This article examines the content distribution practices and regulatory anxieties generated by a particular cloud computing technology: the cyberlocker, or one-click file-hosting site. Cyberlockers, which offer an easy and free way to share media files, are widely used for content piracy. Over the last decade, usage of cyberlockers has increased rapidly; however, an intellectual property crackdown in 2012 has had far-reaching consequences for the industry. In this article we provide a short history of this ephemeral digital technology before considering some questions it presents for current media studies debates about sharing and reciprocity. We argue that the cyberlocker, as a non-reciprocal sharing technology, represents a limit case for liberal theories of informational freedom.
AhnJ (2012) Broadband policy in South Korea: the effect of government regulation on internet proliferation. In: PTC 12 (Pacific Telecommunications Council) Proceedings, 20–23January, Hawaii, available at: www.ptc.org/ptc12/?page_id=1287&pid=123 (accessed 1 November 2012).
boydd (2007) None of this is real: identity and participation in Friendster. In: KaraganisJ (ed.) Structures of Participation in Digital Culture. New York: Social Science Research Council, pp. 132–157.
4.
BurgessJGreenJ (2009) YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.
5.
DrahosP with BraithwaiteJ (2002) Information Feudalism: Who Controls the Knowledge Economy?London: Earthscan.
Envisional (2011) An Estimate of Infringing Use of the Internet (technical report). Cambridge: Envisional Ltd.
10.
GarnhamN (1990) Capitalism and Communication: Global Culture and the Economics of Information. London: Sage.
11.
GillespieT (2010) The politics of ‘platforms’. New Media & Society12(3): 347–364.
12.
GraingeP (2011) Ephemeral Media: Transitory Screen Culture from Television to YouTube. London: British Film Institute.
13.
HargreavesI (2011) Digital Opportunity: A Review of Intellectual Property and Growth. Available at: www.ipo.gov.uk/ipreview-finalreport.pdf (accessed 11 July 2013).
14.
HetcherS (2012) Amateur creative digital content and proportional commerce. In: HunterDLobatoRRichardsonMThomasJ (eds) Amateur Media: Social, Cultural and Legal Perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 35–52.
15.
International Intellectual Property Association (IIPA) (2007) Special 301 Report (excerpt). Washington: International Intellectual Property Association. Available at: www.iipa.com/rbc/2007/2007SPEC301SOUTHKOREA.pdf (accessed 1 November 2012).
16.
International Intellectual Property Association (IIPA) (2008) Special 301 Report (excerpt). Washington: International Intellectual Property Association. Available at: www.iipa.com/rbc/2008/2008SPEC301SOUTH_KOREA.pdf (accessed 1 November 2012).
17.
Ipoque (2009) Internet Study 2008/2009. Leipzig: Ipoque GmbH.
18.
JakobssonPStiernstedtF (2012) Reinforcing property by strengthening the commons: a new media policy paradigm?Triple C10(1): 49–55.
19.
JelvehZRossK (2012) Profiting from piracy: a preliminary analysis of the economics of the cyberlocker ecosystem. Paper presented at IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Tarragona, 3 September. Available at: cis.poly.edu/~ross/papers/Cyberlockers.pdf (accessed 1 November 2012).
20.
KaraganisJ (ed.) (2011) Media Piracy in Emerging Economies. New York: Social Science Research Council.
21.
LauingerTEnginKMichiardiP (2012) Paying for piracy? An analysis of one-click hosters’ controversial reward schemes. Paper presented at 15th International Symposium on Research in Attacks, Intrusions and Defenses (RAID), Amsterdam, 13 September. Available at: www.iseclab.org/papers/uploader-income.pdf (accessed 1 November 2012).
22.
LeeJY (2009) Contesting the digital economy and culture: digital technologies and the transformation of popular music in Korea. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies1(4): 489–506.
23.
LessigL (2004) Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity. New York: Penguin.
24.
LobatoR (2012) Shadow Economies of Cinema: Mapping Informal Film Distribution. London: British Film Institute.
25.
MaierGFeldmannAPaxsonVAllmanV. (2009) On dominant characteristics of residential broadband internet traffic. Paper presented at IMC 09, 4–6 Nov 2009, Chicago. Available at: www.icir.net/mallman/papers/residential-imc09.pdf (accessed 1 November 2012).
26.
MillerTGovilNMcMurriaJMaxwellR (2001) Global Hollywood. London: British Film Institute.
27.
NohJ (2008) Five Korean webhards prosecuted for copyright infringement. Screen Daily, 18June, available at: www.screendaily.com/4039447.article (accessed 1 November 2013).
RothenbuhlerEW (2012) The compact disc and its culture: notes on melancholia. In: BolinG (ed.) Cultural Technologies: The Shaping of Culture in Media and Society. London: Routledge, pp. 36–50.
31.
Sanjuàs-CuxartJBarlet-RosPSolé-ParetaJ (2012) Measurement based analysis of one-click file hosting services. Journal of Network and Systems Management20(2): 276–301.
32.
SellS (2003) Private Power, Public Law: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33.
SmithGM (ed.) (1999) On a Silver Platter: CD-ROMs and the Promises of a New Technology. New York: New York University Press.
34.
SnickarsPVonderauP (2012) Moving Data: The iPhone and the Future of Media. New York: Columbia University Press.
TerranovaT (2000) Free labor: producing culture for the digital economy. Social Text18(2): 33–58.
37.
US District Court (2012) Indictment against Kim Dotcom, Megaupload Limited, Vestor Limited, Finn Batato, Julius Bencko, Sven Echternach, Mathias Ortmann, Andrus Nomm, and Bram van der Kolk. US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 5January. Available at: www.nbr.co.nz/sites/default/files/images/78786408-Mega-Indictment.pdf (accessed 1 November 2012).
38.
VaidhyanathanS (2003) Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How It Threatens Creativity. New York: New York University Press.
