The thousand and one reasons for wanting more bandwidth
Spain-based journalist Marcos Sierra of Voz Pópuli, asked me about the relationship between irregular downloading and the demand for more bandwidth, based on the idea that operators benefited from this activity by providing people with faster connections. He included my comments in his article (pdf).
In replying, I wanted to highlight the extent to which the content industry continues to believe that it plays an absolutely central role in the evolution of the internet, as if everything that the internet is today was thanks to its hard work. Marcos’s reasoning reminded me too much of that stupid comment by an unfortunate Spanish former minister of culture who said something like “Why do we all need so many gigas of ADSL? To send e-mails?”
Demand for content is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the internet has grown, but not even the main one. We use the internet for all kinds of things: from communication with other people (which was the main reason for its development), as well as to access all kinds of tools and services. A web increasingly characterized by connections to objects of all kinds, seeing the internet mainly as a way to download content is anachronistic, revealing a backward-looking mentality, at least so says an academic whose main reasons for contracting a symmetrical 300MB connection from his operator was so he can upload the material he uses on the digital campus he uses for his classes.
Content is just part of the story. Anybody who thinks that this is what the internet is about is just plain wrong. People do much more on the internet than consume content, and as different services are developed on it, demand diversifies further. As to whether content is downloaded “illegally” or via officially approved providers depends simply on availability: if there is a comprehensive offer at a reasonable price, the use of irregular channels decreases. It’s that simple. There is no “intrinsic evil,” there are no “local peculiarities” or “dodgy countries”: that is just myth. When the right services are offered at a reasonable price, irregular downloading is reduced; it doesn’t disappear, because there will always be residual demand, but even that residual demand can be turned into a fantastic marketing opportunity, as some companies know very well.
Did the telecoms operators see unlicensed downloading as an opportunity? Possibly, as can be seen in any other aspect of demand. Does that mean that they must be in some way grateful to the content industry, or worse, compensate it? No way. The problems of the content industry were generated by itself through its supine ignorance and stupidity, and it has only itself to blame for its problems.
Here is the complete answer I sent to Marcos:
To argue that somebody wants more bandwidth solely for the purpose of downloading content seems to me to be completely absurd at this point: copyright holders need to stop thinking this is all about them. Their obsession that everything on the internet is about content is a pathetic demonstration that they still do not understand the internet.
Unlicensed downloading will never disappear and there is no point wasting time pursuing it: as long as there is demand, technology will always be one step ahead and will make it possible to obtain content outside commercial channels. The only way to fight unlicensed downloading is by increasing supply and pricing it competitively, so that there is no incentive. Nothing has done so much to reduce unlicensed downloads as Spotify, YouTube or Apple Music and Netflix, HBO or Movistar +. Pursuing people is simply a waste of time and resources.
(En español, aquí)
