they are, naturally, legally righteous), but in the process make themselves an enemy of the current and future platform of all media. I think piracy should be dealt with more progressively, because it simply can't be fought with legal intimidation alone. Because of the internet, we are living in times of incredibly interesting developments, where traditional cultural institutions are challenged and entire industries is being forced to change. I only feel bad for the porn actors.

Great post, noticeably devoid of the fiery hatred Jay demonstrates toward the prospect of anyone making money for any reason.

I agree you need to distinguish between artist and producer incentives when thinking about a sensible copyright regime. Nowhere is this more relevant than in music, where the necessary up-front investments are (often) minimal and there seems to be an inherent utility in making music itself, as evidenced by the millions of garage bands out there that are going nowhere. Of course, you can argue that these shitty garage bands are doing little more than imitating the styles of existing artists and perhaps adding some superficial changes of their own to try to carve out the slightest niche of a unique identity in this creative landscape, and that they are doing so because of the improbable but highly valuable possibility of becoming a music icon showered with money and worshiped the world over. Let's ignore that point for a second, particularly given that monetary rewards that are too high for "making it big" will actually result in overproduction of shitty music and annoying teenagers, and Lord knows none of us want that. And to be clear Ade, I'm not talking about your band here, which I know nothing about.

So incentives for artists should absolutely be divorced of incentives for investors and producers to create an analytical framework that creates the most efficient production levels and properly balances monetary incentives for innovation with wide-scale access to existing copyrighted works and "fair use" of those works, which also promotes innovation. And you're absolutely right; organizations like the MPAA and RIAA have largely taken a rights-based and power-based approach to this issue with consumers, instead of an interest-based approach which would emphasize innovative win-win solutions between companies and consumers over harsh distributive regimes that punish and alienate fans. I do think it's unfair to say there hasn't been any innovation in this sector; access to digital copies at a reasonable cost is ever-expanding and endless new revenue models have been attempted by one or another content delivery start-up to try to maximize access to these works while providing an appropriate revenue stream for higher-cost works such as TV miniseries and movies. The point I was trying to make to Jay, which flew directly over his rectangular prism of a head, is that it's easy to see the difference in average quality when comparing free content (YouTube bullshit) to paid content (feature films). Perhaps a more apt comparison is comparing subscription-supported content (HBO) to ad-supported content (NBC). Fuck.

In the meantime, while experimentation and innovation continue, piracy provides a band-aid by giving free access to these works to people with some spare time and either a high risk appetite or nothing to lose. It provides a competitive force to counteract some of the issues of entanglement with media conglomerates and particularly with companies like Comcast that are trying to cling to their traditional competitive advantages in a changing landscape (as they should). Ultimately, though, I think those are the province of antitrust and while piracy may provide a short-term "solution," it also creates numerous problems and can't remain the only competition to traditional media delivery for long. Not to mention, piracy doesn't work if it's easy for anyone to do and with minimal risk, so a high-profile prosecution like this of a guy who has made a shitload of money by making it as easy as humanly possible to steal content doesn't undermine innovation or productive efficiency.