RIAA and Sci-Fi Upgrades
The RIAA is serious. They believe that they are protecting the artists and music companies by harassing college students and grandmas. These actions are designed to stop the illegal downloading and sharing of music.
But, is it *really* illegal?
Sure, I know that technically, in the current parlance of the law, it is illegal. But, let's do a little speculative research. I believe in the near future, due to some probable real-life Sci-Fi upgrades to the human body, this legality issue will become a whole lot more gray.
Here is the argument:
Premise 1: It is legal to listen to the radio.
From this premise, it is reasonable to assume that if I hear something on the radio and then hum or sing it from memory, I not breaking any laws. I am simply re-experiencing the music, based on my recollections.
Premise 2: In the near future, we will be able to augment our minds with technology to increase our memory capacity.
This is fairly realistic. Transhumanism is a growing movement, advocating the upgrade of the human race through science and technology. So, I can easily imagine implanting a chip in my head that will allow me to offload memories or, better yet, provide me with photographic memory. It probably will be as easy as Lasik eye surgery is today (which is a widely accepted form of human enhancement through technology).
Premise 3: Memories stored on technology designed to augment the body should be treated as body extensions, not as separate devices.
Under this premise, assuming I have the chip implant and I listen to a song on the radio, it should still be legal for me to recall the song from memory. Even if I offload the music experience to the chip, the chip is a part of me, not something separate. It is memory enhancement!
Premise 4: PDA's are memory enhancement devices.
I have a PDA/Smartphone with me at all times. I use the device to keep track of my schedule, which is is clearly a memory enhancement activity. From Premise 2, if I offload a song to my memory enhancment device, I should be able to do so without breaking any laws, since I previously heard the song legally. The device is also a part of me - it is with me all of the time, whether it is implanted in me, or attached to my hip. Thus, my PDA should be able to be filled with mp3s, as long as I have heard them from a legal source.
Conclusion: My iPod can legally store any music that has been played on the radio.
Huh? How did I get here? Well, assuming all of the preceding Premises are valid, here is the logic:
My iPod has a calender
...making it a PDA
...making it a memory enhancement device
...making it legal to have songs on it
...as long as I have heard them before from a legal source, like the radio.
Brilliant!
I rest my case. RIAA - your rebuttal, please?
Thanks for the thoughts! You bring up some very valid points in your post...and, I do think you are 100% correct - someone will legislate that implants are separate from the body, and expand on the laws around that. Still, there are some very sticky problems that the lawyers will have to deal with in 20 years.
(note to self..have 3 year old son start legal studies) ;-)
-- Posted by: Fred at March 11, 2007 11:07 PM
Wow, very interesting train of thought. Couple of things I thought of while reading.
Radio. Music companies get paid when a radio station plays one of the songs in their library. Music companies also fought tooth and nail to block the manufacture or sale of recording devices before mp3. 8-track and casset tape were both battles the music industry engaged in.
Copy protection. Once cybernetic implants are available the various entertainment companies will institute some sort of copy protection. One possible way would be to insist at a government level that any implants come equipped with a switch that, once engaged by an inaudible supersonic or subsonic signal, will not store a recording of that sensory input. Radio stations will be told "Insert this in your broadcast or you can never play any of our music".
Implants. I doubt implants would be legally viewed as part of the body. More likly they will be viewed as prosthetic enhancements. In other words, the compairison to lasic would be a little off. It'd be more like glasses/contact lenses. They improve our ablities, but are not a part of us.
Thanks for writing this up, it's an interesting concept.
-- Posted by: 2xKnight at March 10, 2007 11:20 PM