Opt in / opt out?

Of the many varied emails we’ve received over the past week or so, thanks to everyone including those who are vociferously pro piracy, one constant has been the reference to the argument regarding the “increased sales” generated as a direct result of sharing files across p2p networks with a lot of file sharers reiterating their preference to “Try before they buy”.

Whist nobody appears able to validate the claims of increased sales with any degree of accuracy or hard factual evidence it does present both sides of the argument with an opportunity to further develop the notion as a potential business model. We mentioned earlier that many file sharers considered the “battle” between p2p users and the industry was one which was business model based and not necessarily targeted at artists themselves. The unfortunate reality is that the artists, distributors, publishers and retailers have become the collateral damage resulting from this battle.

Given The Pirate Bay is widely acknowledged as the market leader in p2p together with the fact that the Pirate Party Declaration of Principles openly states “Copyright was created to benefit society in order to encourage acts of creation, development and spreading of cultural expressions. In order to achieve these goals, we need a balance between common demands of availability and distribution on the one hand, and the demands of the creator to be recognized and remunerated on the other”, the Pirate Bay medium and its users would be an excellent means by which to both test the veracity of the improved sales claims and move forward the Pirate Party political manifesto as published.

How can we as consumers, industries and advocates of change, collectively best harness and use this technology and endeavour to examine the phenomenon of increased sales by additional free marketing and the “try before you buy” consumer approach?

Essentially we believe that an opt in / opt out approach would be the best vehicle to achieve this. If the Pirate Bay were to act in the positive in relation to the party objective of achieving “a balance between common demands of availability and distribution on the one hand, and the demands of the creator to be recognized and remunerated on the other” one obvious way of achieving this would be to actually acknowledge the artist wishes as to whether their works may or may not be distributed for free via p2p.

If, for example, an artist is willing to have their material distributed via that medium in order to potentially generate additional sales then that is a commercial decision taken in good faith which they ultimately believe will benefit / sustain them. On the other hand if an artist decides the opposite and wishes to refrain from the opportunity then that, by all accounts according to the logic of the core argument of many Pirate Bay and other free p2p users, is the rock upon which they will perish as artists.

The notion that by distributing someone’s works for free, without their permission, in the hope that someone is exposed to it and decides to remunerate the artist is fundamentally flawed. True democracy, another tenet of the Pirate Party, is not built upon individuals making decisions – political, commercial or otherwise - on the part of third parties without the participation of that third party in any decision making process. This is not Nazi Germany, nor should we be advocating or seeking a return to that mindset. These are decisions ultimately for the artist, as the creator, to make.

We believe that the music industry, whilst flawed in many regards, has the resources and a moral obligation to its employees to facilitate an opt in / opt out policy as far as free torrent distribution is concerned where torrent sites are minded towards a truly democratic participation on the part of artists.

Whether it has “the will” is another matter which will need to be explored.

Both camps (p2p and the music industry) have entrenched positions and the people suffering the brunt of the inaction are the artists, publishers, distributors and retailers. Certain consumers, in this scenario specifically those who use the p2p networks with no intention of ever paying for materials downloaded, may feel that they are in a golden age – a Groundhog Day birthday present scenario. This is unsustainable. Already there are creative people questioning the rationale behind their being expected to invest heavily for nominal, if any, return.

The argument “if they are any good they will sell” is a straw man defence. Not everyone has the skills, wherewithal, technical knowhow and resources to self finance and promote themselves. What are the incentives for those with those particular skill sets to help any such individual where there is the very real possibility, despite even their best efforts, that they make no money from doing so?

As a society we cannot simply expect everything for free otherwise the supply dries up as there are no true monetary or business incentives for people to continue to be creative, nor for those in the ancillary service industries to support them.

Everyone knows that The Pirate Bay is not the only show in town when it comes to p2p / torrents. They are, however, the largest, most popular and the only medium with affiliations to a political party and clear manifesto objectives. We would therefore welcome and encourage an open and frank dialogue between both parties – without the tit for tat retaliatory posturing of the past – in an attempt to arrive at a mutually respectful position whereby the Pirate Bay / Party might achieve at least one of their stated objectives with broad consent and the music industry, per se, might embrace and engage a technology and proposed business model - the proponents of which firmly believe to be the future.

It is only by working together that both parties might come to understand and appreciate each other as truly viable entities.

If there were to be a meeting of the minds we, The Bats, would be happy to act as facilitators in that regard.

The Bats