What kind of file sharer are you?

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:14 pm

With the media attention our recent court date with CRIA have generated (good comments here ), the debate has centered around "piracy" this and piracy that and whether isoHunt as a search engine "facilitates" such piracy. I would of course say we don't, with all the non-infringing uses I've endorsed on the frontpage here with Creative Commons or otherwise copyleft content (OSS) that have adopted BitTorrent distribution. But that's not the point of this post.

I want to quote an excerpt from Lessig's book Free Culture below, and ask you as a user of isoHunt and BitTorrent a basic question: What kind of file sharer are you? What brought you to using BitTorrent, and which of the following is the most common use you have when downloading and sharing with BitTorrent? Which use case is most important to you?

Quote:

File sharers share different kinds of content. We can divide these different kinds into four types.

A. There are some who use sharing networks as substitutes for purchasing content. Thus, when a new Madonna CD is released, rather than buying the CD, these users simply take it. We might quibble about whether everyone who takes it would actually have bought it if sharing didn't make it available for free. Most probably wouldn't have, but clearly there are some who would. The latter are the target of category A: users who download instead of purchasing.

B. There are some who use sharing networks to sample music before purchasing it. Thus, a friend sends another friend an MP3 of an artist he's not heard of. The other friend then buys CDs by that artist. This is a kind of targeted advertising, quite likely to succeed. If the friend recommending the album gains nothing from a bad recommendation, then one could expect that the recommendations will actually be quite good. The net effect of this sharing could increase the quantity of music purchased.

C. There are many who use sharing networks to get access to copyrighted content that is no longer sold or that they would not have purchased because the transaction costs off the Net are too high. This use of sharing networks is among the most rewarding for many. Songs that were part of your childhood but have long vanished from the marketplace magically appear again on the network. (One friend told me that when she discovered Napster, she spent a solid weekend "recalling" old songs. She was astonished at the range and mix of content that was available.) For content not sold, this is still technically a violation of copyright, though because the copyright owner is not selling the content anymore, the economic harm is zero--the same harm that occurs when I sell my collection of 1960s 45-rpm records to a local collector.

D. Finally, there are many who use sharing networks to get access to content that is not copyrighted or that the copyright owner wants to give away.

And based on comments here and elsewhere, one I'm reminded I've heard before, I venture to add a 5th case:

UPDATED wrote:

E. Those who use sharing networks to download what they already bought in another digital form. Aka. format shifting, for various reasons including DRM or for backup purposes. Examples include:

* You bought a copy-protected CD, and you can't conveniently transfer the songs to your iPod or MP3 player.
* Games that are so crippled by copy protection that you had trouble running the game you bought, but a downloaded copy would be free of such crippling DRM. 2649 1/5 stars offers amusing insight.
* Your HDDVD player stopped working, no player is sold anymore, and you want Bluray versions of HDDVD movies you bought.
* Software/games where the CD/DVD they came on have been too scratched up to play (by your children or whatever reason). Case of downloading a backup copy of digital goods you bought.

Free Culture's chapter on Piracy elaborates on the first 4 cases, you can read them there. Since the copyright owners are so fond of using the term piracy and calling you pirates, I believe it's important for you to know and discuss just what is piracy?

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 9:35 pm

IH wrote:

B. There are some who use sharing networks to sample music before purchasing it.

C. There are many who use sharing networks to get access to copyrighted content that is no longer sold or that they would not have purchased because the transaction costs off the Net are too high.

B describes me, but its usually I'll find out about something, and its usually not of the music variety but TV show or movie, and I'll make up the decision to buy or not to buy. I'm quite happy to build up a DVD collection as long as I'm getting something good. I also like the fact that I can enjoy something a while so I can be careful with my money too. I could take the approach of not paying for my own copy, but no if something is worth it, I'll buy it.

What is really annoying is waiting for DVDs to be released here. Or TV shows to be aired here. Dexter season 2 hasn't been released on DVD here or else I just haven't encountered it in the shops any time I've been in them which is unlikely. Also, waiting for them to be aired here, having to watch them on the schedule of whatever network and having ads? No thanks, not for me.

C is applicable to me in some instances, though sadly a lot of the time I have trouble finding a source with a lot of seeds for things that are niche.

