Locke on Unauthorized Music Sharing

While discussing Locke’s property theory, Professor LaVaque-Manty highlighted the dilemma of intellectual property, specifically unauthorized music sharing (UMS). Although the professor didn’t ask who has downloaded music illegally, I imagine the majority of us have done it at some point in our lives. Strangely enough, when the professor asked whether UMS is equivalent to stealing, the majority of the class agreed it was. There was, however, a student who defended UMS. In his defense, this student argued that the music was originally purchased by an individual with his hard earned money, making the music his property. Accordingly, the owner can handle his property however he wishes, including sharing it with his friends. While this defense seemed logical, it didn’t sit well with my moral principles. I knew unauthorized music sharing was wrong; I just needed a quality defense. Luckily, I found the defense within Locke’s theory of property.

John Locke

     To begin my defense, let me explain the fundamentals within Locke’s property theory. According to Locke, God gave the earth to all people and, accordingly, every person has a right to his share of the land. To privatize land, Locke defines property as anything in which an individual performs work on and takes out of the state of nature. Locke justifies this theory, stating people naturally own their bodies and subsequently own the things that their body works on.  With the introduction of money, employers compensate employees for their labor, and as a result, employers own whatever the employee produces.
     Locke expands on his property theory by describing the limitations on property accumulation. Locke states that an individual can continue to accumulate property as long as there is enough land for other people and the land is not spoiled. In regards to spoilage, Locke believes the man who possesses the spoiled land “took more than his share” and now can’t tend all the land. Although Locke discusses spoilage in the context of agricultural land, spoilage also refers to the general decrease in value of any object. Just as a spoiled piece of land loses value, a scratched CD drops in price. Spoilage occurs in any case in which the value of an object is harmed.

BitTorrent is a popular music sharing site.

So how does Locke’s theory condemn unauthorized music sharing? Consider where the music started, how it changed hands, and where it ended up. When creating an album, the artist spends hours writing lyrics and recording songs. Therefore, the finished album is the artist’s property. When the album hits stores, people purchase the album with their own money; thus compensating the artist for his work and making that copy of the album their property. However, if an individual (John) who purchased the album gives the music to his friend (Frank) for free, both John and Frank violate Locke’s property limitations.
By sharing the music, John and Frank specifically violate Locke’s spoilage rule. When John gives the album away for free, he allows the property to spoil, meaning it decreases in value. By receiving the album for free, Frank’s demand for the album diminishes, thus lowering the overall demand for the artist’s album. Consequently, the price/value of the album decreases, which, in this context, is equivalent to spoilage. Under Locke’s principles, spoilage, and therefore UMS, is illegal.
     In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that with the introduction of money, Locke accepts unlimited accumulation. Locke reasons that perishable items can be converted into money, a nonperishable item, making the spoilage problem obsolete. In my opinion, however, this rational falls short because money does not replace perishable items, it simply quantifies their value.  In effect, items continue to spoil regardless if we associate money with them. This issue obviously warrants further explanation. Due its enormity, however, this issue can’t be fully explained in this blog post. Nevertheless, I disregard Locke’s unlimited accumulation theory when making my defense for the illegality of UMS.