Only 2 in 500 College Students Believe in IP

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "David Pogue of the New York Times has an interesting story about how fewer and fewer people believe that infringement is wrong. He mentions talks he gave back in 2005 where people were willing to believe that making backups of DVDs you own is wrong. Today, however, at his talks, he was only able to get two people out of a crowd of five hundred college students to say that downloading a movie or album is wrong. He goes on, like many before him, to bemoan the immorality of young people today, saying: 'I do know, though, that the TV, movie and record companies' problems have only just begun. Right now, the customers who can't even *see* why file sharing might be wrong are still young. But 10, 20, 30 years from now, that crowd will be *everybody*. What will happen then?'"

Comments

What do the rest believe in?

[tepples]

So less than one percent believe in IP. If not Internet Protocol, which network layer protocol do they believe in?

But seriously, there are reasons not to believe in "intellectual property" even if you do believe in copyright. For one thing, "intellectual property" confuses copyright law, patent law, and trademark law..

Re:What do the rest believe in?

[aussie_a]

They quite possibly do believe in IP. They just don't believe downloading for personal use to be immoral.

Re:What do the rest believe in?

[Erpo]

Thats right, if BSD copy and pasted all of those GPLed drivers and stripped the license and labled it BSD I wouldn't be heartbroken at all.

Hear hear!

I support the GPL over BSD-style licenses because I don't like the idea of Free code being used to improve proprietary software, but that's something I'm willing to live with if copyright is abolished, which is a more important goal.

Re:What do the rest believe in?

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

[College students] just don't believe downloading for personal use to be immoral.

Many of my friends didn't see anything unfair about heavy taxation and redistribution of wealth while they were students (and therefore paying no tax and probably claiming some sort of state funding toward their tuition expenses). In most cases, their views changed rather abruptly when they got their first real pay slip and looked at the deductions column.

The moral of the story is that your personal morals are at least in part a product of your own experience and view of the world. Most college students have a very narrow view of the world, being young and having yet to start the main working phase of their lives, so it's not surprising that their views on ethical issues like copyright infringement come from a one-sided perspective. It is, of course, regrettable how quickly certain people who have come through the education system and started work in knowledge industries forget their first perspective in their haste to advocate their second.

Re:What do the rest believe in?

[Pentahex]

Warren Buffet will never have to worry about paying the mortgage or the light bill. Sure, the Hollywood elite and super rich like George Soros can advocate higher taxes because they're economically untouchable. They have more money that anybody could spend in many lifetimes. The poor and lower middle class pay only minimal taxes. It's hard working middle class people trying to acquire wealth that are crushed by the jackboot of confiscatory taxation.

Our understanding will change...

[kyc]

  First everybody will believe that IP doesn't exist. Even now many people (including reasonable nerds such as we are) believe that IP does not exist in the form it struggles to exist today.

The context of IP is changing and it has to change according to Internet rules. People think that it might seem unethical but the availability of sharing (especially when there is more than a single network node for each human being) cannot be just neglected by the trivial assumption that people should respect for IP.

I don't believe in IP and I don't think they deserve it. Is the amount of effort they are putting to produce a song, really worth the millions of dollars they are claiming that they must make?
No way.

That's why they will lose. That's why they are losing every second. And at some point, they will really understand that resistance is futile.

Internet will prevail

Bias

[RockMFR]

Before anyone starts discussing the 2/500 statistic, remember that the interview method - asking an auditorium of college students to raise their hand - is not the best way to get a truthful response. The percentage of people who believe that downloading a movie/album illegally is wrong is probably much higher.

Re:Here's my take:

[couchslug]

"But 10, 20, 30 years from now, that crowd will be *everybody*. What will happen then?'"

They'll "grow up"/sell out like the Hippies and turn into reactionary fear freaks who will be as easily manipulated as all previous generations?

Re:Interesting question of sociology and morality

[rothic]

If everybody believes the world is flat, is it?

Of course not, but that's not a completely arbitrary human concept which only exists for as long as it's supported by the population composing the society from which the concept arises.

Flower Power!

[a_nonamiss]

It'll be just like when, in the 1960's, most young people had a laid-back attitude towards drug use, which was illegal at the time. Now, 40 years later, those people are in power, and drug use is perfectly... uh... oh... wait. Never mind.

Re:Sounds about right

[AlterTick]

Where is it written that The point of patents and copyrights are to promote the publics best interest by creating an incentive to create new works that benefit all. ?? I think that patent law is there to protect the inventor. While "all" may benefit, this is a secondary result, sometimes. You think wrong. God almighty, it's in the fucking US Constitution. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8:

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."