Monday, May 12, 2008

Selectively Utopian (Or... Small Content Creators Are The Redshirts Of The 21st Century)

I finally figured it out... People that share files and have this moral attitude that they are doing nothing wrong are not just misguided or using the technology to justify a arguably questionable act, They are just Star Trek fans!

They are trying to force the first steps of a Roddenberrien vision of the future where there is no money, there is no work other than what you do to better yourself and here is the good part... Technology has advanced to the point were all basic human needs are met at zero cost. 

Relevant Utopian Points of a Star Trek future:
  1. Energy is essentially free
  2. Food can be "replicated" using the free energy
  3. Living space and shelter is free (somehow)
  4. People create art because they can, not out of a need to earn a living from their talent
  5. All human knowledge, entertainment and information, is freely accessible to anyone
So, we have the beginnings of point 5... without any of the other points to support it! What I think people who share files are basically doing is putting the IDEA of intangible media having no monetary value before the needs of the real people that still depend on the income from that content!

The file Sharing community is fond of repeating mantra like "Information wants to be free" well I think I have coined the perfect response by saying that what they are are proposing is a "Selective Utopia"!

They want certain obtainable elements of a futuristic utopia without other supporting elements that make it all plausible to a working society, and they are willing to sacrifice the well being and rights of other human beings in order to get those first elements.

They want the parts of the "perfect future" that they can have now even if that will cause hardship and difficulty to the very people trying to create interesting, unique, or simply new content for them because the other parts of the "perfect human utopia" are impossible with our current technology. I honestly think some of them understand this but instead of being sympathetic or trying to find a interim solution, it is simpler to blame large media companies and and ignore the very existence of small, independent content creators because that causes a moral dilemma for them.

In other words, they see us as expendable, much like a poor guy who made the poor choice to wear red on the day he got picked to beam down with the lading party. Problem is, I don't think this will be a reversible trend and I don't think these attitudes will be "undone" once the war with "big media" is over. How will new art be supported in the future? Good question. Its one that doesn't seem to be getting asked... let alone answered.

I have never had a problem with file sharing really,  I do have a problem with the growing lack of respect for the talent of the people that create content. It seems to get worse as time goes by. I am fearful that recorded music, photography, programing and other inherently digital skills will just be seen as valueless in the future, and thats sickening if you understand how much effort can go into becoming good at those things. I don't want file sharing to end... I just want it to grow with a healthy respect for the content being shared and to find ways to support new and unique artist... I realize this is likely a pipe dream at this point but I keep trying.

There is apparently a movement going on to grow file sharing, to legitimize it. The idea being that if enough people do it then it become the legal standard. That makes sense, I am betting it will happen in some form, but I am afraid the people pushing for this haven't really thought it out, at least from the viewpoint of a small independent content creator.

If enough people buy into the idea that they should not have to pay for intangible media, many people stand to loose their livelihood. This goes for photographers, musicians, illustrators, programers, writers, filmmakers, painters, anyone whose work starts out or can eventually be converted into ones and zeroes. 

Sometimes its only a portion of their livelihood, but it could be the difference between being able to continue to create art or not being able to continue to afford the costs associated with it. In any case, taking income away from hard working people that may need it to survive or to continue making the art that others enjoy.

We are not just talking about huge record labels and movie studios here... The same technology that has given rise to file sharing has also empowered artist and programers worldwide to take charge of their own destiny.

The concept of "Pro" and "amateur" is as outdated as the CD and SoundWarehouse. If a person can make $1000 a year off their photography then by god they should $1000 a year off if and don't let ANYONE call them a hobbyist. When was the last time any of us had a job for more than 2-5 years? If Someone can make music for the rest of their life and sell a few thousand downloads a year then its likely that music may end up being the single highest grossing job they will ever have regardless if they never have a "HIT".

That is of course if people continue to apply any value to recorded music...

We may all just end up living in a selectively utopian world and such a person just ends up working extra shifts at the Sack-N-Save because they can't yet heat their house with free power or replicate free food to feed their kids.

Art takes time and effort, it has value. If it is eventually delivered in a digital form... that dosen't mater! If you make a copy you still are receiving the VALUE when you enjoy the work that was done. If the Content creator offers a digital file for free. GREAT! I do, and I will continue to. But if you are asked to support the art by paying a licence... well, until the time that we have invented dilithium reactors, food replicators, and transporters, you have an obligation, especially to independent content creators.

You could say that the way the file sharing community is currently implementing the progression of the march towards their Selective Utopia, Will end up possibly  permanently denying any hope of a Artists Utopia in the foreseeable future.

(Note about the art: The image of The Mona Lisa in a red Star Trek uniform that you see at the top of this post was created especially for this article. I then uploaded it in its basic form to see if it would spread across the internet and to see for myself how often I was credited, linked to, or to see how often the watermark was removed. "Red Shirt Mona Lisa" or "Star Trek Mona Lisa" has traveled far and wide, so far, I haven't come across anyone selling T-shirts made from the art or anything like that, and mostly I have been happy that people leave the watermark. Every once and a while someone will link back to the original or even spends a few moments to find me and ask before using it... So it has been interesting. And, trust me the fact that it is a modest manipulation of one of the worlds most famous paintings is not lost on me. I don't usually do mash-ups, I strive to be as original as I can. So, I find the fact that it has caught on amusing, hopefully others do also).

