Thread: P2P first seeders: pirates or "masked philanthropists"?

Do some P2P file sharers see themselves as the Robin Hoods of the digital age—taking from the greedy content companies and giving to the global have-nots? Amidst all the angst over illegal Internet file sharing and what to do about it, there's a related debate raging over two questions—why do people share files and what do they think about the ethics of the practice?

Obviously lots of BitTorrent users simply want free content. But a new study coming out of the United Kingdom suggests that more than a few see their activities in explicitly moral terms, particularly "first seeders"—folks who first post a torrent for public sharing, as opposed to "leechers," those who download torrent files but don't offer any content themselves.

Some first-seeders may see themselves as "masked philanthropists," the survey concludes, "working from the perceived safety of their own homes to defy a legal system that incorrectly ascribes legal liability to their actions, while they generate esteem through their altruistic engagement with the file-sharing community."



Thus concludes a paper titled "Seeders, leechers and social norms: Evidence from the market for illicit digital downloading," authored by economists Joe Cox and Alan Collins of the University of Portsmouth, and Stephen Drinkwater of the University of Wales. Their data comes from a 2007 survey of 6,103 file sharers who responded to a questionnaire published on three Finnish technology websites: Mikrobitti, Digitoday, and Taloussanomat.

Little to gain

The survey asked readers about their downloading/file sharing habits, their attitudes towards both legal and illegal file sharing, and their socio-economic status. In analyzing the responses, the authors noted that the heaviest file sharers tend to be younger males with a certain amount of education. Participation in the activity starts to drop at age 33 or older.

"A possible interpretation of these findings is that that illegal file sharing is an activity that people require a threshold level of education and income in order to engage with and that it is also a form of consumption behavior that consumers might 'grow out of' as their incomes and levels of education increase," the study notes (our interpretation: most of these file sharing kids are in college).

First seeders tend to adopt this role if they know other file sharers as friends, relatives, or colleagues, the paper observes. These respondents also told the Finnish sites that "no-one should be liable for the offense," and in any event, they didn't think it likely that they would get caught.

From such responses the scholars extrapolate some interesting observations. Since the first-seeder has little economically to gain from first making a file available for illegal downloading, there can only be a few logical explanations for their behavior. They either think that the penalty costs for their activities are very low, or they get "psychic benefits" from performing their role. Or both.

The psychic payoff "could be in the form of getting one over on the system, feelings of altruism and community spirit (a 'Robin Hood' syndrome), or seeking recognition among other members of the file sharing scene," the trio of economists write.

Will the Digital Economy Act stop them?

Economist Joe Cox was less tentative about the scholarship in a University of Portsmouth video interview posted on blip.tv.

"What I found was that the seeders are motivated by altruism and a desire to achieve notoriety on the file sharing scene," he explained. "And they perceive the chances of themselves getting caught or punished as very, very low indeed. They see themselves as the Robin Hoods of the digital age and giving to the poor in terms of making the content available to all."

This makes the U.K.'s new Digital Economy Act, with its provisions permitting ISPs to block repeat infringers, unlikely to succeed, Cox warns. The ISPs "don't really want to play ball because it's going to involve them cutting off paying subscribers and spending lots of time and effort tracking down those individuals who are guilty of the offense."

And they, apparently, don't think they're guilty at all.

"So I think a more radical approach is required," Cox concludes, "and a rethink of how this problem can be tackled through government involvement and legislation."

Source: P2P first seeders: pirates or "masked philanthropists"?

------------------------Post auto merged------------------------

for mods or people whom like to report me;
this is another view on the study already mentioned in this thread.
I can understand when people see two headlines that say almost the same, they would quickly think it's dupe.
Next time take the effort of reading the article. There is a reason that different big news-sites exists. They offer a different view on matters. I can understand the motivation to remove a real dupe post, but when my posts disappear because they look like other posts, I just get frustrated.
I hope the people whom targeted me read this. This is not an attack nor an insult, this is me being frustrated.