MacNeill (2016)

From Copyright Evidence
Jump to: navigation, search

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

MacNeill (2016)
Title: Torrenting Game of Thrones-So wrong and yet so right
Author(s): Kate MacNeill
Year: 2016
Citation: MacNeill, K. (2017) Torrenting Game of Thrones-So wrong and yet so right. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, Volume 23, Issue 5, p.545-p.562. Available at https:http://journals.sagepub.com.ezproxy.lib.gla.ac.uk/doi/pdf/10.1177/1354856516640713
Link(s): Definitive
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by:
About the Data
Data Description: Data consists of the analysis of 252 comments on a Facebook post by the US Ambassador to Australia, which concerned Game of Thrones and widespread copyright infringement. Results were coded using content and thematic analysis resulting in 5 themes on the justification of piracy (informed by neutralization theory): (i) the denial of a victim, (ii) the denial of responsibility, (iii) the denial of harm, (iv) condemning the condemners and (v) appeal to higher loyalties. Only 12 responses could not be categorised within these themes.
Data Type: Primary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: No
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2013
Funder(s):

Abstract

"This article examines the views expressed by Australians relating to unauthorized digital access to the popular HBO series Game of Thrones. A detailed analysis is undertaken of the online responses to a 2013 Facebook post by the United States Ambassador to Australia, chastizing Australians for their ‘illegal’ behaviour. This analysis is used to critique the dominant framing of the activities of filesharing, torrenting and unauthorized downloading as criminal and those involved in the activity as being influenced by sociological factors. In contrast, the research found that many of the justifications for these behaviours contained in the Facebook comments demonstrated an informed critique of the market mechanisms at work in the distribution networks."

Main Results of the Study

• Some users seek to "neutralize" their unethical behaviour by denying guilt for unauthorised downloading. In response to the downloading of Game of Thrones, users denied suggestions that there was any direct link between their activities and harm to the creators, citing the show's wide success, consistently high authorised sales and ancillary merchandise. Many complained that the exclusive distributors in Australia failed users on price, mode of delivery and time delay. Other comments suggested wider tensions with "American cultural imperialism", describing disparities between US and Australian distribution models as an "Australian tax".

• Whilst neutralization informed themes of the study, the authors found that many of the comments suggested users had a more nuanced and sophisticated understanding of market dynamics than first anticipated. Piracy in this instance acted as a proxy or shadow competition for the monopoly distributor, demonstrating instead a loyalty to the products users were being accused of injuring.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

Whilst the study does not make any explicit policy recommendations, the authors note that the framing of unauthorized downloading within models of criminality (framing piracy as "stealing") is not a productive way of understanding the dynamics of downloading. Instead, unauthorized downloading is often viewed by many as an ethical act of rebalancing within a distorted market, perhaps mitigating the impact of monopoly pricing.



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Green-tick.png
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)
Green-tick.png

Datasets