The internet’s “enshittification,” a term coined by journalist and privacy advocate Cory Doctorow, has been a gradual process that began long before the rise of TikTok. It all started in the early days of the internet when file-sharing platforms like Napster allowed users to freely share and download music. However, these platforms faced numerous lawsuits from record labels and were eventually shut down, leaving us with a limited selection of streaming platforms like Pandora and Spotify that cater to the interests of corporate copyright holders.
In his book, “The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation,” Doctorow delves into the failures and misguided decisions of Big Tech companies that have shaped the social media landscape we know today. He argues that it is our duty to dismantle these systems and create a more interoperable and decentralized internet.
One of the key developments that Doctorow explores is the introduction of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s (DMCA) “notice-and-takedown” reporting system and YouTube’s ContentID scheme. These systems were meant to address copyright infringement issues but have had unintended consequences and have given Big Content more control and power over online platforms.
Doctorow explains that notice-and-takedown itself doesn’t directly harm the big entertainment companies. However, in 2007, a new system called “notice-and-stay-down” emerged as a result of the entertainment industry’s desire for more control. This system monitors all user uploads and checks if they are similar to any flagged copyrighted works. ContentID, which debuted on YouTube in 2007, was an early example of this system and allowed rights holders to block or monetize the use of their copyrighted works.
Related Post
But there are significant problems with this approach. ContentID cannot determine whether a third party’s use of copyrighted material falls under “fair use,” which allows for certain uses of copyrighted works without permission. Furthermore, the filters used by ContentID often flag legitimate creative works, expressive speech, and transformative content that makes use of samples or quotations. Computers are simply not equipped to distinguish fair use from infringement, making it difficult for creators to share their work freely.
Moreover, the filters used by ContentID operate on the principle of fuzzy matches, allowing for false positives. This flexibility allows rightsholder groups to block anything even remotely similar to their claimed copyrighted works. Classical musicians, for instance, face significant challenges as their performances often resemble recordings claimed by major labels. This has made it nearly impossible for classical musicians to earn a living from their online performances, as their videos are either blocked or their ad revenue is directed to the record labels.
It is evident that the notice-and-takedown system and ContentID have not created an internet that benefits everyone. Instead, they have given entertainment companies the power to shape and control new technologies and dictate how they function. These actions and intentions, as revealed in the Viacom case, show that blocking copyright infringement is just a pretext for an internet controlled by the entertainment industry.
In conclusion, Cory Doctorow’s book sheds light on the problematic aspects of the modern social media landscape and calls for greater interoperability and decentralization. The current systems in place, such as notice-and-takedown and ContentID, have inadvertently given corporations more control and stifled creativity. It is essential to dismantle these systems and create an internet that truly benefits all users, allowing for the free exchange of ideas and creative expression.
