But the use of that word 'piracy' to describe my activities indicates that some would have you believe that I have committed crimes that are morally equivalent to this most heinous of acts -- which still attracts the death penalty in many countries.
You see, somewhere kicking around at home I have a copy of Windows 95 CD together with a Windows 98 upgrade. Those CDs came with a software licence that said the operating system could only be installed on a single PC. Well, to date, that software has probably been installed on more than half a dozen PCs. Every PC was at the time owned by me, but by installing the software I am breaking the terms of the licence. Even though the software is virtually obsolete, in Microsoft's eyes I am committing an offence.
(You might ask why I chose to keep reinstalling Windows 98 -- particularly through such a tortuous process. Well, I use several applications that are only available on Windows, and I am not simply not interested in upgrading to Windows 2000 or XP -- I prefer to use Linux where possible.)
But it gets worse. My litany of supposed law-breaking goes back years, and I'm afraid that Bill Gates is not the only person who is worse off because of what some may term my disregard for the law. I have downloaded MP3 files from the Internet, and while I would probably not have bothered to buy most of that music on CD or vinyl anyway, I am still deemed to have impoverished some very-rich-but-not-quite-as-rich-as-they-would-otherwise-be people. As for those musicians that I respect, well, I would probably go out and buy their CDs or albums anyway, so I'm not really sure they lose out.
I also borrow books. And read them. And I don't even bother to pop a bob in an envelope and send it off to the author. OK, so borrowing books is not illegal yet, but it soon could be, and even if it is not you can bet your bottom bookshelf that the technology will soon arrive to make it impossible to do so.
Now I am not what you would call a habitual offender. Honest, Gov. Even so, people do try to stop me committing these supposed crimes. I hate to say it, but I have a problem with this. I have even more of a problem with people who try to stop me committing crimes that are not yet crimes -- and I'll explain what I mean by this in a moment.
First, I should point out that I would have no problem with the Business Software Alliance or other media representation group applying for an Anton Pillar order and raiding my CD counterfeiting factory -- if I had one. That sort of thing is clearly against the law, and I would have -- as the BSA rightly says -- taken a business decision that the threat of imprisonment and a fine was worth the risk of the money I would have made.
Nor would I have a problem with the BSA applying for an Anton Pillar order and raiding a business for using a buying a single software licence to run software on all the PCs.
But I do have a problem when media companies begin to develop technology that, in trying to stop me breaking the law, stops me exercising my legal rights. Copyright law was developed to strike a balance between the author and the purchaser of a piece of work, whether it is in the form of a book, or music or, more recently, software. The very term 'copyright' indicates a right invested in the purchaser to make limited copies and, in fact, copyright laws do in fact invest such rights for limited, personal use.
So what is going on when I buy a CD, fully expecting it to work in my PC and to be able to make a copy -- or rip an MP3 for personal use -- but the CD contains anti-copying technology. Is there a case for saying that the CD breaches my rights as enshrined in copyright law? I think there may well be. And is it OK for a company to engineer a product that, in making it (supposedly) impossible to break the law, infringes my rights to use that product as I wish within the law? Perhaps.
Imagine if cars were limited to 50mph throughout the world, just so they could not be used to break speed limits in the US, regardless of the fact that in much of Europe speed limits are higher -- sometimes much higher. Or if guns were re-engineered so they could not fire bullets that can kill people -- arguably a worse crime than listening to a Celine Dion CD on your PC. Actually, this second option would not be a bad idea, and people who listen to Celine Dion CDs should probably be locked up for good measure anyway. But you get the idea.
As for the software. Well I am quite aware that by breaking the seal I agreed to a licence, but there is a concept within British law at least that says wholly unreasonable contracts cannot be enforced. My copies of Windows 95 and Windows 98 have only ever been used on PCs owned and upgraded by myself. Is it unreasonable to suppose that I should be able to continue to use those copies on PCs that I upgrade or replace because I really have to if I am to be able to run the latest applications? I'll leave that one to you.
The rights of the individual are being eroded by big business and it is happening because they are doing it by stealth, and by clever use of propaganda. Of course I'm not a pirate. I am a regular person who exercises his rights, and who is finding it increasingly difficult to do so. If you don't believe me, just try buying an e-book and passing it round a few friends after you've read it.
Want to share piracy guilt?
Mr. Loney, let us share a cell!
Whilst incarcerated, we might reflect upon the evil of our ways over the years. Hi, I'm Alan...and I'm a pirate *sniff*
Seriously, if a genuine balance is not struck on these software piracy issues, copyright holders may find their work not much in demand. Most people I know (hmmm...not a bad idea for a song) are firmly of the belief that their personal rights come much higher on the list than someone else's rights (mostly whom they've never met, or are likely to meet), especially when that someone else wants them to buy their product. I'm sure you see where I'm heading...and where the inevitable will take us if we don't stop thinking about the dollar first. Personally, if I buy software or music and I want to reproduce it for my own convenience, I will do it. I see that as my basic right...I own it. If I want to make 10 copies and launch them into the air as clay pigeons, I will.
Anyways, that's my 2 cents worth...
Oh, heck, I wonder who I should be paying for having said that!
Be well,
Alan Richardson