“Heavy” file sharers’ and “heavy” activists’ values and attitudes toward file sharing and intellectual property rights Master’s Thesis submitted to the Department of Informatics and Media, Uppsala University, August 2012, for obtaining the Master’s Degree of Social Science in the field of Media and Communication Studies. Candidate: Milda Liokaityte Supervisor: Christian Fuchs 2 Abstract “Heavy” file sharers’ and “heavy” activists’ values and attitudes toward file sharing and intellectual property rights are analyzed in this thesis, with a focus on the conflict between property owners and non- owners. The purpose of this MA thesis is to investigate the perception of file sharing and intellectual property rights on the Internet. The main research questions is: How do “heavy” file sharers and “heavy” activists perceive file sharing and intellectual property rights on the Internet?. For answering it, critical political economy and both qualitative and quantitative methods are used. Therefore, the paper consists of two major parts. In the first part, the theoretical framework is introduced. In the second part, empirical research is presented and the theoretical framework is applied to the analysis of the gathered data. Data were collected with the help of a survey. The main results of the study suggest that “heavy” file sharers and “heavy” activists tend to have left-wing values and a left-wing political agenda behind file sharing, and perceive culture, and information and knowledge as “public goods”. Furthermore, “heavy” file sharers and “heavy” activists tend to contribute to the Net gift economy and share their created content in a way that constitutes an alternative to intellectual property rights, which they see as out-of-date. 3 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 11 1.1. Historical Background 11 1.2. Technological Background 13 1.3. Media Background 15 1.4. Research Questions and Hypotheses 17 1.5. Purpose of the Study 20 1.6. Significance of the Study 21 1.7. Methodology 22 2. Theory 22 2.1. Critical Political Economy 23 2.1.1. Property Conflict and Capitalism 25 2.1.2. Political Economy of Intellectual Property 27 2.1.3. The Main Concepts of Critical Political Economy 27 2.2. Society Today 30 2.3. A Typology of Theoretical Positions on Intellectual Property 33 2.4. A Typology of Theoretical Positions on File Sharing 37 2.4.1. Differences Between Tangible and Intangible Goods 37 2.4.2. Presentation of Political Views 39 2.4.3. Distribution of Positions in File Sharing Regarding Political Ideologies 41 2.4.4. A Typology of File Sharers and Activists 47 2.5. Critical Political Economy, Intellectual Property Rights, and File Sharing 49 2.6. Summary 51 3. Research Method 53 3.1. Conceptualisation 54 3.2. Choice of Method 57 3.3. Operationalisation 58 3.4. Population and Sampling 59 3.5. Data Collection 60 3.6. Data-Processing 64 3.7. Analysis 64 3.8. Application 67 3.9. Limitations of the Research Method 68 4. Presentation of Results 68 5. Data Analysis and Interpretation of Results 78 4 5.1. Testing Hypothesis 1. Analysis and Interpretation 79 5.1.1. “Heavy” File Sharers’ and “Heavy” Activists’ Discovery of File Sharing 79 5.1.2. “Heavy” File Sharers’ and “Heavy” Activists’ Experience Connected with File Sharing and Their Feelings Towards It 81 5.1.3. “Heavy” File Sharers’ and “Heavy” Activists’ Reasons to Download Or to File Share 86 5.1.4. Symbolic Meaning of File Sharing for “Heavy” File Sharers and “Heavy” Activists 91 5.2. Testing Hypothesis 2. Analysis and Interpretation 97 5.2.1. “Heavy” File Sharers’ Reasons to Start File Sharing and Symbolic Meaning of the Activity 97 5.2.2. “Heavy” File Sharers’ Perception of File Sharing and Its Connection with Politics 102 5.3. Testing Hypothesis 3. Analysis and Interpretation 105 5.3.1. “Heavy” Activists’ Reasons to Start File Sharing and the Symbolic Meaning of the Activity 105 5.3.2. “Heavy” Activists’ Perception of File Sharing and Its Connection with Politics 109 5.4. Testing Hypothesis 4. Analysis and Interpretation 111 5.4.1. “Heavy” Activists’ Interest in Politics and Political Beliefs 111 5.4.2. “Heavy” Activists’ Perception of File Sharing and Its Connection with Socialistic Values 114 5.4.3. “Heavy” Activists’ Perception of File Sharing and Its Connection with Liberal Values 119 5.4.4. Correlation between “Heavy” Activists’ Political Beliefs and Attitudes toward File Sharing 121 5.4.5. “Heavy” Activists’ Attitudes towards the Role of Government and Economy in the Individual’s Life 130 5.5. Testing Hypothesis 5. Analysis and Interpretation of the Results 138 5.5.1. “Heavy” Activists’ and “Heavy” File Sharers’ Perception of Intellectual Property Rights and Laws 138 5.5.2. “Heavy” File Sharers’ and “Heavy” Activists’ Perception of Intellectual Property Rights/Laws and Their Effect on Culture and Information 141 5.6. Testing Hypothesis 6. Analysis and Interpretation 145 5.6.1. “Heavy” Activists’ and “Heavy” File Sharers’ Perception of File Sharing from Ethical and Moral