Essay Undergraduate 1,339 words

Government Prosecution of Illegal File Sharing

~7 min read

Abstract

This paper argues that the burden of enforcing intellectual property laws against illegal file sharing should not rest with private industries such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), but with the government through criminal prosecution. Drawing on deontological and consequentialist ethical frameworks, the paper contends that illegal file sharing constitutes theft of intellectual property, that the government has a fundamental obligation to enforce its own laws, and that civil litigation has proven an insufficient deterrent. The paper also highlights the broader economic harm caused by illegal file sharing, including job losses, reduced tax revenues, and erosion of the rule of law, concluding that criminal prosecution is both a legal and practical necessity.

📝 How to Write This Type of Paper Writing guide — click to expand

▼

What makes this paper effective

The paper builds its argument systematically, moving from ethical principles to practical economic consequences, giving the position both moral grounding and real-world weight.
It explicitly names its ethical frameworks — deontological and consequentialist — demonstrating academic awareness and showing the reader how different lenses converge on the same conclusion.
The analogy between physical theft and intellectual property theft is developed clearly and persuasively, making an abstract legal concept concrete and accessible.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper uses a two-pronged ethical analysis, first establishing a deontological case (file sharing is illegal, therefore the government must enforce the law) and then reinforcing it with a consequentialist argument (the harms caused by inaction justify criminal prosecution). This convergence technique — showing that multiple ethical frameworks lead to the same conclusion — strengthens persuasive essays considerably and is a hallmark of well-structured argumentative writing.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens by identifying the enforcement gap and framing the central problem. It then establishes the theoretical basis for intellectual property protection before arguing that the government has a duty to enforce its own laws. A dual ethical framework section follows, succeeded by a focused discussion of deterrence. The economic consequences section broadens the argument's practical scope, and a short conclusion calls the government to action. The structure moves logically from principle to practice to policy recommendation.

Introduction: The Enforcement Gap

The issue of illegal file sharing is complicated, with many different considerations coming into play. One aspect that has not received sufficient attention is the prosecution of offenders. Thus far, the task of enforcing intellectual property rights violated through illegal file sharing has been left to the victims themselves. The government has not enforced existing laws, preferring instead that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sue file sharers in civil courts. The association has been forced to pursue these individuals at a rate of approximately 400 lawsuits per month (Lake, 2004).

What does not make sense is why this task has been left to the industry alone. The industry is losing money because of illegal file sharing — major record labels shed approximately 5,000 jobs between 2000 and 2006. Album sales have completely collapsed, and investment in new artist development has dwindled. The industry has been forced to seek damages through civil courts, but it should not have to do so on its own. The government should prosecute individuals who engage in illegal file sharing.

In truth, it should not fall to the industry to enforce the laws of the land. We need to be clear about the nature of illegal file sharing: it is against the law for a reason. Society has developed a system of intellectual property rights because creative output has value and that value deserves protection. Intellectual property rights are considered a foundation upon which a proper market economy can grow. Without such rights, individuals and companies will be less likely to invest. To encourage investment, we need to protect intellectual property — patents, trademarks, written works, and works of art. When a person creates something, it is their property, and they alone have the right to market it and profit from it. Illegal file sharing takes that right away from the creator.

Intellectual Property Rights and the Nature of Theft

Ordinarily, when one party takes something from another, it is considered theft. This ties back to the very definition of the word "property." Files of all types — songs, movies, images, programs — are all forms of intellectual property. What is sometimes forgotten in this discussion is that the intent of the law is for all property to be subject to protection. Yet intellectual property is not afforded the same protections as physical property.

If someone enters your home and steals your stereo, they are subject to criminal prosecution. The police would never tell you to deal with it yourself in civil court. Yet that is exactly what is happening with illegal file sharing. Musicians, programmers, and filmmakers are all being told that they must deal with the theft of their property on their own. This is simply wrong. All property should be afforded equal rights under the law. The theft of intellectual property is therefore not merely a matter for civil courts, but for criminal courts. As copyright infringement encompasses exactly this kind of unauthorized taking, it warrants the same legal seriousness as physical theft.

Everyone understands that government plays certain roles in society. One of those roles is to codify and enforce the system of law. That principle is so fundamental to the definition of government that even libertarians agree with it. With illegal file sharing, we have a situation where the government has written a code of law and then chosen not to enforce it. This goes against the very purpose of government's existence.

The Government's Obligation to Enforce the Law

It is not the role of government to pick and choose which of its laws it will enforce. It is the role of government to enforce all of its laws. Therefore, the government should be the body that prosecutes individuals who engage in illegal file sharing.

3 Locked Sections · 465 words remaining

Deontological and Consequentialist Justifications · 130 words

"Two ethical frameworks support prosecution"

Criminal Prosecution as an Effective Deterrent · 145 words

"Jail time deters more than civil suits"

Economic Consequences and the Rule of Law · 190 words

"Job losses and weakened investment climate"

Conclusion: Government Must Act

The government has been unwilling to get involved in the problem of illegal file sharing beyond superficial law-making, such as legislation requiring colleges and universities to address the issue on their campuses (Brodsky, 2008). The industry, already suffering the effects of criminal activity, is left enforcing the law because the government does not appear to consider it sufficiently important.

You’re 49% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.

130,000+ paper examples AI writing assistant Citation generator Cancel anytime

Key Concepts in This Paper

Intellectual Property Criminal Prosecution File Sharing Rule of Law Deterrence Copyright Theft RIAA Lawsuits Economic Harm Deontological Ethics Consequentialism