I recently read the book Free: The Future of a Radical Price by Chris Anderson.  It contains an anecdote about a computer game developer who asked the readers of Slashdot, a well-known technology website, why his game was being so widely pirated.  The readers voiced a number of rationalizations that were quite thought-provoking.  One concern many voiced was the use of software mechanisms to prevent copying of the software were onerous and caused people not to want to pay for the game.  Others felt the game was overpriced for the entertainment it provided.

Image Credit: Matthew Lebahn

I don’t doubt that there is an issue with a number of computer games being overpriced.  Just the other day I considered buying Team Fortress 2 and decided against it base solely on the price tag.  I also agree that certain anti-piracy mechanisms are more onerous than they need to be to prevent piracy.  But there’s a serious leap of logic from the game being overpriced to pirating the game being okay.

The Tenenbaum file sharing case, which I covered the first day of, evoked the same problematic philosophy.  Many anti-RIAA advocates rationalize rampant music piracy on the grounds that the record producers “need to develop a new business model” to adapt to a reality where piracy is widespread and generally uncontrollable.  Charles Nesson argued this point directly in his opening statement.  The idea seems to be that rather than rely on rules based on assumptions that don’t really fit the reality of the situation, record companies should find other ways to earn money besides charging for copies of the music they produce.  These people seem to think that they can drag the music industry, kicking and screaming, into new business models by just showing them how easy it is to ruin their current business models.

The hubris in this attitude is astounding.  While refusing to patronize businesses that rely on a economically unsound model is perfectly understandable, the idea that the group refusing to accept reality forfeits its right to collect anything for what its offering should strike people as a fairly radical conclusion given the grievances presented.

Imagine the example of a farmer’s market where a farmer only wants to be paid in silver.  He offers 3 ears of corn for 2 grams of silver.  Most of us would counter-offer a dollar in US currency for those ears of corn.  If the obstinate farmer refused our money, we’d leave.  Most of us don’t carry around chunks of pure silver on us, and we’d probably consider the farmer’s eccentric or quaint, depending on his rationale.  None of us would demand the corn from him and force him physically to take the dollar from us, and fewer still would outright steal the corn from him.

Many of these activists argue that there’s a difference between taking something physical from a person and depriving them of a chance to sell something someone else gave them for free.  After all, the marginal cost to create another unit of software is close to nothing.  But this rationale doesn’t solve the farmer’s market hypothetical.  The farmer in our previous example may not be able to sell all of his corn before it spoils.  As such, it’s not unreasonable to conclude that taking two ears of corn without paying won’t have a negative effect on the farmer’s bottom line.  Frankly, given what the farmer is asking for his corn, it’s unlikely he’ll sell any at all.  So he won’t lose anything he wasn’t already going to lose because of his own stupid policies, right?

I’m not saying people who pirate music and software are bad people.  And some people are far more honest with themselves about why.  They want it and don’t want to pay for it.  But if we choose to do it, we should accept that we’re just doing something we shouldn’t be doing and not hide behind flimsy rationalizations like “they deserve it” or “this is in retaliation for [whatever your particular bone to pick is]“.  If you really don’t want to patronize offensive business practices, don’t buy music.  Use sites like RIAARadar.com and AmieStreet.com to get music you can get legally get for free or can buy without any of the proceeds going to RIAA members.  Go to live music shows and patronize local bands who self-produce.  But we can’t decry their business tactics while stealing the end product of their work.  It just makes us look like shallow, opportunistic poseurs.