I don't understand

Digital Ownership

A few decades ago digitalization of information seemed to promise to make some things quite easier. The most notable being:

There’s a considerable asymmetry between the three. Discovery and sharing are one-time actions. Discovery might require a long period of searching, but eventually it ends. Once found a piece of information can’t really be “undiscovered”. Pretty much the same goes for sharing. Access though is a very different beast.

Having access to a thing is a continuous process. Access can be taken away.

Art is also information. That’s not a reductionist view of art. Information is a technical detail1 of how art is shared.

This transitively brings the same promises to art as well. A considerable part of the internet economy is based on sharing forms of art. That same part of the internet economy logically gives the same promises about art.

Conditional access

The predominant way we access information is actually conditional. Streaming services offer access subscriptions, which can be terminated somewhat one sidedly . Either violating some rules of the service2 or due to someone along the way from you to that streaming service provider deciding your access to it should be cut3. Now technically neither of these are in fact taking away ownership, as no one has sold anyone anything “material”. Access to information has been taken away, which is different.

The same goes for everything else being distributed digitally. Most new literature that is published in a digital format very often come with severe limitations on how they can be read. To the point where you could actually lose books you’ve “bought” because you haven’t really bought any books. You’ve technically bought access to read them, which is different.

Real ownership of digital goods is technically still possible even in a totally legal way4. Sadly that requires a considerable amount of effort and honestly money, unlike most streaming alternatives. At least for music owning digital copies is still completely doable. Things are a bit more hazy regarding books, but at least from a moral standpoint I think is still doable.


  1. albeit an insurmountable one ↩︎

  2. some of which can be pretty unreasonable ↩︎

  3. likely due to legal restrictions ↩︎

  4. weirdly enough books being the least available because of that one horrible monopolist ↩︎