Skip to main content
Log in

Technology scruples: why intimidation will not save the recording industry and how enchantment might

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While the recording industry continues to lobby for increasingly draconian laws to protect their interests, users of digital technology continue to share files and copy protected music. This paper considers the ethics of copying and argues that legal measures are unlikely to solve the music industry’s problems in the age of digital reproduction. It begins with a review of the legal arguments around copyright legislation and notes that the law is currently unclear and contested. Adapting the game “scruples” to questions of what is and is not considered theft, a qualitative study reflects on the ways that ethical positions around new media are reached and articulated. The findings relate ethical positions constructed around notions of resistance, intangibility and identity. It is argued that the global online population cannot be policed without consent and that mechanics of artist reimbursement must be developed that account for consumers’ technology scruples. File sharing is then considered not as a legal problem but as a design challenge and a strategy of enchantment is suggested. The design concept of a digital music box is outlined to illustrate strategies of enchantment rather than litigation and intimidation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Spinello R, Tavani H (2001) The Internet, ethical values and conceptual frameworks: an introduction to CyberEthics. Comput Soc 31(2):5–7

    Google Scholar 

  2. Walton T (2003) Golden age of free music’ vs ‘copying is stealing’. The Register. Published Wednesday 6th August 2003

  3. Rasch M (2003) Copying is theft—and other legal myths. The Register. Published Monday 28th July 2003

  4. Lettice J (2004) Music biz in unauthorized downloads shock. The Register. Published Thursday 4th November 2004

  5. Gilmour I (2004) Out of bounds reviewing the reading nation in the romantic period by William St Clair, vol 27, no. 2. London Review of Books, Cambridge

  6. Vance A (2005) Music sales slide despite RIAA’s crushing blows against piracy. The Register. Published Saturday 31st December 2005 22:24 GMT

    Google Scholar 

  7. Teather D (2005a) Music industry victory will spark file-sharing lawsuits. The Guardian, 28th July 2005

  8. Smith T (2005a) RIAA Aussie Kazaa users told to stop using Kazaa. The Register. Tuesday 6th December 2005

  9. Woodworth GM (2004) Hackers, users, and suits: napster and representations of identity. Popular Music Soc 27(2):161–184

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Foucault M (1991) In: Rabinow P (ed) The Foucault reader. Penguin books, London

  11. Gross G (2005) New copyright protection bills likely in 2005. The Standard.com, Thursday, 27th of January, 2005

  12. Jones S, Lenhart A (2004) Music downloading and listening: findings from the pew Internet and American life project. Popular Music Soc 27(2)

  13. Adam A (2000) Gender and computer ethics. ACM SIGCAS Comput Soc 30(4), Special Issue: CEPE 2000, pp 17–24

  14. Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  15. Taylor AS, Harper R (2002) Age-old practices in the ‘new world’: a study of gift-giving between teenage mobile phone users. Proceedings of CHI 2002, Minneapolis, MN, pp 439–446

  16. Willis P (1990) Common culture. Open University Press, Milton Keynes

    Google Scholar 

  17. Morson GS, Emerson C (1990) Mikhail Bakhtin: creation of a prosaics. Stanford University Press, Stanford

  18. Bakhtin MM (1984) Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. University of Minnesota

  19. Crowley T (1996) Language in history: theories and texts. Routledge, London

  20. Vance A (2005b) Sue the reader of this file sharing book. Book Review. The Register. Published 22nd February 2005

  21. Preece J, Rogers Y, Sharp H (2000) Interaction design: beyond human–computer interaction. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dourish P (2001) Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  23. McCarthy JC, Wright PC (2004) Technology as experience. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  24. Norman DA (2004) Emotional design: why we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Shneiderman B (2002) Leonardo’s laptop. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  26. Blythe M, Monk A, Overbeeke C, Wright PC (eds) (2003) Funology: from usability to user enjoyment. Kluwer, Dordrecht

  27. McCarthy J, Wright P, Wallace J, Dearden A (2006). The experience of enchantment in human–computer interaction. Pers Ubiquitous Comput 10(6):369–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Clarke AC (2000) Profiles of the Future: an inquiry into the limits of the possible, Millennium edn. Indigo, London

  29. Kundera M (1991) Immortality. Faber & Faber, London, Boston, p 84

  30. Stivers R (2001) Technology as magic: the triumph of the irrational. The Continuum, New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gell A (1992) The technology of enchantment and the enchantment of technology. In: Coote J et al (eds) Anthropology, art, and aesthetics. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 40–63

    Google Scholar 

  32. Adorno T (1991) The cultural industries: selected essays on mass culture. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  33. Willis P (1978) Profane culture. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  34. Brook T (2003) Position paper for a workshop on designing culturally situated technologies for the home. Proceedings of CHI 2003. ACM

  35. Wallace J, Press M (2004) Craft knowledge for the digital age: how the jeweller can contribute to designing digital communication devices. Proceedings of the 6th Asian design conference, Japan

  36. Wensveen S, Overbeeke K, Djajadiningrat T (2004) Freedom of fun, freedom of interaction. In: Blythe M, Hassenzahl M, Wright P (eds) More funology. Interact Mag 11.5:59–61

  37. Pine and Gilmore (1999) The experience economy: work is theatre and every business is a stage. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

  38. Falk J, Dirking L (1992) The museum experience. Whalesback Books, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wright PC, McCarthy JM, Meekison L (2003) A framework for analysing user experience. In: Blythe M, Monk A, Wright PC, Overbeeke C (eds) Funology: from usability to user enjoyment. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  40. Schou S, Toft R (2005) A theoretical model for experience and social interaction in digitally enhanced environments. Proceedings of the 6th DAC conference IT university of Copenhagen 1st–3rd, pp 162–168

  41. Jay M (2005) Songs of experience: modern american and european variations on a universal theme. University of California Press, California

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Blythe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blythe, M., Wright, P. Technology scruples: why intimidation will not save the recording industry and how enchantment might. Pers Ubiquit Comput 12, 411–420 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-007-0158-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-007-0158-z

Keywords

Navigation