Medosch argues that: “piracy, despite being an entirely commercially motivated activity carried out in black or grey markets, fulfils culturally important functions” (Reader, page 318). Discuss ONE of these arguments while giving an example online.
Medosch argues that “piracy, despite being an entirely commercially motivated activity carried out in black or grey markets, fulfils culturally important functions” (Medosch, 2008: 81). With the widening of both the global and the local digital divide, which refers to inequality access to information, technology and the internet based on geographical location and wealth, we see a rise in the “pirate culture” (Castells, 2001). Piracy has always been spoken about negatively, a “billion dollar threat to the US economy” according to Paul Paradise (1999). However, it is important to countries or areas deprived from cultural products due to poverty or censorship because it gives them “access to cultural goods which otherwise would be completely unavailable” and bridges the gap between them and those in power (Medosch, 2008: 81). It addition, piracy is often the force that drives cultural productions as seen in the popularisation of pop music in UK where pirated versions of songs from the Beatles and Elvis Presley where illegally transmitted on private radio stations (Mason, 2008). Although I reject the values of “theft” promoted by piracy, I agree that it is an important agent in fulfilling cultural functions that controls the flow of power in society.
As Medosch (2008: 80) points out, “large international vertically integrated media corporations stifle local cultural production by completely taking over marketing and distribution channels, thereby destroying the business of local distributors who offer more culturally diverse and more local goods”. This means that media conglomerates are controlling the flow of media content to maintain their power over consumers by cutting out culturally important products from mainstream. They also commercialise content, limiting access to products only to the rich (Cuneo, 2002). This phenomenon pulls the poverty and digital divide gap wider because without access to cultural products and technology, you have cannot gain knowledge and will forever live in the vicious cycle of poverty. In developing and third world countries such as India and Africa, they advocated for free softwares and were more open to piracy because the stagnation of technological capabilities imposed by copyright laws also meant the stagnation to their economies because opportunities to compete in the global market were stifled (James, 2002). What we see here is that the protection of the richer economies meant the poorer economies suffer. With piracy, in this case, the richer economies stay rich (since developing and third world countries cannot afford the technology without piracy any way) while the poorer economies gain opportunities to escape poverty.
In Australia, for example, the film “Ken Park” was banned in 2003 on the basis that it was too sexually explicit (Carstairs, 2003). It was the only country who banned it. However, the film contained controversial issues that many people saw important in the education of sexuality, dysfunctional families, teenage deviance and suicide (Carstairs, 2003). Thus, illegal screenings were shown and copies of the film were distributed online (Carbone, 2003; The Age, 2003). The restriction was not only seen as a form of cultural inhibition, but also seen as a form of censoring free speech (The Age, 2003). Here is the film trailer (*Note – It is explicit):
Piracy, though inherently bad as it exploits others work, fulfils culturally important functions, more so, but not exclusive to, countries which have no access to the original material. In a way, it promotes democracy within local cultures and the global sphere. Mark Pesce goes as far as to say that piracy can be harnessed for economic growth, because it promotes cultural productions that may otherwise be left on the shelf (Pesce, 2005). Even though I agree that piracy has benefits, I do not think it is a long-term solution to bridging cultural differences. Instead, I stand by Jeffrey James (2002) argument that free software and better management of copyright materials can perform the same cultural function in a more ethical way than piracy.
References:
Carbone, S. (2003) ‘Film board chief on the defensive over banned movie’, The Age, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/07/04/1057179156219.html, 5 July, [3 June 2011].
Carstairs, P. (2003) ‘The “banning” of Ken Park: a brief review of the facts and issues’, Arts Law Centre of Australia, http://www.artslaw.com.au/art-law/entry/the-banning-of-ken-park-a-brief-review-of-the-facts-and-issues/, 30 September, [3 June 2011].
Cuneo, C. (2002) Globalized and Localized Digital Divides Along the Information Highway: A Fragile Synthesis Across Bridges, Ramps, Cloverleaves, and Ladders. The 33rd Annual Sorokin Lecture: University of Saskatchewan.
James, J. (2002) ‘Free software and the digital divide: opportunities and constraints for developing countries’, Sage Publications: Journal of Information Science 2003, 29: 25.
Mason, M. (2008) ‘Live and Let DIY’, Guardian.co.uk, http://www.guardian.co.uk/ culture/2008/may/10/popandrock.piracy, 10 May, [3 June 2011].
Medosch, A. (2008) ‘Paid in Full: Copyright, Piracy and the Real Currency of Cultural Production’ pp. 73-97 in Deptforth. TV Diaries II: Pirate Strategies. London: Deptforth TV.
Paradise, P.R. (1999) Trademark Counterfeiting, Product Piracy, and the Billion Dollar Threat to the U.S. Economy. USA: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Pesce, M.D. (2005) Piracy is Good? New Models for the Distribution of Television Programming. Lecture: Australian Film Television and Radio School.
The Age (2003) ‘Ken Park ban ‘sadly archaic’, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/07/04/1057179133410.html, 4 July, [3 June 2011].
Rebecca Ng Lye Ee 