ACTA

I would like to start off my blog by discussing a very controversial issue: the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, better known as ACTA.

The Internet is overflowing with information about it, rage and ire abound and, as expected, a myriad of opposing opinions and views. As always is the case with such burning issues, however, is the unbelievable amount of misinformation being thrown around from both ends of the spectrum. With everyone so keen on voicing his or her opinions louder than the next guy, people forget that the strongest weapon to win an argument is to be informed about the topic at hand. This has left  many who had little information with several volumes of Encyclopaediae’s worth of information worth less than the flowery print on your average toilet roll.


So What is ACTA, really?

In short, it’s an international trade agreement that seeks to harmonise anti-counterfeiting measures around the world. The main concern many people have with this agreement is that it will threaten the liberties we currently enjoy on the Internet by allowing governments to monitor our Internet usage for illegal activity involving intellectual property. The official explanation provided by the EU is that this will not undermine the Internet or the individual’s online liberties, but on the other hand will secure jobs by shielding companies from piracy. Matter of fact is that there is an unusual air of secrecy surrounding its negotiations and details, which makes it hard to conclude what the reality is.

There is plenty of information online regarding the pros and cons of ACTA. In fact, you can read the official positions here, here and here, and get the anti-ACTA side of the debate here, here, here, here, here (etc. ad infinitum). Thus I do not want to turn this post into another source of (dubious) information and I just want to voice my opinion about it.

Do I agree with ACTA?

The abridged version of the answer is: No.

The longer answer is: I believe that it is a Panic Button of sorts that the entertainment and publishing industries are hastily attempting to push when faced with the ever-growing threat the Internet is proving to be.

ACTA photo: ThinkAwesome.com

By all means, businesses are businesses and their one aim, at the end of the day, is to make money. Many anti-ACTA protestors are using the argument that artists are filthy rich anyway; downloading their album for free won’t hurt. On the other hand, ACTA supporters claim that piracy is killing businesses and should be eradicated.
I believe that both sides are absolutely wrong in their arguments. In my opinion, piracy is a natural reaction to the industries’ failure to get their business model up to date with the times.

Allow me to explain. With increased losses caused by decades of piracy (from the humble cassette tape to the high-speed broadband revolution), the entertainment industry is attempting to regain some of it back by following this simple (or rather, retarded) logic: if item A is yielding 25% of the profits we used to get 10 years ago, produce 4 items of questionable quality and we would at least get 70% of that. On paper, this might make sense (somehow), but the reality is far from being so simplistic. With increased volumes of releases and lower quality of production, the general public is growing increasingly apathetic towards the idea of spending their hard-earned cash in dire economic times on 2nd or 3rd class material. Moreover, the increased volume makes it even harder for the average consumer to buy everything he or she would like to watch, listen to or read. Whereas the viewers were glued to the TV to watch a few good shows only a decade ago, today we are bombarded with tens of series running for many seasons, while new series keep stacking up on top. Surely, no one is willing to buy 40 season box-sets of all their favourite shows, which would cost well over €3,000, along with overpriced CDs from all their favourite artists, and still have cash to go to concerts and buy tons of book. This has caused people to enjoy all of the choices they are provided by obtaining it for free, legally or otherwise.

More people are tapping into YouTube to stream their music, while CD sales are sharply declining. Online services like iTunes have provided a sort of middle-ground with a cheap alternative to obtaining music online, yet less people see the need to buy it when you can get it for free in a matter of seconds.

