New legislation in the
form of SOPA and PIPA intends to dismantle the internet as we know it
and replace it within a sphere of authoritarian sponsorship. It should
have been known that something of this nature would occur when Vice
President Joe Biden compared pirating music with breaking into and
stealing from a jewelry store. The intentions of these legislative
decisions are to inspire the transformation of an Open Domain internet into a Closed Domain internet reliant upon authoritarian
consent as opposed to free choice.
But serious fallacies and errs in thinking supersede the SOPA and PIPA bills, central to those errors are the very definition of "Theft" and its relation to the larger body of human interaction. The act of theft is all pervasive throughout life, but it is within human society that "Theft" has been abstracted into "Crime" and spliced into contractual law we as "citizens" follow as a birthright, a serfdom of service, if you will. But the act of theft, that is to say: the act of stealing, can be simplified to mean nothing more than "the act of deprivation". And in that sense everyone is guilty of theft, as deprivation is insurmountable in sustaining existence. For example, microcosmically, my free time is deprived by an employer I must labor for; I even say my free time, that is to say the time of SELF, is deprived through the simple act of communicating with another. Microcosmically, deprivation is extended even further into the Spectacle of survival itself within a 21st Century model of economic nourishment; I was not taught how to catch the fish at the supermarket, of course.
Despite the absurdity of reducing Internet "Piracy" to a Categorical Imperative vision of "Theft", legislators continue to push forward, as if they are blind to the idea of Fair Use. Fair Use interpreted in my sense is about transformation, and therefore circles back to transformative efforts of the SOPA and PIPA bill which wish to transform Fair Use into a vision in line with their image. Fair Use is usually broken down into the categories of "Commentary/Criticism" and "Parody". But what within the domain of the internet, or within the confines of phenomena itself is free from commentary, criticism, or parody? The act of any language based human interaction, the act of cognitive thinking itself, is by default a form of commentary. To deprive Fair Use on the internet is to deprive one of a basic human desire and Will for action. Therefore human creativity and ingenuity, which begins and ends through commentary (language), is stifled.
But what of the poor entertainment industry, aren't they being abused by the evil Open Internet? They're business owners just as Biden's hypothetical jewelers, are they not? But the point is their business is not being infringed upon by "Piracy", if they were less short sighted and more ingenious they would find what many professional Creatives and Entertainers have found, "Piracy" is a good thing. The act of online Piracy takes the logic of a "Free Market" to a logical conclusion, allowing human beings to engage in their desires with less pressure than a marketing team can possibly allow. Monetary value is only as useful as the system it exists in, for it is an extension of Fiat Money in today's system; it is a Medium of Exchange. A simplifying method, and all together arbitrary in light of the possibility of competing currencies. As economist and political philosopher Frederic Bastiat showed in his fascinating "What Is Money?" riches is equated with "progress and civilization". The SOPA and PIPA supporters wish to protect civilization at the expense of progress, but they fail to realize that both categories go hand and hand, and one cannot be gained without the other.
But serious fallacies and errs in thinking supersede the SOPA and PIPA bills, central to those errors are the very definition of "Theft" and its relation to the larger body of human interaction. The act of theft is all pervasive throughout life, but it is within human society that "Theft" has been abstracted into "Crime" and spliced into contractual law we as "citizens" follow as a birthright, a serfdom of service, if you will. But the act of theft, that is to say: the act of stealing, can be simplified to mean nothing more than "the act of deprivation". And in that sense everyone is guilty of theft, as deprivation is insurmountable in sustaining existence. For example, microcosmically, my free time is deprived by an employer I must labor for; I even say my free time, that is to say the time of SELF, is deprived through the simple act of communicating with another. Microcosmically, deprivation is extended even further into the Spectacle of survival itself within a 21st Century model of economic nourishment; I was not taught how to catch the fish at the supermarket, of course.
Despite the absurdity of reducing Internet "Piracy" to a Categorical Imperative vision of "Theft", legislators continue to push forward, as if they are blind to the idea of Fair Use. Fair Use interpreted in my sense is about transformation, and therefore circles back to transformative efforts of the SOPA and PIPA bill which wish to transform Fair Use into a vision in line with their image. Fair Use is usually broken down into the categories of "Commentary/Criticism" and "Parody". But what within the domain of the internet, or within the confines of phenomena itself is free from commentary, criticism, or parody? The act of any language based human interaction, the act of cognitive thinking itself, is by default a form of commentary. To deprive Fair Use on the internet is to deprive one of a basic human desire and Will for action. Therefore human creativity and ingenuity, which begins and ends through commentary (language), is stifled.
But what of the poor entertainment industry, aren't they being abused by the evil Open Internet? They're business owners just as Biden's hypothetical jewelers, are they not? But the point is their business is not being infringed upon by "Piracy", if they were less short sighted and more ingenious they would find what many professional Creatives and Entertainers have found, "Piracy" is a good thing. The act of online Piracy takes the logic of a "Free Market" to a logical conclusion, allowing human beings to engage in their desires with less pressure than a marketing team can possibly allow. Monetary value is only as useful as the system it exists in, for it is an extension of Fiat Money in today's system; it is a Medium of Exchange. A simplifying method, and all together arbitrary in light of the possibility of competing currencies. As economist and political philosopher Frederic Bastiat showed in his fascinating "What Is Money?" riches is equated with "progress and civilization". The SOPA and PIPA supporters wish to protect civilization at the expense of progress, but they fail to realize that both categories go hand and hand, and one cannot be gained without the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment