The Merging of Media Mediums

As technology has evolved, so too have the mediums used to project, display, transmit and record. With regard to the music industry specifically, the introduction of Napster in 1999 brought with it the increased visibility and functionality of personal mp3 players. In 2001, the iPod was introduced, completely changing the game and ultimately evolving into today’s iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad. The increasing prevalence of smartphones today is still dominated by Nokia, but Apple smartphone (iPhone) sales are gaining market share quickly, growing 131.6% year over year. With devices such as the iPhone and the Android driving smartphone sales, more devices will evolve in the direction of a high performing smartphone with media capabilities and an application-centric interface.

As of late last year, research suggested that only one-third of U.S. mobile subscribers with media-capable phones use them to listen to music, compared to 60% of iPhone users. However, with increasing application development and usage, it is estimated that listening to music on mobile devices doubled last year. The ringtone industry came and went and now music labels and application developers are exploring areas of innovation. Because mobile users operate on monthly subscription plans to their provider, discussions of working with providers to provide music subscription services bundled with a service plan seems like a natural next step. The increased usage of mobile devices to listen to music has been aided by streaming sites such as Pandora, Grooveshark and Rhapsody, so that millions of songs are available to the user anywhere. One especially interesting site, Dropbox, has developed applications for iPhone/iPad and Android users, making their online external file storage available easily through these devices - since the site also features a public file sharing option, it walks the slippery slope of copyright infringement.

These available options for music lovers have Apple beefing up its iTunes as of late. Not only is Apple filing for an "iTunes Live" trademark which would book and record (and sell) live music sessions held by Apple, but they are also implementing a "VIP" ad program to track their iTunes customers' purchases. Though ad targeting is nothing new, it is somewhat disconcerting to have one company that heavily involved in one's livelihood - which is exactly what smartphones are becoming. The issues that have been arising regarding copyright infringement of music sampling and sharing are only bound to multiply with the increasing use of personal smartphones for almost everything imaginable. With accessible external file storage and music streaming on the go, smartphones are rapidly changing the knowledge exchange landscape - and ultimately shaping the rules that will govern it.

The Copyright Conundrum

If the music industry has failed to control any aspect of its universe, it is its ability to foresee and effectively adjust to the digital era of music creation and distribution. With constantly changing mediums throughout my parents’ and my lifetime, each new recording device has come with its own set of intellectual property issues. These devices challenge copyright laws within America and the rest of the developed world which statically exist in a fluid, digital space. With increasingly digital music formats, the media literacy of artists, listeners and customers is also evolving with the availability and prevalence of new technology.

One particularly entertaining documentary which explores the limits and flaws of current copyright law with regard to digital music sampling is Rip!: A Remix Manifesto.

This documentary follows the artist Girl Talk, 28-year-old Gregg Gillis, a biomedical engineer that samples biological data by day, and by night, creates and performs "mash-ups" solely through his laptop - with one mash-up potentially containing as many as 21 different song samples. Rip! also explores the failings of the music industry's war on individuals' downloads and the overriding question of freedom of creativity/building on collective culture versus works in the public domain which became copyrighted and are now off limits. The entire documentary samples various media sources throughout, citing the "Fair Use" principle of copyright law which allows sampling for the sake of argument. Greg Gillis notes towards the end of Rip! that, even in his day job as a biomedical engineer, it is often difficult to promote new, innovative ideas on the biomedical front due to the complete ownership of various parts of the potential solution -- patents. While Rip! tends to ignore the benefits of intellectual property and copyrights, it does make a good case for the futility and adverse effects of preventing a knowledge and creativity exchange.

Most recently, Britain passed the Digital Economy Bill into law on April 8th, which has taken progress on the copyright front to promote knowledge exchange backwards in many senses. Where copyright law needs to be amended to take into account the innovation of technology and human creativity, Parliament has instead given additional oversight to the high courts by having the power to force internet service providers (ISPs) to act as agents of copyright infringement enforcement against their customers. The Ministers can identify copyright infringing users, which the ISP must notify, keep a detailed watch on, and punish (not to mention increased fines). In turn, the Ministers can also push blocking injunctions on ISPs of websites used for copyright infringement, if need be. However, clearly, the Digital Economy Bill is unafraid to find ISPs liable for their customers' copyright infringement which simply adds another level of regulation in an environment that is already very fluid and difficult to effectively control. Most likely, this will simply result in ISPs either being unable to keep up with the necessary amount of regulation and paying large fines to the state (as well as individual fines), or blocking injunctions and/or excessive regulation will promote an almost Draconian internet state, preventing the creativity and knowledge exchange that the internet promotes. Measures of this sort beg the questions of whether internet users' privacy rights are being infringed upon and whether these sorts of punishments (large fines, loss of internet access) will have broad, unintended effects, especially in the cases of families and schools. Like the ongoing misplacement of penalties in the U.S., Britain exemplifies another case of "punish, then evaluate," if sensible evaluation comes at all.