Pirates of the South Pacific
Wednesday, October 7, 2009 by gelise123
At the end of Monday’s lecture on piracy and copyright infringement, Luke asked the question, “Is piracy of works by wealthy mainstream artists more ethically acceptable than piracy of works by ‘small’ and/or independent (and perhaps local) artists?” This is an interesting point, and my first reaction would be yes – Madonna is probably far less likely to feel the impact of one less CD being bought, than say, local Kiwi band The Checks. A survey of the class revealed that about 90% of my peers felt the same, agreeing that the severity of piracy as a crime depended on the case. The common consensus seemed to be that we are less likely to pirate independent and/or local artists than big stars.
However, Yar also raises the valid point that musicians almost always make more money from live performances than from royalties earned from the distribution of their records, and that in fact royalties very infrequently provide artists with a sustainable living. He quotes musician Ignacio Escolar as saying, “Like all musicians, I know that 100,000 pirate fans coming to my shows are more profitable than 10,000 original ones”. Thus, could piracy actually be beneficial to smaller, independent artists? By turning a blind eye to piracy, their music could perhaps gather a greater audience and a larger fan base – in turn recouping money lost from distribution through ticket sales to live performances.
Movie piracy on the other hand is a different story. In the film industry, the film itself is the primary product; it is not a stepping stone to live performances like music. Therefore, buying or downloading pirated copies of films would cause a negative impact in the financial takings of the filmmakers. This is important in a country like New Zealand, where the film industry is quite small. Here, it is important for local films to make a profit so that other films can continue to get made. According to tvnz.co.nz, pirated copies of Sione’s Wedding resulted in a loss of approximately half a million dollars at the NZ box office – a significant amount when you consider the total box office taking for the film was $3.8 million. The man responsible for selling the pirated copies had also been pirating Hollywood films, but was dobbed in to the police after associate became “incensed” that he was pirating local films. (http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411416/743419). Thus, coming back to the original question, I would answer yes – pirating mainstream artists does seem more ethically acceptable than pirating smaller, local artists - especially in the case of movie piracy.
However, Yar also raises the valid point that musicians almost always make more money from live performances than from royalties earned from the distribution of their records, and that in fact royalties very infrequently provide artists with a sustainable living. He quotes musician Ignacio Escolar as saying, “Like all musicians, I know that 100,000 pirate fans coming to my shows are more profitable than 10,000 original ones”. Thus, could piracy actually be beneficial to smaller, independent artists? By turning a blind eye to piracy, their music could perhaps gather a greater audience and a larger fan base – in turn recouping money lost from distribution through ticket sales to live performances.
Movie piracy on the other hand is a different story. In the film industry, the film itself is the primary product; it is not a stepping stone to live performances like music. Therefore, buying or downloading pirated copies of films would cause a negative impact in the financial takings of the filmmakers. This is important in a country like New Zealand, where the film industry is quite small. Here, it is important for local films to make a profit so that other films can continue to get made. According to tvnz.co.nz, pirated copies of Sione’s Wedding resulted in a loss of approximately half a million dollars at the NZ box office – a significant amount when you consider the total box office taking for the film was $3.8 million. The man responsible for selling the pirated copies had also been pirating Hollywood films, but was dobbed in to the police after associate became “incensed” that he was pirating local films. (http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411416/743419). Thus, coming back to the original question, I would answer yes – pirating mainstream artists does seem more ethically acceptable than pirating smaller, local artists - especially in the case of movie piracy.
Bruce Curtis mentioned in one of his lectures that because of illegal downloads, the sales of old school artists' music have decreased dramatically. That is why we are seeing so many bands reunited and doing World Tours so as to make money that is being lost through illegal downloads. I think it's fabulous for music fans as artists tour more often and we can enjoy live music; especially in a country like New Zealand which is often overlooked but we now have more and more artists touring here.