12 comments:

kiwa said...

When people start to feel what is one's is collectively for all then you side toward a social agenda. While some may feel this is a stretch I think once you decide that those who work to have must share all to those who do not, or that a central force must redistribute amongst the population, then you foster these issues. I believe in public domain and that some things after time or as a gift from the original producer can be free to all, but I agree that just because it exist and can be distributed does not entitle everyone to any work of others freely. I think it is time people understand that everything can not be sans cost.

Bender Bending Rodriguez said...

Ok, I first have to say that that is an awesome picture!

Secondly, I totally agree with you. I was just thinking how its funny that within the science community, I feel just the opposite. I think that journals in which scientific papers are published should be freely available. Especially when the research is paid for with public tax dollar, which it often is. I suppose its a completely different business model, though. You get paid to do the research and then are expected to publish.

Murdock Scott said...

Kiwa,

I also believe in public domain. After a time, most work should absolutely be set free. I would even go as far as saying that we could stand to loosen the rules a bit and allow greater access so that people who don't have a lot of income are never denied quick and simple ways to get useful, educational or even just entertaining content. I don't even want to end casual file sharing really... I only hope to change the attitudes of the people that can afford to support content creators and get them thinking about it a bit differently... sort of a hopeless quest I think.

Now where did I put my lance? I think I see a windmill on the horizon... : )

Murdock Scott said...

BBR,

Thanks man! I had a lot of fun making it. I cant wait to find it on a bunch of splogs, repurposed 10 different ways without my permission, and eventually plastered on T-shirts that I don't get any profits from.

Of course... I didn't ask Divici if I could edit his work either... hmmmmmm. Moral dilemma. (That of course was part of the joke.)

You know It will be funny to see... I have only posted the 2 versions of it here and on my flicker account. both are watermarked and both have complete contact info in the meta data... lets watch and see what happens. lol.

About the science community, the difference I see there is that you guys seem inherently respected for your work. At least to a much greater degree on average than the common independent musician would be.

Try this out next time you happen to be covered in dirt because you were trying to fix your old beat up car on a lonely highway and you are trying to get a ride to the next town.

You flag down the only car that has been by in hours and the driver says OK, i may give you a ride... but I want to know what you do for a living first.

Do you say:

A. I am a research scientist studying the effects of Heisenberg felid theory on interpolating resonant protons.

or

B, I am Sitar player in a jazz punk fusion ensemble called The Flaming Fud Puckers! wanna hear our CD?

Kidding aside, I wish we had your sweet deal, I think the corrnerstone of it is the respect for what you do. People see the worth of it. Somewhere along the line people most people lost sight of the worth of art. Not that I blame THEM mind you.

I see it as the fault of the asses that have been selling it like it was Ckacker Jack for the last several decades.

: P

Murdock Scott said...

Yay!

http://coisasdemo.blogspot.com/2009/11/adorei-essas-releituras-de-monalisa.html

Murdock Scott said...

Neat! She is getting around on tumblr... with proper credit and links back no less!

http://davereed.tumblr.com/post/491974829/red-shirt-mona-lisa-by-murdockscoott-on-flickr

Murdock Scott said...

Heh, no proper credit here... but at least they are leaving my watermark!

http://www.fanpop.com/spots/star-trek/images/6819522/title/mona-lisa-famous-red-shirt-star-trek

Murdock Scott said...

More proper credit here and some nice comments...

http://www.startrekmovie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251&page=85

My faith in people may be restored a bit with all this great linkage back to me. I am sure anyone who spends even a small amount of effort looking for the creator will find me if this keeps up. : )

Murdock Scott said...

LOL! I just found it in a collection of images offered as a torrent

"Uploader's Comments:
These are funny/cartoon pictures of Mona Lisa colleted from various sites. Credit goes to those who made them.
Directory: The.other.Mona.Lisa
Files:
***snip (there were well over one hundred)***
Mona-Lisa-in-the-famous-red-shirt-of-Star-Trek-star-trek-6819522-322-500.jpg 132.7 KB"

Its funny the uploaded states... "Credit goes to those who made them" but of course spends no effort identifying those people. heh. So yeah, thats not really giving credit dear up-loader. : )

Murdock Scott said...

I guess someone twote about it at some point...

http://tweetmeme.com/story/293094178/red-shirt-mona-lisa-on-flickr-photo-sharing

greggieguygood said...

see can i win, SU all good what we you want is the people not to lose their jobs, hmm cuz some all steal for no gain 99% but it is where the money comes from I know, SU would not permit that: simply nothing gets subsidized basically it runs its self or its purpose is faded out maybe DS9 7/9 sonic shower or janeway and having to hook when no ones looking, it cleans the dirt and puts it back on, dirt is never dirty, in case i look to far out in left field I crippled it with bad humour for a bunt and run.

Murdock Scott said...

Over the last few days I have had fun tracking "Red Shirt Mona Lisa" on Pinterest. She is all over the place! Some folks even pinned the image so that it clicks though to my flickr account. A few people removed the modest watermark but most left it. One person even combined it with someone else's "Klingon" Mona and that has taken on a life of its own... http://technabob.com/blog/2010/06/15/mona-lisa-star-trek/