The Internet is in its infancy. Electronic information still travels along copper wires left over from the industrial revolution, but the information age is about to hit puberty. Fiber optic cables are sprouting in unexpected places. The piracy and chaos we are collectively experiencing is growing pains.

    For a few awkward years, the situation is only going to get worse. But soon enough the labels, studios and every other paranoid media owner will have to stop acting like petulant teenagers. The time has come to address piracy with some real, sustainable solutions that consumers will support. The time has come for the entertainment industry to grow up.

    ACT I: THE SET-UP

    Current system is shot to hell. Heads buried firmly in sand.

    A few months ago, the writer and NYU professor Clay Shirky told me he thought DRM was a “nostalgic” idea. Nostalgic is the best adjective I’ve heard to describe how most large entertainment companies think about controlling their content in a digital era. Big media continue to view the situation through rose-tinted spectacles while consumers see red. When being a pirate is the easiest way for people to access the content they want in the format they want it in, then something has gone very, very wrong.

    There isn’t a moral defense for stealing in most cases. But there isn’t a moral defense for invading people’s privacy and imposing draconian laws to protect outdated, crumbling business models either. Music and movie piracy is rampant because over the last ten years, the market has utterly failed to provide a wide range of preferable legitimate solutions. If this continues as bandwidth increases and download speeds accelerate, the entertainment industry will be left in ruins. Many think that needs to happen for new business models to form. I think those currently in power simply need to grow a set and confront the reality of the situation.

    So far the search for new revenue streams by the big labels and studios has only turned up one that they seem to be comfortable with: the legal department. It’s impossibly difficult and expensive for the average consumer to use music legally in podcasts, on websites, in remixes, or in public speeches for example. But if you do decide to use music illegally, it’s entirely possible that a huge team of lawyers will come at you like a troop of rabid spider-monkeys. Instead of looking at real solutions, all the labels seem to be doing is exacerbating their problems.

    Pretending the current laws or legitimate options for consuming movies and music online are in some way going to stop piracy from turning the entire entertainment business into a giant anarchic swap-meet is like pretending recycling plastic water bottles will single-handedly end global warming. The problem is the entertainment business doesn’t recognize the giant anarchic swap-meet for what it really is; a great way for them to make a ton of money.

    ACT II: CONFRONTATION

    Licenses replace sales. Labels accept reality, or die.

    CD sales are in freefall, (the arrival of the Mac Book Air this week was perhaps the final death knell for the format) and the legal department is clearly not a viable long-term revenue stream. A more efficient way to monetize how we consume music online (and other goods with zero marginal production costs) is not to think about monetizing them in terms of sales, but instead in terms of licenses.

    This is already beginning to happen. Deals like the “Comes With Music” partnership struck between Universal and Nokia last month may feel like “one step forward, two steps back”, but at least we’re finally heading in the right direction. And the fact that all the majors are starting to work with legitimate file-sharing models like iMeem is encouraging.

    The solution we are slowly moving towards is a voluntary collective license for music, which consumers could choose to pay, or not. It needs to work all over the world. National boundaries don’t apply to this kind of information anymore. To pretend they do is as nostalgic a notion as DRM.

    Organizations such as ASCAP or the BMI could fulfill this role. This system wouldn’t be a tax; there would be no cap on the amount of money an artist or label could earn, innovation would not be stifled. Bennet Lincoff wrote a paper this time last year which I believe could be the answer. The EFF is also supportive of a similar solution, which they outlined in a 2004 paper:

    “The concept is simple: the music industry forms a collecting society, which then offers file-sharing music fans the opportunity to “get legit” in exchange for a reasonable regular payment, say $5 per month. So long as they pay, the fans are free to keep doing what they are going to do anyway—share the music they love using whatever software they like on whatever computer platform they prefer—without fear of lawsuits. The money collected gets divided among rights-holders based on the popularity of their music.

    “In exchange, file-sharing music fans will be free to download whatever they like, using whatever software works best for them. The more people share, the more money goes to rights-holders. The more competition in applications, the more rapid the innovation and improvement. The more freedom to fans to publish what they care about, the deeper the catalog.”

