Cover art for Radiohead's "In Rainbows"
The principles behind Radiohead's decision to release its album essentially for "free," is an idea that Lawrence Lessig would probably agree with. Lessig, a legal scholar from Standford, argues eloquently in his book "Free Culture" about the nature of cultural production, its history, and how digital technologies have transformed how it is distributed currently. Lessig's arguments, unsurprisingly, center around the legal history of cultural production as he explains how recent copyright laws are anathema to freedom of expression.
Lessig does a brilliant job of introducing the reader to the main issues surrounding copyright laws and how the Web has complicated things. This is not to say the Web is to blame. Quite the contrary. The Web is a great facilitator to sharing ideas and content, Lessig says, and I agree. However, the author is quick to point out that piracy in its conventional sense-- the act of stealing from those who produce or distribute content is wrong-- Lessig explains that file sharing and other methods of sharing information online are not so clear-cut. Lessig points to history to support his claims.
According to the book, copyrights have not always been so clearly defined. While copyright law today encompasses things that written, songs that are recorded, computer programs that are developed, videogames that are designed, and other cultural artifacts, early English copyright law only protected books. But these early copyrights were designed with the aim of protecting the distribution of books, and not the artists.
Lessig connects this argument to today as he explains that artists still reap little of the reward their works produce. Drawing from the work of various artists of various kinds, they are always happy with the way copyright laws work either. Unsurprisingly, it is the MPAA (A body responsible for producing motion pictures) and the RIAA (the lobbyist arm of the recording industry) that are the biggest culprits.
The author's arguments rotate between examples drawn from legal history and philosophical arguments supporting the notion that spreading culture is important. After painting a nuanced, detailed sketch of the problem, Lessig recommends a remedy for the copyright issue: a new way of legislating copyright concerns. Lessig feels that the creative properties of artists should be defended against those who would try to profit wrongfully from other's work, but at the same time, appeals for the importance of sharing work that is culturally significant.
Sometimes, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Lessig understands this, and his assessment is thorough and well-reasoned. Coming into the reading, I expected this to be simply an assault on the importance of copyright law, but Lessig's work is much more than that. It is an appeal to all thinking people to reconsider how copyright laws are harming the spread of knowledge and culture and aims rectify the problem. As media outlets become increasingly more powerful, it is important for thinking people to stand up and take notice. Lessig's work caused me to take notice.
