PiracyThere is this really interesting debate going on the interwebs about the ethics of downloading media you have already paid for in another format. For instance, the argument was put by NY Times’ Ethicist, Randy Cohen, explaining why, in his opinion, it’s not unethical  to download a digital copy of a book, if you’d bought a hard copy of the book — even though it probably violates copyright law. A lot of people disagreed with this point of view, who felt it was an unethical violation as well.

Recently Mitch Wagner of Computerworld, who must have missed the first debate, opened it up again by writing a blog post asking what people thought about the ethics of downloading media you already purchased legally. Here is an excerpt:

I recently got a hankering to re-read some of my favorite books. I already own them, in hardcover and paperback. But I’d like to re-read them as e-books. Do I need to buy the e-book versions, or can I download a pirated copy of the e-book for free?

The argument that says it’s wrong is pretty simple, and clear-cut: When I bought the books, I bought individual copies of the books. All I own is that one copy. If I lost the copy, I wouldn’t be entitled to a free replacement. It wouldn’t be right for me to shoplift the book from the local Barnes & Noble. I’d have an obligation to buy a new copy, or borrow one legitimately, before re-reading the book.

On the other hand: I already paid for these books legitimately. They’re my books. The shoplifting analogy is specious, because in that case, I’m depriving the rightful owner — the owner of the bookstore — of their copy of the book. If I download a copy of the e-book, nobody else is deprived of their copy.

However, he goes on to make another point that also deserves some scrutiny:

Every couple of years, TiVo hiccups and fails to record a favorite TV show. In that case, I have to decide whether to wait for the show to come out on DVD, or just download the episode from the BitTorrents.

There are people who will claim that, due to the fact that it likely infringes on copyright to do so, it’s automatically unethical. But I also acknowledge that morality isn’t determined by the law per say. It is an interesting debate, and while I personally tend to side on the fence that each time you buy or access a right to electronic, print or whatever form of media, you should pay for the right to access it, I only come to that viewpoint as I think the artist, or person who created it has a right to profit from their work. Of course, this isn’t always the case as I know, and it isn’t a perfect world, so often times, they rarely see anything. But just because technology and the output of media/consumption is changing, should we change the right of someone to make their living off of what they produce?

Either way, it’s an interesting debate and one I will keep following with interest.