the death of megaupload

"I'm fine with it but there were certain albums that were out of print and mega upload was the only way to get them :("

- @TheBlackLips (Cole Alexander)

---

For reasons I don't completely understand, MegaUpload's demise is making waves across virtually every media outlet on the planet.

Yes, they were a big-name force among file-hosting sites, but they weren't that great of one, and there are literally hundreds of sites ready to take its place. And with the way MegaUpload designed their database, it was only a matter of time before they were shut down: DMCA requests sent to the site resulted in links to the files being disabled, but the files themselves were not removed from their servers. No DMCA liability coverage + Files hosted on stateside servers = The FBI knocking on your door. No surprises there.

File-hosting sites like MegaUpload are demonized quite frequently, and not without good reason. They're profiting largely from the illegal practice of hosting copyrighted materials, whether or not they want to admit it. All the DMCA takedowns they process can't cover up that truth. But people rarely mention the fact that Mediafire, Rapidshare, and the other file-sharing giants are effectively creating an online music archive of incomparable proportions, made open and free to the public.

Arguments supporting SOPA/PIPA (RIP) have been riddled with misconceptions, most notably the idea that downloads = lost sales. Record companies like to believe that if it weren't for free downloads, the masses would willingly scoop up those same releases in CD form for $20. Which is ridiculous. But even beyond that, it's assumed that the albums people are downloading are available to buy legally at all.

When I started making an honest effort to buy music again, I was stunned by how much of it was out of print and incredibly rare. I had always assumed there was a legal alternative to getting my music that I was ignoring--probably a result of rampant RIAA scare tactics. But in truth, if I want a copy of Cosmos From Diode Ladder Filter by Space Machine, Masonna's analog space-synth side project, I need to shell out a minimum of $40, and not a dime would go to the artist, or even the record company. Yet somehow downloading that album from Mediafire would be immoral.

I have a hard time believing that Masonna only wants the 500 people who bought his 500-copy limited edition album to hear it. The copies are already sold, you can't make anymore money from the products--if you're not going to release mp3's for sale, how can you object to fans seeking out your art by illegal means?

If the RIAA had their way, this piece of art would be lost to anyone who hadn't snatched up a copy from the original limited release or was willing to get gouged by a reseller. And that's just a sad, awful prospect.

There are examples of this across the Internet, in every conceivable genre, and in every conceivable art form. Countless works that would have been lost to but a select few, yet have been made available to anyone capable of a simple Google search. Record company shortcomings, publishing red-tape issues, a simply lack of funds--all problems that traditionally have kept amazing music in the dark, all circumvented en masse in a global effort to share rare music with the world.

This is not to say all file-hosting is admirable, however. Far from it. The vast majority of hosted music is likely in print. If you're downloading new music instead of paying $9.99 for the mp3's, you're in the wrong. You can argue that the music is overpriced, or the quality isn't perfect, or whatever--chances are, I agree with you. But that doesn't make taking the art without compensating the artist right.

The question I would pose is this: Is it still "piracy" if the only people potentially losing money are Ebay sellers? If legal means have been exhausted to all practical limits, is the illegal method all that immoral? Am I a bad person for downloading Cosmos From Diode Ladder Filter instead of paying a random person in Japan $40 for a physical copy? Because I don't feel like one.

All piracy is not equal. There's a difference between downloading the new Lady Gaga album and downloading a Mountain Goats tape from 1992 that was only pressed 200 times. Admittedly, it's a hazy difference, and I wouldn't expect to win over any RIAA lawyers with this argument, but to any fan of music, it should be crystal clear.

At some point, in the age of downloading, excessively rare music simply becomes part of the public Internet domain, whether the artist or the record company likes it or not. (In many cases, neither the artist nor the record company even exists anymore to protest it.) There are plenty of ways to combat this--reissuing albums, buying back publishing rights, etc.--but if left out of print for decades at a time, rare albums will almost always materialize online and make their way to file-hosting sites.

If sites like MegaUpload are taken offline one-by-one for copyright violations, these rare albums will be taken offline as well--perhaps permanently. These sites serve an archival purpose that goes well beyond RIAA complaints and (supposed) lost revenue. Cole Alexander saw this, even as he joked that his record sales were already rising after the takedown.

Sites like MegaUpload play a unique and powerful role on the web, and in popular culture as a whole. You can easily make the argument that the increasing number of diverse, genre-defying bands that have emerged in the last decade have benefited from the spread of free music online. Musicians can take-in incredible varieties of music with the click of a mouse, where in the past they would have been limited to major-label releases or the content of the local record store. You can find any kind of music online, and as a result, artists are creating wildly eclectic musical concoctions that would have been nearly impossible to piece together just fifteen years ago. You can't ignore the role that sites like MegaUpload have played in this evolution.

There is no danger of file-hosting sites being removed altogether; as long as they remain profitable there will always be another site ready to step up, despite the risks. And if the SOPA blackouts taught us anything, it's that the Internet isn't giving up it's basic freedoms with out a fight. But the RIAA and the MPAA will continue their War on File-sharing until it is eliminated, just as the War on Drugs and the War on Terror succeeded before it. And just as we need to educate the masses that pot won't kill you and terrorism exists for a reason, we need to promote the idea that piracy is not as cut-and-dry an issue as the record companies want us to believe.

The MegaUpload's of the Internet are not inherently evil, and are in fact brilliant tools working (inadvertently) to preserve worlds of music in ways more efficient than anyone or anything else online. They should be utilized and fine-tuned, not destroyed.

Support the music you can, but don't let the fringes fade into oblivion either. Like all things, all the music industry needs is a little balance. And that starts from the ground up, with us.