On Bono's thoughts on IP

U2 frontman Bono's Op-Ed for the New York Times has officially raised the hackles of the Internet.  This is by no means a difficult thing to do, but what is particularly interesting in this case is that his words are being completely misread by those infuriated by the article.

In the article, titled "Ten for the Next Ten", Bono states:

Caution! The only thing protecting the movie and TV industries from the fate that has befallen music and indeed the newspaper business is the size of the files. The immutable laws of bandwidth tell us we’re just a few years away from being able to download an entire season of “24” in 24 seconds. Many will expect to get it free.

No one seems to be taking any issue with this portion, and it's pretty clear he's correct.  He continues:

A decade’s worth of music file-sharing and swiping has made clear that the people it hurts are the creators — in this case, the young, fledgling songwriters who can’t live off ticket and T-shirt sales like the least sympathetic among us — and the people this reverse Robin Hooding benefits are rich service providers, whose swollen profits perfectly mirror the lost receipts of the music business.

This is the statement that vexed the Web, thanks in part to BBC.com's truncation of this statment (omitting the section that is bolded above.)  People seem to think that Bono is somehow defending ISPs, but this is a grave misreading.  What he is trying to express is that ISPs only benefit from file sharing, and the creators are the only ones who will feel the pinch as their work is copied.  

File sharing does not hurt the major labels, as much as they claim that it does. Artists, both signed and unsigned, are affected.  Sometimes the effects of file sharing on a recording artist are positive– increased exposure and a satisfied, widespread fan base are merely a few potential good things to come of file sharing.  However, loss of potential profits from music sales is a reality, no matter how much the "pirating community" wishes to deny it.  For musicians that are signed to a label, any loss of possible profit is an excuse for the label to pull the rug out from under the band.

Regardless, it's clear upon a complete reading of Bono's statement that his thoughts are geared toward helping young musicians, not keeping mainstream acts in the black.  And he goes on:

We’re the post office, they tell us; who knows what’s in the brown-paper packages? But we know from America’s noble effort to stop child pornography, not to mention China’s ignoble effort to suppress online dissent, that it’s perfectly possible to track content. Perhaps movie moguls will succeed where musicians and their moguls have failed so far, and rally America to defend the most creative economy in the world, where music, film, TV and video games help to account for nearly 4 percent of gross domestic product. Note to self: Don’t get over-rewarded rock stars on this bully pulpit, or famous actors; find the next Cole Porter, if he/she hasn’t already left to write jingles.

Outrageously, people have taken this as an endorsement of draconian surveillance and "firewalling" by the Chinese government.  Perhaps this confusion was caused by the word "ignoble"... if Bono were less poetic, he could have said "shameful" or "despicable" and made it crystal clear that he is, in fact, against China's censorship of the Internet.

This segment of Bono's statement, aside from further condemning Internet Service Providers, clearly makes two points:

1.There is a chance that people will truly support artists and creators; this is something that movie makers might have better luck with promoting than the botched threats of the RIAA. That would be nice.

 2. Beware the wrath of the fat cats.  Bono mentions the ability to track content on the Internet to remind consumers of downloadable media that if someone wants to know where their content is ending up, it can be tracked.  We have seen individual music downloaders sued for ridiculous amounts of money... what happens when the movie industry decides to sue individuals for stealing a $350 million grossing (and rising) movie like Avatar?  Anyone who believes this will not happen within the next ten years is delusional; it is only a matter of time.

Which was Bono's ultimate point.  Looking into the next decade, we need to establish some clarity when it comes to downloadable media.  Musicians of all levels, from the hobbyist to the hopeful star, need to understand the laws of Copyright and Intellectual Property, even if they plan to give away their music for free.  As more and more people gain high speed access to the Internet, there will be more instances where the line between stealing and receiving is blurred.  That's all Bono is saying: advice freely given and well meant.

Don't shoot the messenger.