    目前的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)正處于孩童時(shí)期。電子信息通過(guò)工業(yè)革命留下的銅線(xiàn)廣泛傳播，信息時(shí)代即將步入青春期。光纖網(wǎng)絡(luò)隨處而見(jiàn)，而互聯(lián)網(wǎng)帶給人們的混亂和隱私上的沖擊同樣經(jīng)歷著一場(chǎng)巨大的考驗(yàn)。

    媒體的發(fā)展進(jìn)入了多年以來(lái)的低谷。但是，短時(shí)間之后品牌媒介，工作室以及其他的恐慌的媒體公司老板都不得不停止自己憤怒的行為。到了一個(gè)不得不用一些實(shí)際可行的辦法來(lái)解決隱私問(wèn)題的時(shí)候了。娛樂(lè)產(chǎn)業(yè)必須成長(zhǎng)。

    幾個(gè)月前，紐約大學(xué)教授Clay Shirky告訴筆者說(shuō),DRM(內(nèi)容數(shù)字版權(quán)加密保護(hù)技術(shù))只能作為一種懷舊的想法了。懷舊是大的娛樂(lè)公司對(duì)于在數(shù)碼時(shí)代控制自己發(fā)行內(nèi)容保護(hù)的最好的形容詞。大眾傳媒始終戴著玫瑰色的眼鏡來(lái)看這種情況，而消費(fèi)者戴著紅色的眼睛來(lái)看這種情況。當(dāng)盜版能夠使人們第一時(shí)間看到自己想看的形式和內(nèi)容，那么問(wèn)題就很?chē)?yán)重了。

    在大多數(shù)情況下，人們都不會(huì)為偷東西這樣的行為進(jìn)行道德上的辯解。人們同樣不會(huì)為入侵別人隱私以及為保護(hù)已經(jīng)過(guò)時(shí)，頻臨崩潰的商業(yè)模式進(jìn)行嚴(yán)厲的法律保護(hù)的行為進(jìn)行辯解。過(guò)去十年，音樂(lè)以及影視盜版光盤(pán)泛濫的產(chǎn)生是由于人們無(wú)法為音像市場(chǎng)提供行之有效的法律保護(hù)。隨著帶寬的增加以及下載速度的提升，如果仍然沒(méi)有完善的法律體系，那么娛樂(lè)業(yè)確實(shí)危在旦夕。很多人認(rèn)為面對(duì)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的沖擊，娛樂(lè)業(yè)應(yīng)該采取新的商業(yè)模式去經(jīng)營(yíng)，我認(rèn)為目前在位的經(jīng)理人的確應(yīng)該制造一系列新的方案來(lái)應(yīng)對(duì)當(dāng)前的形勢(shì)。

    目前為止很多大的娛樂(lè)媒體公司以及工作室對(duì)法律體系相對(duì)理解。對(duì)在播客，互聯(lián)網(wǎng)以及混音室以及公共演講中使用音樂(lè)的消費(fèi)者進(jìn)行征稅是不可能，而且成本昂貴的。但是如果你大規(guī)模的違法使用音樂(lè)，不乏會(huì)有一個(gè)律師團(tuán)對(duì)你進(jìn)行制裁。不但沒(méi)有解決他們的問(wèn)題，對(duì)公眾下載行為采取過(guò)激行為只會(huì)加劇娛樂(lè)公司的問(wèn)題。

    假設(shè)我們現(xiàn)在認(rèn)為指望當(dāng)前的法律體系對(duì)于在線(xiàn)音樂(lè)和電影來(lái)說(shuō)可以徹底解決盜版問(wèn)題，那么就相當(dāng)于我們?cè)诩僭O(shè)回收塑料瓶足以解決全球變暖問(wèn)題一樣天真。

    CD銷(xiāo)量越來(lái)越少，一個(gè)更有效的辦法去衡量線(xiàn)上下載音樂(lè)的價(jià)值不是量身訂價(jià)而是下載許可證。而目前這一切已經(jīng)開(kāi)始施行，上個(gè)月環(huán)球唱片與諾基亞公司在手機(jī)音樂(lè)下載上的合作看上去似乎“前進(jìn)一步，倒退兩步”，然而至少已經(jīng)開(kāi)始朝向一個(gè)正確的方向邁進(jìn)了。

    問(wèn)題是我們始終中間人，然而因?yàn)橹虚g人無(wú)法很好的完成他們的工作，因此我們決定不再支付給他們錢(qián)。

    娛樂(lè)行業(yè)今后的發(fā)展方向只能是共享。不僅是個(gè)體用戶(hù)將自己的資源共享，這也為很多網(wǎng)站提供了新的機(jī)會(huì)和賣(mài)點(diǎn)。

    娛樂(lè)行業(yè)目前面臨的沖擊同傳統(tǒng)的盜版形式之間的一條線(xiàn)是由消費(fèi)者畫(huà)出的。唯一可以解決盜版的方式仍然在于消費(fèi)者。