Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free

Information Doesn’t Want to Be Free Plot Summary

Introduction

In today's digital age, we face a fundamental conflict between technological capabilities and legal frameworks. The internet has transformed how creative works are distributed and consumed, yet our copyright laws remain rooted in pre-digital concepts. This tension creates a battlefield where creators, technology companies, and media conglomerates clash over control of information, often at the expense of human freedom. The core insight developed throughout these pages is that digital locks and restrictive copyright enforcement don't primarily benefit creators—they benefit intermediaries while harming both creators and audiences. By examining the technical realities of digital copying alongside the economic and social consequences of various regulatory approaches, we can see how current copyright enforcement mechanisms undermine not just artistic freedom but fundamental human liberties. What emerges is a compelling case for rethinking our approach to intellectual property in ways that protect creative livelihoods without sacrificing the open internet and the freedoms it enables.

Chapter 1: The Lock Fallacy: How Digital Locks Harm Creators and Benefit Intermediaries

Digital locks, also known as Digital Rights Management (DRM), have been widely deployed by media companies as a supposed solution to unauthorized copying. However, these technologies fundamentally misunderstand both the nature of digital information and the relationships between creators, distributors, and audiences. The first problem with digital locks is technical: they simply don't work. Any digital lock can be broken, often within days of release. The 09 F9 key that protected HD-DVDs was discovered and published online, spreading to hundreds of thousands of websites. Music from iTunes was routinely stripped of protection within minutes of release. As security experts understand, digital locks can't just be broken by sophisticated hackers—once broken, the tools to circumvent them become widely available to anyone. More problematically, digital locks transfer power from creators to distributors. When your creative work is locked with technology you don't control, you lose the ability to determine how that work reaches your audience. Consider a filmmaker whose movie is locked to a particular platform—if that platform later changes its terms or demands a higher percentage, the filmmaker can't simply take their work elsewhere without forcing their existing audience to abandon their purchases. Digital locks also harm audience relationships. They turn paying customers into frustrated users who can't do simple things like move content between devices they own or make backups. Studies have shown that when legitimate content becomes unavailable or too restrictive, audiences turn to unauthorized sources—and once they learn these methods, they often continue using them even when legitimate options return. Perhaps most insidiously, digital locks require computers that spy on their users and disobey their owners' commands. A computer that can play a locked file must be designed to hide certain processes from its user and refuse certain commands. This fundamentally compromises computer security and personal freedom, creating vulnerabilities that affect not just entertainment but all aspects of digital life. The reality becomes clear: digital locks don't protect copyright—they protect middlemen while harming both creators and audiences.

Chapter 2: Fame vs. Fortune: Why Attention is Necessary but Insufficient for Creative Success

Creative success requires both recognition and compensation, but these factors operate independently and through different mechanisms. The internet excels at creating fame—spreading work to vast audiences—while monetization remains a separate challenge. The digital landscape has transformed how audiences discover creative work. Where once gatekeepers like publishers, record labels, and studios controlled access to audiences, today's creators can reach potential fans directly through countless platforms. This increased accessibility democratizes opportunity but also fragments attention across millions of competing voices. The old equation of "get noticed by a big company, then get paid" has been replaced by more complex paths. However, fame alone doesn't pay bills. As technology publisher Tim O'Reilly famously observed, "Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy." This doesn't mean fame automatically leads to fortune—it means fame is a prerequisite for any monetization strategy. No one can pay you for work they don't know exists. The internet makes discovery possible at unprecedented scales, but converting that attention into income requires deliberate strategy. Successful creators today employ multiple revenue streams rather than relying on a single model. They sell physical goods associated with digital works (merchandise, limited editions, signed copies), offer performances and experiences (concerts, speaking engagements, workshops), create commissioned works for clients, engage directly with fans through crowdfunding and patronage, and license their creative output for various uses. The specific mix varies by medium and audience, but diversification is essential. The crucial insight is that distribution channels have multiplied. When only a handful of companies controlled access to audiences, creators had little leverage. Today's abundance of platforms creates competition among intermediaries, giving creators more options and better terms. This shifting power dynamic explains why traditional media companies fight so aggressively for more restrictive copyright enforcement—their control over distribution is their primary source of leverage over creators. Understanding this distinction between fame and fortune allows creators to strategically approach both, seeing widespread sharing not as a threat but as part of the discovery process that precedes monetization.