So, where have the industries failed?
They have failed in recognising that piracy is in fact providing them with a vital lifeline: popularity. Most of the people downloading music and movies for free wouldn’t have necessarily purchased a particular item anyway, even if they had infinite supplies of money. Many people don’t bother parting with their cash for the unknown anymore. People want to purchase items they are 100% sure they enjoy, which is a small percentage of items amongst the barrage of releases released everyday. This has led to the grossly erroneous claims that piracy and counterfeit items are costing Europe €8b, which is calculated by counting the potential gains if all the downloaders and purchasers of counterfeit items bought all the releases they obtained for free or opted for the “genuine” stuff. They never mention, however, the hundreds of millions gained through concert tickets bought by someone who has never purchased a CD, along with the hundreds of millions in increased merchandise sales and billions more earned by the other perks that come with popularity. Even the big-names themselves are providing music for free, which has helped the artists become unreasonably popular. I dare say that 90% of artists today would not be so popular if it wasn't for free music. 
Take Justin Bieber. Horrible music, despicable fake character. Yet, his videos on YouTube have collectively gained over 2 billion views. If only 1% of those views resulted in a CD sale, we're looking at 20 million sales and millions more in ticket sales. Of course, those YouTube videos are legally uploaded by the copyright owners, however it highlights the power of free material. It highlights the unwillingness of the majority to spend their money on items they can get for free. Millions of people who would have potentially never heard of him had his music not been available for free; it's led to a successful business which spawned a massive merchandise industry and a blockbuster documentary.

Recently, Mikael Hed, CEO of the Finnish company Rovio, makers of the hugely popular Angry Birds franchise, has put this very simply: “Piracy may not be a bad thing: it can get us more business”.

And this isn't limited to the music and movie industry. Paulo Coelho, a Brazilian best-selling author who sold over 12 million copies of his critically acclaimed books, attributes this mega-success to piracy.

Can the entertainment industry really survive without selling music, movies and games? I believe that the entertainment landscape has not only NOT suffered from this phenomenon, but rather it flourished! Anyone with a talent can become a superstar overnight thanks to YouTube. Any independent artist can provide his or her product for free while getting paid thanks to the YouTube partner program. Some of the YouTubers out there are earning 5 figure paycheques on a monthly basis doing what they do best in front of their camera, having millions of views from all around the globe, without the shackles of Sony, EMI and Universal. Why have independent artists figured it out while the big guns stick to their plastic and paper business model?

All this paved the way to ACTA. The big industries are refusing to see the elephant in the room and are instead trying to attack the problem from the wrong angle. Instead of asking what their faults are and how they can move on with the times, they are attacking the people by making the Internet a more hostile ground.

What about Malta?
Being Maltese, I also feel the need to address the situation here in Malta.

The recent online stir was initially triggered by this article:

Malta signs anti-counterfeiting trade agreement 

Malta has become a signatory to the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) – which is seen by critics to be an international version of the controversial SOPA bill – signed by the EU and member states at a ceremony in Tokyo today. (read more)

The Maltese government had seemingly signed in favour of ACTA without ever mentioning it in public, effectively signing it behind everyone’s back. A day later, this link started circulating which, at face value, suggested that the 3 Labour MEPs voted in favour, while the 2 Nationalist MEPs voted against. The Labour Party hastily issued a statement saying that the particular vote in question wasn’t a vote for or against ACTA, but rather a vote to determine which parts of ACTA should be revised. 

On the other hand, the Nationalist MEPs issued a statement shortly after, saying that the PL got it all wrong.

Maltese MEPs photo: Reuters

What can I say? The Maltese Zulu tribes have managed to turn this issue into a political, partisan matter and are now crossing swords. Their cavemen drones are, as usual, taking the respective statements to new heights, with one end accusing the Government of Fascism and wanting to make YouTube accessible only against a fee (no, I’m not joking here), and the others accusing the Opposition of backing piracy and assisting the Mafia (not joking here, either).  

The fact remains that none of the parties spoke out about this issue before the people started protesting online. Everyone was way too busy following the pathetic Franco Debono saga and worrying about Daphne’s blog. Once the people (read: the voters) starting voicing their opinions, they jumped onto the bandwagon, waking up from their comatose state to win some sympathy (read: votes). Yet, the monkeys believed them, regurgitating everything their favourite criminal (read: politician) fed them.