One of the issues we discussed a bit was the “irrational fears†on the part of content industries (specifically motion picture and music) that all of their sources of revenue will disappear absent some forms of digital rights protection. I wonder if there is also perhaps “irrational fear†on the part of those of us who worry about potential for rights lost through technological changes proposed by the content industry (myself absolutely included!).Yet, between these two “irrational fears,†there may be some value in the dialog that is taking place. Copyright law and technological standards evolve so slowly that finding a compromise between these two seemingly polar positions might be an important part in the production of law and social consensus (despite the drawbacks inherent in law made through compromise).
Further, I’m personally interested in the role that this dialog plays in informing the public about copyright law, and in its role creating norms of compliance. Do people listen to the Valentis and Gillespies of the copyright debate? How do their arguments impact their actions? If the “average Joe†isn’t listening, are those who can really make an impact listening (legislators, academics, creative types, industry people)? What impact does it have on them, and any potential policy?
[This post is part of a summer reading group, following a discussion of Tarleton Gillespie’s Book Wired Shut.]