Chapter 3: The Internet as a Human Right: Why Free Expression Matters More Than Profit

The internet has evolved from a mere communications technology into the central nervous system of modern society. Beyond entertainment consumption, it now mediates our most fundamental rights to expression, association, and participation in civic life. Research demonstrates the profound social impact of internet access. Studies comparing similar families with and without connectivity show that those with access experience better health outcomes, higher educational achievement, greater social mobility, and increased economic opportunity. Countries and international bodies increasingly recognize internet access as a human right precisely because digital exclusion now means exclusion from full participation in society. This framing reveals the true stakes of copyright battles. When entertainment companies demand the power to disconnect users accused of infringement (through "three strikes" laws) or block websites without judicial review, they're asking for the authority to remove people from essential social infrastructure over commercial disputes. This would be like allowing a publisher to cut off someone's telephone service because they photocopied a book, or a movie studio to evict someone from their home for recording a film. The human dimension becomes even clearer when examining how copyright enforcement mechanisms affect privacy and free expression. To effectively police digital copying requires surveillance of communications and the ability to remove content without judicial process. These mechanisms, once established, inevitably expand beyond their original purpose. Russia demonstrated this when authorities used software piracy accusations as pretexts to raid opposition newspapers and political organizations. In democratic countries, the chilling effect on speech occurs when legitimate criticism, commentary, and cultural participation are suppressed through overzealous or automated enforcement. What's most troubling is how copyright enforcement increasingly requires compromising the security and integrity of our devices and networks. Digital locks necessitate computers that hide processes from their owners and networks designed for monitoring rather than privacy. As our lives become more dependent on connected devices—from pacemakers to vehicles—these vulnerabilities threaten not just our digital freedom but our physical safety. The fundamental question isn't whether creators deserve compensation, but whether that compensation should come at the expense of basic freedoms and rights in the digital age.

Chapter 4: From Regulation to Censorship: How Copyright Enforcement Threatens Freedom

Copyright enforcement has progressively morphed from an industrial regulation into a mechanism for widespread censorship and surveillance. This transformation reveals how even well-intentioned laws can fundamentally threaten freedom when applied to general-purpose technologies like computers and networks. Historically, copyright functioned as an industrial regulation governing relationships between commercial entities—publishers, broadcasters, record labels, and other businesses. This made sense when copying required specialized equipment and substantial capital investment. The average person simply couldn't afford printing presses or record-pressing plants, so copyright rarely affected individual behavior directly. Digital technology has collapsed this distinction. Computers are copying machines by design—they make temporary copies to display websites, play music, or show videos. Networks function by copying data between points. This means enforcing copyright in the digital realm inevitably extends regulation from specialized industries to everyday activities of ordinary people. The enforcement mechanisms this extension requires are inherently censorial. Consider website blocking, one of the most common copyright enforcement tactics. To prevent access to sites accused of facilitating infringement requires implementing the same technical infrastructure used by authoritarian regimes to control political speech. Indeed, entertainment industry groups explicitly cited China's national firewall as a model in their arguments for the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). This censorship infrastructure cannot function without surveillance. To identify potentially infringing content, all communications must be monitored. YouTube's Content ID system scans every upload against a database of copyrighted works, while internet service providers are increasingly pressured to inspect all traffic passing through their networks. This surveillance catches vast amounts of legitimate speech alongside any infringement. Perhaps most concerning is how copyright enforcement has expanded to target tools and technologies rather than specific infringing uses. Legislation like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act makes it illegal to create or distribute technologies that could circumvent digital locks, even for lawful purposes. This has prevented security researchers from disclosing vulnerabilities, hindered the development of accessibility tools for disabled users, and blocked the creation of interoperable products. The result is a regulatory framework that increasingly resembles censorship, where ordinary communication requires permission, where speech can be removed without judicial review, and where the architecture of control extends far beyond its original purpose.

