June 13th, 2009 the need for a new e-morality
Like any new domain of human activity, the internet world is collectively struggling to reach a consensus on what is right and what is wrong. This is akin to the early days of the radio, for example, when it was uncertain whether it was stealing to play recorded music over the air. The solution was reached through broad licensing agreements between the recording industry and the radio stations.
Similar ethical uncertainty exists with digital priacy. Like the primitive apes of the digital world that we are, most have simply and straightforwardly adopted the moral conventions of the physical world: STEALING IS WRONG. But this sort of simple transfer of code only highlights our penchant for continuity and traditions over logical analysis for establishing appropriate rules in a new arena.
Consider the following case scenario: Alex bought a CD (whether it be music or software is irrelevant, for now). Then, Alex loses the CD. Is it ok for Alex to download an “illegal” pirated copy from the internet (say, from thepiratebay.com), without paying for it again?
Asking this question on most internet forums would yield a broad consensus among typical internet users: “NO, it is not ok. It is stealing.” They would draw the following analogy: Since Alex lost the CD, would it be ok for Alex to walk into a store and walk out with a second copy of the CD without paying for it? NO! Then why should it be ok for Alex to do the same on the internet?
But here in lies the rub. Let’s compare the apparent “analogy” between the physical world and the digital world. In both cases (Alex downloading a priated copy and Alex pick-pocketing a CD from a store), Alex has already paid for the contents of the CD itself. But in the physical case, by stealing a copy from the store, the store loses the CD. There is a victim. In contrast, there is no victim in the digital scenario. Alex has already paid for it, so the company creating the content on the CD does not lose sales. And because digital piracy involves making a bit-by-bit copy of the material, no one is deprived of anything when Alex downloads the pirated copy.
So, if no body loses, why should it be unethical? I hope you see that Alex is perfectly acting within his/her moral boundaries. Piracy seems blacketly wrong only when compared with stealing physical objects. Analyzed within its own terms, piracy is not always unethical.
The conlusion is this: we cannot simply apply the familiar ethics of the phyisical world to a new arena such as the digital world. This only confuses the issue, as demonstrated above. I call for a new system of e-morality, one that is logically constructed through careful analysis of the new domain.
