|
Peter de Jager is a provocative Speaker,
Writer and Consultant. His primary focus in on how we manage change,
technology and the future.
In addition to speaking at conferences
worldwide, he also writes monthly columns for CIO Magazine and
Computerworld Canada.
His goal is always to question what we
think is so, and in so doing perhaps open up new opportunities.
If you'd like permission to reprint any
of Peter's articles, please contact him directly.
You can contact him at
pdejager@technobility.com
Or sign the Guest
Book and he'll get back to you.
|
|
|
I consider myself both an ethical and moral person, and yet, thanks to the
Internet, I'm a thief.
When I first heard about Napster I made a conscious decision NOT to
download it and install it on my PC. However, I have teenagers in the
house, and it somehow magically appeared on my desktop. The next thing I
knew I was stealing the intellectual and artistic property of musicians.
Why? Because it is so incredibly easy. Just point, click and snatch. No
chance of getting 'caught', no possible confrontation with the artist or
the police, and all done in the privacy of my own home.
I'd never in a million years, steal something from a store. HMV doesn't
have to put up security monitors to prevent me from stealing. I know it's
wrong, and wouldn't dream of exercising a five fingered discount.
If I believe it's wrong to steal, and I believe I do, then why did I use
Napster? Are my ethical beliefs so shallow that the only thing stopping me
from stealing a car, is learning how to hot-wire it and somehow avoiding
the risk of being caught? I'd hate to believe that, but my experience with
Napster would suggest it's true.
Moving away from this painful introspection for a moment. What does it say
about society? Napster was a runaway success, until it was finally shut
down. Thievery pays... for a while at least.
If ease of access is the real obstacle to unethical behaviour, then the
future is a rather dim one. I know I can copy DVDs, but there's no Napster
for DVD theft as yet. At least not in the sense I can snatch a DVD in less
than 6 minutes. If there were? Would we use it? If we do, what's the
ultimate future of the movie industry?
This ethical flaw of ours is holding back progress in certain directions.
Paperbacks would be long gone, if the publishers and authors had any
belief that widespread theft of published works wouldn't take place.
Nobody is that naive. Napster was a worldwide social experiment proving
conclusively, we'll steal anything if it's not nailed down.
There's no technical solution to this problem. The closest music ever came
to being safe from theft, was before the advent of recording devices. It
was extremely difficult to steal a 'live' performance. Once it was easy to
copy music, it became easier to steal it. The same is true for books and
movies and anything else we digitize.
The solution as always, lies within ourselves. Not that I have any
naive belief we can change human nature. Our technological future
means ease of access will increase. Which means we will rationalize our
behaviour and somehow adapt to a changed world.
How? How do musicians make a living, if copies of their music are free for
all? Live performances would seem to be the natural answer, but for that
to happen, live performances would have to become the 'thing' to do. In
other words, a shift in how we seek out entertainment must take place. Is
this a reasonable shift in a culture? If you believe it is, then invest in
music halls and coffee shops, because live music will make a comeback.
Not all situations will offer even possible solutions. How does an author
shift their product so they can survive the unpaid mobility of their work?
Would you want to sit through a live reading of 'A Tale of Two cities'? Or
what happens to the movies? If it becomes too easy to snatch a movie,
where's the incentive to make something like 'The Englishman' or 'The
Matrix'?
The problem is rampant. Sierra Studios has worked on developing the game
'Arcanum' for several years. It's not yet released in North America and is
already available for stealing on the Internet. My Napster experience
aside, I know if I steal this product, then I'm part of the problem. It
turns out my ethics aren't as shallow as I feared. I'm not even tempted to
steal it.
Technology always has a social consequence. If you feel these questions
are inappropriate in a computer journal, then who should be considering
them? Like it or not, we're the technologists, and the changes we make,
affect society. If we're not considering the Ethics of Access... who
should be?
© 2005,
Peter de Jager – Peter is passionate about change, how it affects both
individuals and organizations and allows them to grow and prosper. To contact him, and
host internal seminars on Change visit www.technobility.com
For
reprint permissions click here.
|