Standpoints 145 5.6.2. “Heavy” Activists’ and “Heavy” File Sharers’ Perception of the Difference between Tangible and Intangible Goods 152 5.6.3. “Heavy” Activists’ and “Heavy” File Sharers’ Perception of File Sharing and Its Connection with Thievery 157 5.7. Testing Hypothesis 7. Analysis and Interpretation of the Results 162 5.7.1. “Heavy” Activists’ and “Heavy” File Sharers Contribution to the Net 163 5.8. Concluding Interpretation of the Empirical Results 170 6. Conclusions 172 6.1. The Contribution of the Research Results to the Academic World 176 6.2. Research Results Relevance to Politics and Society 178 6.3. Research Ethical Questions 179 6.4. Discussion 181 5 6.5. Future Research Possibilities 190 References: 191 Appendix 203 Questionnaire 203 Distribution of the Questionnaire 211 List of Charts Chart 1. All respondents’ length of file sharing 69 Chart 2. The frequency of all respondents’ file sharing 70 Chart 3. Type of copyright-protected material which is regularly downloaded by the respondents 71 Chart 4. Frequency of purchase of downloaded material by the respondents 72 Chart 5. Respondents’ awareness of the possible legal consequences of file sharing or downloading copyright-protected material 72 Chart 6. Respondents’ gender 73 Chart 7. Respondents’ age 73 Chart 8. Respondents’ place of living 75 Chart 9. Respondents’ level of education 76 Chart 10. Respondents’ occupation 76 Chart 11. Respondents’ monthly income 78 Chart 12. Type of cultural goods and “heavy” file sharers’ and “heavy” activists’ reasons to download or file share 91 Chart 13. Length of file sharing by “heavy” file sharers 98 Chart 14. “Heavy” file sharers’ age 99 Chart 15. Perception of file sharing and its connection with thievery by “heavy” file sharers 102 Chart 16. “Heavy” files sharers’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing is individualistic action 103 Chart 17. “Heavy” files sharers’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing is a social movement and a form of activism, civil disobedience, protest, and resistance 104 Chart 18. “Heavy” files sharers’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing is used only for entertainment purposes 105 Chart 19. Length of time "heavy" activists have been file sharing 106 Chart 20. “Heavy” activists age 107 6 Chart 21. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing is an individualistic action 110 Chart 22. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: File sharing is a social movement and a form of activism, civil disobedience, protest, and resistance 111 Chart 23. “Heavy” activists’ interest in politics 112 Chart 24. “Heavy” activists left-right self-placement 113 Chart 25. Detailed “heavy” activists left-right self-placement 114 Chart 26. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing provides greater access to knowledge 115 Chart 27. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing helps to undermine social division and inequality in accessing information and culture 116 Chart 28. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: information and culture are a common heritage of all mankind 117 Chart 29. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: knowledge and information are produced not by individuals, but collectively in collaboration 118 Chart 30. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing encourages collectivity and participation 119 Chart 31. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: information wants to be free 120 Chart 32. “Heavy” activists’ attitudes toward the statement: file sharing is a part of the freedom of the Net 121 Chart 33. Location of the “heavy” activists’ views towards the statements: incomes should be made more equal vs. we need larger income differences as an incentive for individual effort 131 Chart 34. Location of the “heavy” activists’ views towards the statements: private ownership of business and industry should be increased vs. government ownership of business and industry should be increased 132 Chart 35. Location of “heavy” activists’ views towards the statements: government should take more responsibility to ensure that everyone is provided for vs. people should take more responsibility to provide for themselves 133 Chart 36. Location of the “heavy” activists’ views towards the statements: competition is good, it stimulates people to work hard and to develop new ideas vs. competition is harmful, it brings out the worst in people 135 Chart 37. Location of the “heavy” activists’ views towards the statements: in the long run, hard work usually brings a better life vs. hard work does not generally bring success – it’s more a matter of luck and connections 136 7 Chart 38. Location of the “heavy” activists’ views towards the statements: people can only get rich at the expense of others vs. wealth can grow so there’s enough for everyone 137 Chart 39. “Heavy” file sharers’ and “heavy” activists’ views regarding the statement: intellectual property laws are too harsh 139 Chart 40.