关于盗版的对与错之争

导读：在未经版权所有人同意或授权的情况下，对其拥有著作权的作品、出版物等进行复制、再分发的行为，即可认定为盗版。在绝大多数国家和地区，此行为被定义为侵犯知识产权的违法行为，甚至构成犯罪，会受到所在国家的处罚。

An American anti-piracy bill tries to stem the global theft of intellectual property.

美国议会提出反盗版议案，打击跨国知识产权侵权。

ILLEGAL copying and sharing of copyrighted material is hard enough to stop within a country. But when the internet takes traffic across borders it is almost unmanageable. American-owned intellectual property, say, may be uploaded in one country and downloaded in a second, via a website whose computers are in a third, operated by anonymous enthusiasts (or criminals) from goodness-knows-where. So whom do you sue, and in which courts? The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), now before America's Congress, is the latest of many recent attempts to defend property rights on the internet.

在国内，打击盗版已是十分困难；而互联网时代的到来，使得信息的交流跨越国界，打击盗版几乎成为不可能任务。举个例子，版权在美国的作品，从一个国家上传到网上，通过另一个国家网站，又下载到第三个国家的电脑中，而背后的操作的，是匿名下载狂热爱好者（或是侵权罪犯），可能来自世界上任何地方。去起诉谁，又在哪起诉？这确实成了难题。美国近来为打击互联网产权侵权采取了一系列措施，最近的一项就是《禁止网络盗版法案》（SOPA），正在接受议会审查。

The bill aims to cut off Americans' access to foreign pirate websites by squeezing intermediaries. Rights-holders, such as Hollywood film studios, will be able to request that a credit-card firm or advertising network stop doing business with a foreign site; or ask a search engine to take down links to the site; or ask an internet-service provider to block the site's domain name, making it harder to reach. The intermediary then has just five days to comply or rebut the complaint; after that the rights-holder can go to court.

该议案旨在通过限制中介媒介，阻止美国访问外国盗版网站的接入。好莱坞的电影工作室等版权内容持有者将有权要求信用卡公司和广告发布网站终止与侵权外国网站的业务往来；要求搜索引撤销指向其站点的链接；或要求网络服务提供商封锁该站点域名，阻止该网站的接入。被控中介媒介有5天时间整改或提出抗辩，逾期版权内容持有者可诉诸法庭。

This would rope intermediaries into law enforcement to an unprecedented degree, and give rights-holders exceptional power. Critics of the bill say that takedown requests and court orders will swamp smaller firms and start-ups. They say that blocking entire websites via their domain name smacks of censorship, and that determined downloaders will anyway find the block easy to bypass.

这项议案，对中介媒介的限制是前所未有的，它赋予了版权内容持有者极大的力量。不过，批评者指出，链接撤销和法庭命令会让小型企业、新兴企业疲于应付，不利于其成长。通过域名封锁整个网络更有信息审查之嫌。而且，这种封锁对真正想要下载的人不会起作用，他们很轻易就能绕过。

Two mighty coalitions have formed around SOPA. Supporting the bill are not only film studios and music labels, but also drug firms and other manufacturers. Though SOPA itself does not affect them, they have a big interest in fighting any kind of intellectual-property infringement. On the other side are internet companies, technology investors and digital activists, who share an interest in disrupting business models and a dislike for anything that smacks of old-fashioned regulation.

围绕是否通过SOPA，形成了两个强有力的阵营。支持者不仅有电影工作室、唱片公司，还有制药企业等制造商，虽然SOPA对后者没有直接影响，但只要是对抗知识产权侵权，他们都很关心。反对者阵营包括网络公司、科技投资者和数码活动者，他们志在革新商业模式，反对一切过时的商业规则。

Online narcotics

网络毒品

Constantly changing technology makes data on piracy unreliable. Monitors struggle to distinguish the effect of deterrence from the rise of easy, cheap alternatives to piratical downloading, such as legal online music services. Nor do they know how much piracy has cut legal sales of music and films, and how much blame should go to shifting consumer tastes. But the fight against intellectual-property theft is waged hard. It resembles a bit the fight against illegal drugs: clamp down in one place, and the trade sprouts elsewhere.