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:07 pm

I started using P2P in 99. Shown to me by my roommates, I was amazed at all the free stuff. I found myself downloading music from my past and the occasional video clip... as even at the wopping 30Kb/s download speed, movies combined with the uncompressed size of my former hard drive were weeks away.

Not until around 2001 when bandwidth got a drop kick in speed did I ever download movies. The thing is I only downloaded them to watch them again... as I have always been an avid movie goer.

Now that I am older and the movies have become ridiculously stupid in general I will download flicks I did not waste my money on in the theaters.

As far as Music goes... I never bought CD's or even Tapes really... I am way too frugal. I usually only like 1 song on a disc so I don't bother getting an entire disc.

As for singles on the web... again... I would rather just hear it on the radio unless it is a song I just can't live without. Currently there are about 6 of them.

So pretty much option A

Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 11:40 pm

I would say B..C...and D

I started when i was wanting to get Pink Floyd live shows after seeing them at BC Place in 1994 and found out about RoIO = Record of Illegitimate/Indeterminate Origin ...otherwise a bootleg of a live show...i could not find these shows..then i found napster and now i have at least 100 bootlegs of Pink floyd shows from the early 60's to 1994

I like to listen or see what i want to buy before spending my hard earned money

i am all for little guy trying to get his name out by giving what he has created and giving it away for free ..eventually they will be discovered and there is no better way than p2p or torrenting to get it done

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:24 pm

My favorite and most common use for torrenting is to get episodes of TV shows. I've purchased a few season sets but I've really found I enjoy the digital ease of being able to just click a file.

And I know that there are TV rips and DVD rips of TV shows but a large portion of the episodes of TV shows torrented are TV rips. Which I equate to the same thing as if you recorded a show with a VCR to watch later. It's not fantastic quality. And in face more than a few of my Sci-Fi shows will have a few seconds of commercial or Sci-Fi channel advertisements in them.

Also. I own a lot of CD's I've bought them over the years, records too. But they get old and having a digital copy is nice because you don't wear out a digital copy. So I do have downloaded copies of much of my music, but I also own originals too.

I remember when for a short while they wanted to rig VCR's so that they couldn't record for more than 10 minutes at a time. That didn't go very far because it didn't make any sense. Since when is it bad to record shows from TV. I know TIVO and stuff are for that purpose. And I really doubt people are renting DVD's of movies and converting them to VHS that would just be lame. I don't think the 10 minute failsafe went anywhere which is good. That and by now VHS is long since a thing of the past.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:27 pm

All four.

And I'm guessing most people, if they're honest, are in the same boat, though perhaps to varying degrees in each category. Here, in brief, are some of the usual reasons I use p2p:

-I want to watch/listen to something but don't have the cash (A)
-"...but can't get it anywhere (C)
-"...but I want a digital copy (for remixing, viewing on various devices, etc. Kind of A. , since I'm not willing to buy it again just to get a digital copy I have to DRM-break anyway? Maybe there should be a category for "lazy").

Here's the thing: if you think about it, B is very nearly a sub-set of A. The reason people want a free copy to "Sample" is because, like the A group, they aren't in a position to buy, because of lack of funds, lack of motivation/etc. If, hypothetically speaking, everyone was sitting on a giant pile of money, they (probably) wouldn't bother p2ping to see whether an album was any good: they'd just go to iTunes, buy all the songs, and delete the ones that sucked. Assuming of course, also hypothetically, that iTunes was as easy to use and as vast in scope as p2p networks (which at least in some ways it isn't, and probably never will be).

Second, D doesn't count. Only a true idiot would claim that accessing clearly public-domain material over ANY network is in any way either "piracy" or illegal. Have the industry lobbies done so anyway? Absolutely. But my point still stands.

Which leaves A and C, the "Can't be bothered to pay" -ers and the Collectors of Antiquities. I've been both, though probably more of the first than the second. Neither is wrong, though the latter is obviously easier to defend. But in the first's defense, yes, sometimes I'll grab a movie or album online because I can't pay for it. But perhaps it would be instructive to examine what I did when such a situation struck before the advent of p2p: I checked them out of the library . Whole piles of movies and books, the vast majority of them still in copyright. Year after year.

I enjoyed them.

