by\u00a0MICHAEL HIGH, Fordham University, USA<\/p>\n
[Copyright \u00a9 2015 (Michael High). Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd). Available at http:\/\/ijoc.org.<\/em>]<\/p>\n This article analyzes how the groups of the Swedish Pirate movement (specifically the Piratbyr\u00e5n, The Pirate Bay, the Missionerande Kopimistsamfundet, and the Piratpartiet) use dialogical comedy to counter the rhetoric of the copyright lobby. By appropriating the discourse, slogans, and even names of pro-copyright groups, the Swedish groups position themselves as the natural respondents to antipiracy campaigns. This positioning helps them to publicize onerous copyright legislation and prompt discussion on infringement, free speech, and digital rights. The reclamation of the term piracy and the subversive doubling of antipiracy rhetoric in parody, irony, and satire allows for the resignification of piracy and the recontextualization of incorrect and alarmist statements by industry representatives. As a rhetorical strategy, dialogic comedy counters hegemonic discourse, facilitates social learning, and inaugurates debate and dialogue.<\/p>\n Keywords: Piratbyr\u00e5n, The Pirate Bay, Kopimism, Piratpartiet, piracy, parody, irony, satire, comedy, dialogism, copyright, rhetoric, appropriation<\/p>\n We have this history that every time somebody calls us something negative, we just take the name and make it ours.\u00a0\u2014Peter Sunde, former spokesperson for The Pirate Bay<\/p>\n Beginning with the U.S. Copyright Act of 1909, Congress has allowed media industry representatives to revise and increasingly draft U.S. copyright legislation amongst themselves. This situation has led to broad rights for copyright owners and only limited exemptions for libraries, universities, and the public. The interindustry negotiations that produce these laws have privileged established actors, creating significant barriers to entry for newcomers and difficulties accommodating new technologies (Litman, 2006; Wu, 2004). Correspondingly, the length of copyright has continuously expanded, and the law now includes criminal penalties for noncommercial infringement (Netanel, 2008). International lobbying and trade agreements, which often link aid and trade to the protection of intellectual property (Wang, 2003), have exported this industry-centered copyright to Europe and are aligning regimes across the globe.<\/p>\n ______________________________<\/p>\n Michael High: mhigh@fordham.edu Date submitted: 2015\u201302\u201306<\/p>\n 926 Michael High International Journal of Communication 9(2015)<\/p>\n With the creation of Napster in 1999, the film, recording, and software industries began litigating against private individuals and producing public media campaigns to curb peer-to-peer file sharing and other forms of unauthorized copying. Industry representatives describe such consumer practices as \u201cpiracy.\u201d Piracy rhetoric, when used by the same industries that write and influence copyright legislation, insists that noncommercial copyright infringement results in economic destruction and criminal villainy.1 Although the term \u201cpiracy\u201d originally denoted maritime predation, it became the common way to describe the supposed trespass on \u201cliterary property\u201d by competing publishers in the 17th century (Johns, 2009), and until the introduction of blank cassette tapes in the 1980s (\u201cWatchdog under fire,\u201d 1984), the term did not include noncommercial copying. It is worth noting that the use of piracy to describe infringement is not simply metaphorical (Dawdy 2011), as piracy rhetoric functions the same across maritime and intellectual domains: Just as colonial sovereigns labeled pirates those who trespassed on their self-proclaimed right to pillage from and on the sea (Heller-Roazen, 2009), in the context of copyright, \u201cpiracy is a metaphor selected by the powerful and imposed upon the weak\u201d (John, 2014, p. 8).<\/p>\n Over the last decade, however, the groups of the Swedish Pirate movement have embraced the terms pirate and piracy to challenge the rhetoric of the Motion Picture Association, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, the Business Software Alliance, and their national affiliates. Led by the Piratbyr\u00e5n (Pirate Bureau), The Pirate Bay BitTorrent tracking website, the Missionerande Kopimistsamfundet (Missionary Church of Kopimism), and the Piratpartiet (Pirate Party), this movement has significantly intervened in European debates over the status of digital piracy. Though lacking the economic and media resources of their opponents, these groups have affected the popular and political debates in Europe through the reappropriation of the term pirate and the recontextualization of industry representatives\u2019 statements. Through what I call dialogic comedy, which is the humorous appropriation of another\u2019s ideas and statements, the pirate groups have articulated their own positions and facilitated media dialogue and public education on the role and scope of intellectual property in society.<\/p>\n While designations of piracy define actions and exclude actors from authorized \u201ccirculatory channels\u201d (i.e., the legitimate production and movement of goods and ideas) (Dent, 2012, p. 663), the embracing of the appended label can force a contest between the designator and designee. By reappropriating the pirate label and the term piracy, Swedish Pirates have positioned themselves as the natural respondents to antipiracy media campaigns. Though discursive appropriation need not be comedic, parody, irony, and satire align particularly well with the youthful, iconoclastic sensibility of digital natives while encouraging group identification and participation.<\/p>\n In this article, I review the development of the Swedish Pirate movement, integrate theories of discursive appropriation with scholarship on copyright rhetoric, and analyze pirate texts for their counterhegemonic and affiliative potential. I argue that groups in the movement have humorously<\/p>\n [1 See, for instance, the Federation Against Copyright Theft\u2019s \u201cCopyright Is a Matter of Fact,\u201d available at
\n