Is it even possible to live without the Internet? Maybe not. What about losing access to some of the most popular websites?
On Jan. 18, Internet users were surprised to find Wikipedia unable to be accessed and Google sporting a blacked-out logo. They, along with many other sites, were protesting SOPA and PIPA, two Internet piracy bills being debated in Congress.
In an attempt to address the problem of piracy on foreign websites, according to washingtonpost.com, these bills would give the "Justice Department the power to order sites to remove links to other sites that are suspected of pirating copyrighted materials.
"Critics say that the bills place an unreasonable burden on sites such as Google or Wikipedia to police links from their sites to see if they lead to websites flagged for bad behavior. They also argue that asking search engines to remove links from sites marked as being dedicated to piracy could be a threat to free speech," the article also said.
LAWS ARE NEEDED
Senior Logan Hacker, who is going to Belmont University in Tennessee next year to study music and entertainment business, also believes that it is a violation of privacy. However, he does think that there should be something to stop file sharing.
"If someone really likes a musician’s songs, they should support them," he said. He does say that it is something he worries about, since his future career could be affected by online piracy.
However, huffingtonpost.com says that Lamar Smith, the creator of the Stop Online Piracy Act or SOPA, will be "pulling these bills from considerations ‘until there is a wider agreement on a solution.’"
He told them that, "It is clear that we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal and sell American inventions and products."
The United States isn’t the only one battling online piracy. In Poland, a similar copyright agreement called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was passed. Cbsnews.com says that "Lawmakers for the left-wing Palikot’s Movement wore masks in parliament to show their dissatisfaction, while the largest opposition party, the right-wing Law and Justice Party, called for a referendum on the matter."
While there are many who oppose bills such as these, some companies such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), support them.
Members of RIAA manufacture and distribute about 85 percent of all legitimate recorded music produced and sold in the United States, according to riaa.com. They state that "downloading one song may not feel that serious of a crime, the accumulative impact of millions of songs downloaded illegally–and without any compensation to all the people who helped to create that song and bring it to fans –is devastating."
According to riaa.com, "From 2004 through 2009 alone, approximately 30 billion songs were illegally downloaded on file-sharing networks. NPD reports that only 37 percent of music acquired by U.S. consumers in 2009 was paid for. Frontier Economics recently estimated that U.S. Internet users annually consume between $7 and $20 billion worth of digitally pirated recorded music."
MUSICIANS STILL SCORE
However, senior Nate Botts thinks that this still doesn’t affect the musicians too terribly. He uses Lil Wayne for an example, whose album "Tha Carter IV" had the highest illegal Internet downloads yet still had top sales. "People still buy music even if they illegally download it," Botts said.
But riaa.com adds to their argument that in an analysis by the Institute for Policy Innovation, every year 71,060 U.S. jobs are lost to piracy from sound engineers and technicians to warehouse workers and record store clerks.
In fact, RIAA has filed lawsuits for this piracy. According to duke.edu, their main argument is "music and other files that are downloaded are the work of the artist, programmer or film director that made them, not public property.
"When files are shared," the site continues, "the artist or copyright owner does not receive any compensation. Therefore, they believe, sharing and copying files is stealing the same way shoplifting is."
However, RIAA has been known to file lawsuits against people who may be too young or too old to really know the legality of their actions.
"It’s weird how they don’t care who you are or how old you are. They just sue you," senior Miranda Ethell, who researched illegal downloading for an AP Comp. paper, said.
Duke.edu says that the claim made by supporters of downloading is that "sharing helps the affected industry by allowing the consumer to sample the product before spending the money to purchase it. This in turn generates a new fan base as many discover artists that would be impossible to discover otherwise, thus generating more accurate sales."