No one got any money from it.

And the law didn't care.

I'm convinced that there's no ethical difference between downloading a copyrighted work for free and borrowing it from the local library. How could there be? The only difference is legal, set down in grimy, outdated and cock-eyed laws that should have been changed years ago.

[/soapbox]

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:32 pm

I'm an A type personality. so I guess I'm an A. I'm also cheap but don't tell my husband.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:38 pm

I have been using ISOHunt for a while now and am very impressed.

I mainly download albums etc which I had already on cassette vinyl and by rights I feel that I bought and paid for the item so why should I have to buy another copy on a CD or from Itunes.

The amount of markup on CD DVD is just ridiculous and if someone dosn't go from being a millionare to a trillionare that's no problem to me.

These days there are so many crap tracks on CD's I'll download them and if I like what I hear I will go and buy the album or film. Some albums include a lot of filler material and I don't want to pay for crap I don't like.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:45 pm

The main reason I stated using Torrents was so I could see my si/fi TV series long before we actually get them in Australia.And secondly I hate commercials and having to watch only one episode at a time.So I usually down load two or three episodes and watch them all at once add free.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 7:48 pm

I'm mainly B - I look at it in the context of borrowing money, if the bands album costs £10 to buy, I download that - end up going to three or four of their shows at £20 per ticket, purchase the album on vinyl for £15, purchase every released single from that album at maybe £3.00 each, they get back what I borrowed to begin with, and with mass amount of interest on top.

if the album is rubbish I download it and delete it anyway so it doesn't harm their sales, because I wouldn't have gone and bought it before hearing it anyway, it just gives me the ability to channel my time money and energy into bands who in my opinion are worth supporting instead of wasting money on a cd which will inevitably end up in a plastic box in my warddrobe for the next decade till i can be bothered to haul it to the nearest charity shop.

In the context of movies I'm more in the A section, but inevitably they aren't losing money because I'd never go to the cinema to see them anyway, whereas I might cough up for the price of the dvd when its released because I know what I'm getting.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:36 pm

Thanks to all

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:26 pm

D only

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:34 pm

B and D of course. Wink

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 9:43 pm

I can't afford to take all my children to the movies to see every one that comes out due to the fact that it cost about 120 dollars US each time we go. We still go, just not as much anymore. So I download movies so my family has something good to gather together and watch on Saturday night. I purchased a projector so its a good time for the hole crew. But no one loses money because of it. They lose money because of high prices. I have also downloaded 2 apps. At 2 to3 hundred dollars for these I just can't see paying that much for them. As for as music I download new stuff to preview. If I like it I buy it. music is still rather cheap.

Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:24 pm

I think everyone, if they were honest, would admit to using P2P for all of the above in some mix/combination.
Personally, at the moment I am broke, so I fall under "A" a lot. Then again, I wouldn't have paid for it in the first place since I can't afford it.

Now if the prices were reasonable, I'd buy a lot more often, but when they charge an arm, a leg and a first born for you to buy a product, and then due to stupid copyright you don't even OWN what you bought, I consider it a bit of a "personal fight for freedom" to download some of the content I do. (I'd like to see the car industry or the housing industry implement such crap laws; "You can buy the car/house, but if you want to turn that bedroom into a den, or want to put some winter tires on that car, you can't because you're in violation of EULA").

Also, most of the stuff out there nowdays is utter crap, music, movies and games. A very rare gem does come along, and when it does, I usually go out and buy it. Often when the price on it has gone down to a more reasonable level. I don't mind at all paying for a great flick matenee showing or buying a great game once it's down to $30-40 rather than the $60-70. So in this regard I fall under the "B" category.

"C" is also a very common use, often trying to locate an old favorite game or movie that I simply cannot buy at all, not even in the bargain bins. Occasionally also used for foreign games/films that are near-impossible to find even if they ARE still in the bargain bins in that country, I'm not likely to buy a plane ticket just to browse the bargain bins abroad.

"D" is the most strange one for me personally because when it comes to anything that is free, why use P2P when you can just get it from the website of the creator/distributor. I always just go to the official sites for those, on rare occasions they distribute using P2P networks, torrents especially, but most often they use online repositories such as sourceforge, rapidshare, shareware, etc...