科技发展速度迅猛，使收集到的知识产权侵权数据变得并不准确。不知道是盗版行为，还是如授权网络音乐下载等简单廉价的代替产品，对音乐和电影等销售威胁更大；也不清楚是盗版行为，还是潮流消费对其销售影响更多。唯一明确的是，人们正在进行一场艰难的反知识产权侵权斗争。与禁毒斗争有些类似的，盗版取缔了一处，又会在其它地方迅速兴起。

The Social Science Research Council, an American non-profit body, found in a study this year "little evidence—and indeed few claims—that enforcement efforts to date have had any impact whatsoever on the overall supply [of pirated media]."

社会科学研究协会（SSRC）,一个美国的非政府组织，在今年的调查中指出，“几乎没什么证据证明——事实上只有极少数的组织声称——迄今为止做出的司法努力，对全国的盗版情况有丝毫积极的影响。

With great effort, courts have closed or hampered some big "peer-to-peer" file-sharing sites (these allow users to swap files without going via a central computer). But others spring up in their place. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) estimated that music-sharing doubled between 2006 and 2008.

法院做出了巨大的努力关闭、限制了一些提供“P2P（点对点）”文件分享的大型网站（通过这些网站用户可以不经过中央电脑交换数据），但是类似的网站又随即出现。据国际唱片业协会（IFPI）调查显示，2006年至2008年，音乐共享数量翻了一番。

Growing even faster, though, are cyber-lockers such as RapidShare. These let people share links to files they have uploaded to the "cloud", the huge arrays of easily accessible servers that host all manner of data. A few such cyber-lockers (largely out of the direct reach of American justice) now have more visitors than the top peer-to-peer sites. Illegal streaming services and piracy via mobile devices, the IFPI says, are the next big threat.

相比之下，RapidShare等网络硬盘发展更加迅速。通过网络硬盘，用户可以将自己的文件资料上传到“云”，并在网上发布指向文件的链接。“云”，是巨大的方便接入的服务器组，可以存储各种各样的资源。如今，一些网络硬盘（所在地区美国司法机构鞭长莫及）的访问量已经超过了最大的P2P站点。而接下来威胁最大的，据IFPI称，是非法流媒体服务和基于移动设备的盗版。

In the eyes of rights-holders, the law seems shamefully lax. In 1998 America adopted the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which criminalised many of the methods used to copy digital content, but also established "safe harbours", explicitly protecting intermediaries such as search engines and social networks from prosecution for their users' actions. Several other rich countries have similar laws. The pirates just moved their illegal activity to looser jurisdictions, such as Sweden—while still benefiting from American-based search engines and payment systems. Now the rights-holders see intermediaries as the only point where they can choke the illegal trade. "This is the last stand—the guys who have the pipes," says Peter Mensch of Q Prime, which represents bands such as Metallica and the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

在版权内容持有者看来，法律对版权保护不力，是件十分可耻的事。1998年，美国实施了数字千年版权法案，将许多复制数码内容方式定罪，但同时也制定了一些“避风港原则”，明确规定中介媒介如搜索引擎和社交网络等不因其用户的行为遭到起诉。若干其他富裕国家也有类似的法律。盗版者只要把其非法活动移至司法宽松的国家，就可继续使用总部在美国的搜索引擎和支付系统。所以，想要扼杀这类非法交易，中介媒介就成为咽喉所在。“这些中介媒介，这些管道，是他们最后的抵抗之地。”Q?普莱姆（Q Prime）的彼得?门施（Peter Mensch）如是说。Q?普莱姆是一家乐队代理机构，金属乐队、红辣椒乐队等都是它的客户。

Intermediaries are under fire on other fronts too, notes Viktor Mayer-Sch?nberger of the Oxford Internet Institute. Google, for instance, faces a number of lawsuits in Europe for providing links to material that breaches privacy laws. A handful of European and Asian countries have adopted or proposed "graduatedresponse" laws. These oblige internet-service providers to shut off service from users suspected of downloading illegal files (they get two warnings first).

