Not commenting on any specifics I want to highlight a couple if points that I think need to be considered in these discussions:
-
piracy is going to be a lot easier on SAFEnetwork than on the internet (because anyone will be able to do it, reliably without domains being able to be taken down, with impunity because copyright enforcement will be very much harder)
-
current business models rely on and seek to maintain a system that both creates a massive incentive for piracy and tries to stop it (costly production and distribution, copyright enforcement, surveillance & targeting of both conforming users and transgressing users)
-
SAFEnetwork changes the whole system dynamic in ways that mean these business models will be replaced because the things they rely on will no longer work, which makes it very hard for us to imagine what could replace them, or what could work better for those we are most concerned about (producers & consumers)
If we consider piracy as wrong we ignore it’s role in providing a way to protest against the excesses of enforcement, and the exploitation of producers and consumers. It is those abuses that enable us to recognise the value of cutting out the middle man here, and piracy is an important safety valve, as well as a symptom of the problem. When Joe Public is willing to break the law in large numbers, there is a problem with the law (and the law is just a reflection of the system).
We’ll never design a perfect system, but the current one is so broken, it should be possible to create a better one. But that better system will be very different from what we have now, and I think it helps to realise that making piracy easier can in fact have a good effect - and good effects that we possibly can’t anticipate - rather than just what we’ve been conditioned to think (i.e that it leads to exploitation of producers - that’s already happening, and in ways that doesn’t serve an awful lot of producers or consumers).
Simply democratising production and consumption could have a dramatic positive impact for most producers and consumers (the 99% ), and making piracy easy can help (IMO) prevent a return to centralised control of content, that would inevitably also resume the current inequities and abuses what have become so widespread many people hardly notice them.
In short, consider whether or not piracy can have a role in preventing one kind of abuse and exploitation, without itself becoming a worse source of abuse and exploitation.
So I urge, be brave, don’t worry too much about people being able to hijack popular content. If people do that, and make money by being good promoters that can be as much a service worthy of reward as producing the content in the first place.
If I create, get hijacked, become famous because the promoter created a demand for my work. How is that worse than if I never became popular? Paulo Coelho uses this as his business model - go read his thoughts on piracy if you want the opinion of a producer who is very successful. Not just yesterday’s rock stars! They are products of the current system after all.
How is that worse than an unknown band of teenagers being signed up to an unscrupulous label in a drug induced stupor?
Neither is fair or ideal, but I don’t think fair or ideal is achievable. Better, on the other hand, is something we can do on SAFEnetwork!