Public Knowledge posts a mystifying assault on the Irish rocker Bono over the issue of music piracy.
Whether or not you admire his music and political views, Bono made a good point when he wrote in the NYTimes that just because technology lets us make perfect digital copies of our favorite songs doesn't mean it's right to steal musician's work without paying for it.
Public Knowledge objects, dismissing online thievery as "trivial." Although on other days, its founder Gigi Sohn, says pirates "stink; they should be thrown in jail. And I actually ... encourage the content industry to go after people like that." However, she primarily argues that intellectual property rights hurt people in developing countries. Sohn even accuses Bono of "undermin[ing] just about everything else he professes to stand for" - causes that he's devoted considerable time and energy to - by advocating for the protection of creative rights.
I'm not sure that Bono's New York Times op-ed, in which he specifically tried to "rally America to defend" creative rights, was really addressed at Africa. I'm also not sure that music piracy is a top priority for the desperately poor people Bono tries to help. That seems like a bit of a diversion from Public Knowledge.
However, even assuming that this actually is about developing countries in Africa, it's worth noting that economists like Hernando de Soto would disagree with Public Knowledge and argue that "data shows that countries that protect the physical and intellectual property of their people enjoy nearly nine times higher GDP per capita than countries ranking lowest in property rights protections." It will be more difficult for developing countries to develop without the presumption of property rights.
How those rights are protected is a different question and perhaps a process of discovery. But on the question of whether they should be protected, Public Knowledge is wrong to treat intellectual property as if it is a public utility.
Whether or not you admire his music and political views, Bono made a good point when he wrote in the NYTimes that just because technology lets us make perfect digital copies of our favorite songs doesn't mean it's right to steal musician's work without paying for it.
Public Knowledge objects, dismissing online thievery as "trivial." Although on other days, its founder Gigi Sohn, says pirates "stink; they should be thrown in jail. And I actually ... encourage the content industry to go after people like that." However, she primarily argues that intellectual property rights hurt people in developing countries. Sohn even accuses Bono of "undermin[ing] just about everything else he professes to stand for" - causes that he's devoted considerable time and energy to - by advocating for the protection of creative rights.
I'm not sure that Bono's New York Times op-ed, in which he specifically tried to "rally America to defend" creative rights, was really addressed at Africa. I'm also not sure that music piracy is a top priority for the desperately poor people Bono tries to help. That seems like a bit of a diversion from Public Knowledge.
However, even assuming that this actually is about developing countries in Africa, it's worth noting that economists like Hernando de Soto would disagree with Public Knowledge and argue that "data shows that countries that protect the physical and intellectual property of their people enjoy nearly nine times higher GDP per capita than countries ranking lowest in property rights protections." It will be more difficult for developing countries to develop without the presumption of property rights.
How those rights are protected is a different question and perhaps a process of discovery. But on the question of whether they should be protected, Public Knowledge is wrong to treat intellectual property as if it is a public utility.
Leave a comment