Chapter 5: Balancing Creation and Access: Alternative Models for Digital Compensation

Creating a sustainable ecosystem for creative work doesn't require draconian copyright enforcement. Alternative compensation models can ensure creators get paid while preserving the openness and innovation of digital networks. Blanket licensing offers one proven approach. This system has successfully funded creative work in contexts where individual permission would be impractical—radio stations, nightclubs, and universities all pay collective licenses that allow them to use vast catalogs of work without negotiating each use individually. The fees collected are distributed to creators based on statistical sampling of actual usage. This model could be extended to internet service providers, allowing users legal access to creative works while ensuring compensation flows to creators. Voluntary payment systems have shown surprising effectiveness. The Humble Bundle pioneered "pay-what-you-want" distribution for games, music, and books, consistently generating millions in revenue despite users having the option to pay nothing. Similarly, crowdfunding platforms like Kickstarter have enabled creators to raise funds directly from audiences before creation, shifting the compensation point from after-the-fact purchases to up-front patronage. These models work because many people genuinely want to support creators whose work they value. The distinction between selling access and selling associated goods or experiences has become increasingly important. Musicians now often make more money from concerts and merchandise than recordings, while authors supplement book sales with speaking engagements and workshops. These revenue streams aren't replacements for direct compensation for creative work, but they demonstrate how audience relationships can generate sustainable income even when the primary work is widely shared. Importantly, these alternative models don't require perfect enforcement against unauthorized copying. They acknowledge copying as a technological reality and design business approaches that work with rather than against this reality. The key insight is that people will pay for convenient, reliable access to creative work and for ways to support creators they value—they just increasingly resist paying for artificial scarcity in digital goods. By separating the goal of creator compensation from the mechanisms of controlling copies, we can design systems that fulfill copyright's original purpose of supporting creative livelihoods without undermining the open architecture of digital networks or criminalizing everyday user behavior.

Chapter 6: Technological Inevitability: Why Copying Will Never Get Harder

The fundamental trajectory of digital technology guarantees that copying will become progressively easier, cheaper, and more pervasive. This technological reality should inform our approach to copyright rather than being treated as a temporary problem to be solved. Digital storage continues to follow exponential growth curves—today's smartphone has more capacity than entire data centers did decades ago, while costs plummet. Network speeds likewise increase while becoming more ubiquitous. These trends have continued unabated for decades and show no signs of reversing. Any regulatory approach based on the assumption that copying might someday become more difficult is fundamentally misguided. The proliferation of general-purpose computing compounds this reality. Modern computers are designed to run any valid program, not just authorized ones. Computer scientists have found no theoretical basis for creating devices that can run every program except those that copy protected content. The entertainment industry's desire for devices that selectively refuse certain functions contradicts the fundamental nature of computing technology. Attempts to create devices that resist owner modification inevitably compromise security and functionality. A computer designed to hide certain processes from its user becomes vulnerable to malicious exploitation. Sony's infamous rootkit scandal demonstrated this danger—CD copy protection that secretly installed software on users' computers created security vulnerabilities that malware authors quickly exploited. Even when technical protection measures are initially effective, they face the asymmetric challenge that they need only be broken once to become broadly ineffective. Once circumvention methods are discovered—whether through key extraction, buffer capturing, or analog recording—they spread rapidly through networks designed for information sharing. The effort required to implement increasingly sophisticated protection measures grows exponentially while providing diminishing returns. The lesson is clear: no technical or legal regime can reverse the fundamental properties of digital information. Industries built around controlling copies must adapt their business models to this reality rather than attempting to reshape technology itself. This doesn't mean abandoning copyright entirely, but rather refocusing it on regulating commercial relationships between businesses rather than attempting to control the everyday activities of individuals.