维克托·迈尔·舍恩伯格(Viktor Mayer-Sch?nberger)，任职于牛津互联网研究所，指出在其他领域，中介媒介也饱受争议。比如Google，在欧洲就因为提供的链接违反相关隐私法律，招致了许多官司。在欧洲和亚洲，少数几个国家已经施行或准备施行一种“渐进的”法令，要求网络服务提供商终止向涉嫌非法下载的用户提供服务（最初两次下载用户会受到警告）。

This approach is working, argues Frances Moore of the IFPI. In South Korea, one of the first places to adopt such a law, most people stop downloading files after the first warning and most of the rest stop after the second, she says. In Spain, which passed an anti-piracy law only in March, music sales have dropped faster than the global average. In 2010 Nielsen, a market-research firm, estimated that 45% of Spanish internet users visited illegal music-distribution services, against 23% in the top five European markets.

来自IFPI的弗朗西斯·穆尔（Frances Moore）称，以上这些措施还是起到了作用。她说，在南非，第一批实施此法令的国家，大多数人首次受到警告后就会停止下载，其余的人也大都在第二次警告后停止。在西班牙，三月份刚刚通过反盗版法，音乐销售量已锐减，其减速高于世界平均水平。而一市场调查公司，尼尔森，2010年的报告指出：西班牙45%网民曾非法下载过音乐，而前在五大欧洲市场只有23%。

This deterrent may fade over time, though. Nailing offenders can be tricky, since people often share an internet connection and it is hard to prove which of them used it to download files illegally. The Recording Industry Association of America sued thousands of people in 2003-08 for file sharing. After an initial fall, piracy soon started rising again.

不过，这些措施也会渐渐失去威力。非法下载的用户不屈不挠，也很狡猾。分享链接在网络用户中很常见，很难确定哪个用户使用了非法链接。2003年8月，数千人因为非法共享音乐文件被美国唱片协会诉上法庭。盗版的势头在一轮降温后，迅速回升。

Compared with other countries' anti-piracy laws, SOPA is indeed draconian. But the real row is about how content should be distributed and paid for. The bill's supporters want this to change as slowly as possible, so they have time to adapt. Opponents want to see more rapid changes in business models to speed up overdue innovation: cheaper pricing in poor countries, more use of on-demand digital services, less exclusivity in distribution, and ultimately, less reliance on selling albums and DVDs. Yet self-interest is at work on both sides: many of the bill's critics are trying to create just these kinds of business.

与国外反盗版法相比，SOPA严厉非常。不过，与打击盗版相比，问题的症结却在于版权内容如何发布和收费。SOPA的倡导者想让转变的脚步尽量放缓，有更多的时间去适应；而反对者希望商业模式加速转型，促进已滞后的产业创新：降低在贫困国家的服务价格，推广按需数字服务，减低发布独有性，最终，减弱行业对唱片和DVD销售模式的依赖。不过，无论支持者还是反对者都有私心：批评该议案的很多人，也正在努力创建上述这些商业模式。

Neither piracy laws nor newfangled ideas offer creative types a reliable path to prosperity. Services that provide legal music over the internet pay out little in royalties. Only the biggest bands really do well out of touring—and to become big they need to sell albums, says Mr Mensch. No law can do much about that.

无论是反盗版法还是这些新奇的想法，都不能保障产业模式的创新有可靠地收入。通过网络提供的授权音乐下载，版税收入甚微。而巡回演出，门施说，只有最受欢迎的乐队才有可观的收入——可是乐队要受欢迎，就得出唱片。对此法律就爱莫能助了。