Felix Stalder on Sat, 5 Jan 2008 00:19:09 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> review: Steal this Film, II |
Steal this Film, II The other night, I watched "Steal this Film, II" [1]. The first thing I noticed is how extremely efficient bittorent can be. I downloaded the HD version, 1.71 GB, in less than three hours over my plain vanilla cable line and leaving the connection open for the rest of the night, I distributed the equivalent of 2.5 copies to others. This experience reinforces the main point of the film: file-sharing -- a technologically super-charged, deep cultural practice -- is beyond the point where it can be stopped. The old media industry has lost control over the distribution of content, radically reducing the power of the current gate keepers to determine who can access the archives, who can produce new works, and who can reach an audience with those works. The film's premise is that file-sharing is transforming the basic mechanism of how culture and information is distributed with consequences as profound as the transformation brought about by the printing press. Now, for anyone who remembers the late 1990s, this introduces a certain deja-vu, since this argument was pretty much what fueled the dot.com boom back then. But here, it is delivered with a twist. It's not the happy venture-capital infused entrepreneurs who turn the wheels of change, but the pirates who expand the scope of the possible for the masses, and the teenagers who have already claimed this new space as their natural cultural environment. This is not a top-down revolution. So far the first layer of the argument. The second argues that this is pretty similar to how the print revolution unfolded in the 17th and 18th century. At the time, a battle raged between those who tried to control the spread of knowledge in the service of established power, and those who ignored print privileges and censorship laws by distributing unauthorized knowledge thus contributing the emergence of the reading publicj, which later established itself as a political actor in form of the public opinion. In one of the strongest interview scenes of the film, print historian Bob Darnton speaks of pirate printers situated just outside the reach of the French king in a "fertile crescent" (from Amsterdam to Geneva) publishing books specially for the French markets thus preparing the ground for the enlightenment and, ultimately, the French Revolution in 1789. This point is reinforced by another, even more eminent historian of print, Elisabeth Eisenstein, who tells of a case of a Dutch printer who used the (French) index of censored books as his publishing program because he knew these books would sell well. Drawing on these two historians, the film is suggests that there is a general connection between the loss of control over the distribution of knowledge and the overthrow of the old regimes. This loss of control was not brought about by the magic of technology itself, but by the determination of the people who used the technology to its full extent, even if it brought them in direct opposition to the dominant powers. That this is happening again today is not a co-incidence, but, and this is the third layer of the argument, because the internet was created precisely for this purpose. To make this point, a clip is used from a 1972 documentary [2] where J.C.R. Licklider speaks about the need to invent a better system of information sharing than print because of the physical limitations of moving around paper which strike him as "embarrassing." This is a treasure of a find, since Licklider, who was instrumental in funding the early work on the Arpanet, really speaks about information "sharing", not distribution or any such thing. The fourth and final layer of the argument is that the sharing of culture is constitutive of culture itself and corresponds with a deep human need to communciate. Indeed, communicating is sharing and in an information society producing culture is a way of taking part in society. P2p technology then is simply giving new power to this defining feature of human existence, which was only somewhat subdued in the analog media environment where, as Eben Moglen puts it, "control came naturally as part of the process of the existence of the medium itself." To deliverer this argument, the film sets up a long string of talking heads, some of them quite well known others less (I'm one of them), intersected by footage from a wide range of archival sources edited for associative value and held together by an off commentary connecting the pieces into a well paced narratived. The film is very well made, stylistically a significant improvement over the first part [3] even if it doesn't reach the brilliance of Adam Curtis [4] whose style of documentaries is so clearly invoked here. There is, after all, still a difference between working on a shoe string budget or on the commanding heights of the BBC. Still, the production quality is professional and the film is full of nice visual details. The film's narrative, of course, is not without flaws. The fmost significant is its breathless "it-cannot-be-stopped" rhetoric. While that might be true in a technical sense (p2p certainly beats video-on-demand), one should not expect that is impossible to craft more centralized means of control even on such a radically deecntralized communication protocol. As we all know, the old slogan "the internet intrprets censorship and damage and routes round it" is not a very good approximation to the layered realities of online control. Thus while the old gatekeepers might lose control, it's pretty save to say that new ones will appear. Google, for example, is just about to establish itself as one on a gargantuan scale. Piratebay, which handles currently an estimated 50% of all bittorent traffic [5], is another one, even if they do not seem to be keen on exploiting this position at the moment. The film is clearly a piece of advocacy, more interested in making a point clearly and strongly, rather than telling a complex and possibly contradictory story. Which is all and well, not the least because it's very transparently so, but still, towards the end of the film, it's pushed right over the messianic edge. There are more problems. Apart from Elisabeth Eisenstein, there is not a single women in this film, and apart from Lawrence Liang (ALF, Bangalore), all "experts" are European or American (whereas the "kids on the street" are immigrants). Thus, the revolution might be made by pirates, but if they all come from the geographic centers of power, it's not so terribly hard to imagine how they, or their successors, might transition into the institutional centers of power as well. So, it's perhaps best to watch this film together with another documentary on the subject: "Good Copy, Bad Copy" [6] released earlier this year by Danish film makers. This film has a far more global perspective, introducing two major non-Western cultural communities -- tecno-brega from Brazil and the Nigerian film industry -- as examples of practices who are not encumbered by the copyright conundrum that forces us into such unproductive questions as whether piracy is a good thing or not. Looking at Brazil and Nigeria GCBC suggests that whereas technological change might still originate from the West, but cultural innovation is distributed much more broadly. The two films are really companion pieces, and they even share some footage. Despite problems, Steal this Film, II deserves the very large audience it's likely to get, given that it's promoted on the front page of ThePirateBay.org. A space far more valuable than a TV ad for a dvd could ever be. I wonder how long it takes the suits to figure this out. Steal this Film, Part II, 2007 Length: 0:44:43 by League of Noble Peers (Alan Toner, J.J. King, Jan Gerber, Sebastian Luetgert, Luca Lucarini, and others). [1] http://www.stealthisfilm.com/Part2/ [2] http://www.mininova.org/tor/559767 [3] http://www.stealthisfilm.com/Part1/ [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Curtis [5] http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-torrents-and-peers-double-071225/ [6] http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net --- http://felix.openflows.com ----------------------------- out now: *|Manuel Castells and the Theory of the Network Society. Polity, 2006 *|Open Cultures and the Nature of Networks. Ed. Futura/Revolver, 2005 # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org