Chapter 7: The Ethical Imperative: Supporting Freedom in a Computer-Mediated World

As computers become integrated into every aspect of our lives—from our bodies to our vehicles, homes, and public infrastructure—the ethical stakes of their design grow enormously. The values embedded in these systems will determine whether technology amplifies human freedom or constrains it. Our devices increasingly mediate our most intimate and consequential activities. Medical implants regulate bodily functions, smart home systems control our living environments, vehicles navigate our physical movement, and network-connected devices capture our conversations, locations, and relationships. When these systems are designed to prioritize external control over user autonomy, they fundamentally compromise our agency and safety. The Edward Snowden revelations demonstrated how vulnerable poorly secured systems are to surveillance and exploitation. The NSA's BULLRUN and EDGEHILL programs deliberately weakened encryption standards and computer security to facilitate intelligence gathering. These deliberate vulnerabilities, once created, become available not just to "authorized" parties but to criminals, oppressive regimes, and malicious actors of all kinds. Copyright enforcement mechanisms contribute directly to this problem by requiring systems designed to resist user control. A device that prevents copying must necessarily hide some of its operations from its owner and refuse certain commands. Such designs fundamentally compromise security and create precedents for more extensive control. When copyright law prohibits users from examining or modifying their own devices, it prevents them from verifying that these systems are acting in their interests. This connection between copyright enforcement and broader freedom becomes clearer when considering the technologies that both enable infringement and protect fundamental rights. Virtual Private Networks, encryption tools, and anonymity services like Tor are essential for journalists, dissidents, and ordinary citizens seeking privacy, yet are increasingly targeted as "circumvention tools" under copyright enforcement regimes. The ethical position that emerges is clear: we must prioritize creating technological systems that remain answerable to their users rather than external controllers. This doesn't mean abandoning all regulation or oversight, but rather designing regulations that target harmful behaviors without requiring compromised technologies. By distinguishing between commercial exploitation and personal use, we can craft rules that protect creators' interests without undermining the autonomy and security of individuals. The future of human freedom increasingly depends on maintaining control over the computers that mediate our lives. Copyright must adapt to this reality rather than demanding that our technological infrastructure be compromised to enforce business models from the analog era.

Summary

The digital age presents us with a profound choice about the relationship between creativity, technology, and freedom. While the entertainment industry frames this choice as between compensating creators and allowing "piracy," the real stakes are much higher. The regulatory mechanisms demanded to control digital copying inevitably expand to compromise personal privacy, security, and fundamental freedoms. What emerges from this analysis is a vision for a digital ecosystem where creative livelihoods flourish without sacrificing essential liberties. By recognizing that information doesn't want anything—people do—we can design systems that acknowledge technological realities while supporting human needs. This means copyright focused on regulating commercial relationships rather than personal behavior, compensation models that don't depend on perfect control, and technological systems designed to empower rather than restrict their users. The future of both creative expression and human freedom depends on getting this balance right.

About Author

Loading...

Cory Doctorow

Cory Doctorow is a science fiction author, activist, journalist and blogger — the co-editor of Boing Boing and the author of the YA graphic novel In Real Life, the nonfiction business book Information Doesn’t Want To Be Free, and young adult novels like Homeland, Pirate Cinema, and Little Brother and novels for adults like Rapture Of The Nerds and Makers. He is a Fellow for the Electronic Frontier Foundation and co-founded the UK Open Rights Group. Born in Toronto, Canada, he now lives in Los Angeles.

Read more

Related Books by Cory Doctorow

Loading...

The Art of Asking

Brené Brown

or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Let People Help

★★★½☆3.9