Lily Allen and Her Fight against Music Piracy
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
British music artist Lily Allen has been very controversial throughout her music career. Figuring in a number of headlines and news stories detailing her alcohol and drug addiction and subsequent rehabilitation, Allen is in the news again. However, this time, it is no longer about her substance abuse but because of an equally controversial subject: piracy.
On September 20, Allen put out a blog called “It’s Not Alright,” criticizing the stance of Britain’s Featured Artist Coalition on the British government’s proposed crackdown on illegal file sharing activities. The Featured Artist Coalition is a group of British musicians that include Blur, Keane, Radiohead, George Michael, Cornershop, Annie Lennox, and other big names in the British music industry. The Coalition came out with a statement that condemned the British government’s move to cut off Internet access for those who engage in illegal file sharing. Saying that it would not be feasible for the government to do so because illegal file sharing actually helps them market their music by serving as a sampler, and because it is part of this generation’s way of appreciating and getting to know music.
Lily Allen was livid in opposing the coalition’s stance. In her MySpace blog, Allen said that file sharing was detrimental to the music industry and suggested that the Coalition’s stance was short-sighted. File sharing, according to her, may not be an issue for established acts like those by members of the Coalition, but it makes it difficult for new acts to survive or succeed.
What followed was a heated debate that swept Allen, the Coalition and the British public into a whirlwind of arguments and counter-arguments. The Coalition came up with a follow-up statement clarifying that it was not promoting piracy, but it was solidly against cutting Internet access for those who are guilty of it. Allen, for her part, said that the coalition is making it out that the proposed legislation may be construed as an attack on liberty and freedom, but stealing is not exactly a human right that has to be protected. Allen also put up a blog that collected messages from artists who share her opinions but deleted it days afterwards.
Allen came out victorious. However, when the Coalition retracted its earlier statement on September 25. The Coalition agreed on what it called a “three-strike” process to punish file sharers. Two instances would merit warning letters, and the third would justify a limitation on the offender’s Internet bandwidth that would render piracy and file-sharing inutile.
The Coalition also signified its support for Allen’s campaign.
The Coalition’s entanglement with Allen is only one of the various worthwhile stories on piracy and file sharing and how policies should be enacted to control it. They present two sides of the argument that has come to crop up each and every time the issue of piracy is brought up.
On one hand, we have those who say that piracy has a negligible effect on the sales of albums; that it even helps market songs by providing a sampler for the group’s album. That in itself makes it a valuable marketing tool that record companies do not have to pay for.
Nevertheless, there are those like Allen, who firmly believe that piracy and file sharing is killing the music industry. These are the people who equate file sharing with theft, an activity that, instead of telling people to buy albums, encourages them to pilfer and get their music for free. It also discourages new artists from joining the industry, making it stagnant and with room only for the big names and established artists.
The biggest challenge for policymakers is to come up with regulations that address piracy in such a way that is both equitable to the music industry and the general public. It is not an easy task as both parties have their own agenda. Who has the answer? Nobody as of yet, but the fight against piracy continues.