Advertisement

Perceived Punishment and Digital Piracy: Certainty, Celerity and Severity of Digital Piracy

  • Sanjeev P. Sahni
  • Indranath Gupta
Chapter

Abstract

Perceived punishment analyzes the perception of people regarding the severity of the punishment with regard to the act of digital piracy. This chapter, within the framework of deterrence theory and other behavioral theories, explains how punishment plays an important role in curbing digital piracy. It also analyzes the perception that the more severe the nature of punishment perceived by people, the lesser will be the indulgence in the crime.

Keywords

Perceived punishment Certainty Celerity Severity 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.Google Scholar
  2. Bagchi, K., Kirs, P., & Cerveny, R. (2006). Global software piracy: Can economic factors alone explain the trend? Communications of the ACM, 49(6), 70–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beccaria, C. (1985). Essay on crimes and punishments (H. Paolucci, Trans.). New York: Macmillan. (Original work published 1764).Google Scholar
  4. Biddle, W. C. (1969). Legislative study of the effectiveness of criminal penalties. Crime and Delinquency, 15(20), 354–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blake, R. H., & Kyper, E. S. (2013). An investigation of the intention to share media files over peer-to-peer networks. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(4), 410–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonesana & Beccaria. (1764). In Xigen Li and Nico Nergadze, deterrence effect of four legal and extralegal factors on online copyright infringement. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(2009) 307–327.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, J. (2007). From cult of masculinity to smart macho: Gender perspectives on police occupational culture. Sociology of Crime Law and Deviance, 8, 205–226.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, S. E., Esbensen, F-A., & Geis, G. (2001). Criminology: Explaining crime and its context (4th ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Chiricos, T. G., & Waldo, G. P. (1970). Punishment and crime: An examination of some empirical evidence. Social Problems, 18(2), 200–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choi, U. J. & Kim, G. Y. (2009). The study of an effect of punishment on online piracy intention. Copyright, June, 25–48.Google Scholar
  11. Clarke, R. V., & Cornish, D. B. (2001). Rational choice. In R. Paternoster & R. Bachman (Eds.), Pages 23–42 in explaining criminals and crime: Essays in contemporary criminological theory. Los Angeles: Roxbury.Google Scholar
  12. Cochran, J. K., Chamlin, M. B., Wood, P. B., & Sellers, C. S. (1999). Shame, embarrassment, and formal sanction threats: Extending the deterrence/rational choice model to academic dishonesty. Sociological Inquiry, 69(1), 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cooper, J., & Harrison, D. M. (2001). The social organization of audio piracy on the internet. Media, Culture & Society, 23(1), 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cronan, T. P., & Al-Rafee, S. (2008, Apr). Factors that influence the intention to pirate software and media. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(4), 527–545.Google Scholar
  15. Decker, S. H., & Kohfield, C. W. (1990). Certainty, severity, and the probability of crime: A logistic analysis. Policy Studies Journal, 19(1), 2–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Decker, S. H., Wright, R., & Logie, R. (1993). Perceptual deterrence among active residential burglars: A research note. Criminology, 31(1), 135–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gopal, R. D., Sanders, G. L., Bhattacharjee, S., Agrawal, M., & Wagner, S. C. (2004). A behavioral model of digital music piracy. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 14(2), 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grasmick, H. G., & Bursik, R. J. J. (1990). Conscience, significant others, and rational choice: Extending the deterrence model. Law & Society Review, 24(3), 837–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Grasmick, H. G., & Kobayahi, E. (2002). Workplace deviance in Japan: Applying an extended model of deterrence. Deviant Behaviour, 23(1), 21–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grasmick, H. G., Blackwell, B., Bursik, R., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Changes in perceived threats of shame, embarrassment and legal sanctions for interpersonal violence, 1982–1992. Violence and Victims, 8(4), 313–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gunter, W. D. (2009). Internet scallywags: A comparative analysis of multiple forms and measurements of digital piracy. Western Criminology Review, 10(1), 15–28.Google Scholar
  22. Henshel RL Carey S (1975) Deviance, deterrence and knowledge of sanctions R Henshel R Silverma Perception in criminology New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Higgins, G. E., & Makin, D. A. (2004). Does social learning theory condition the effects of low self-control on college students’ software piracy. Psychological Reports, 95, 921–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hinduja, S. (2006). Music piracy and crime theory. New York: LFB Scholarly.Google Scholar
  25. Hollinger, R. C., & Clark, J. P. (1982). Formal and informal social controls of employee deviance. Sociological Quarterly, 23(3), 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Horney, J., & Marshall, I. H. (1992). Risk perceptions among serious offenders: The role of crime and punishment. Criminology, 30(4), 575–594. Fishbein M &Ajzen I (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. (1986). A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6(1), 5–16.Google Scholar
  28. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2006, December 1). The general theory of marketing ethics: A revision and three questions. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(2), 143–153.Google Scholar
  29. Karaganis, J. (Ed.). (2011). Media piracy in emerging economies. New York: Social Science Research Council.Google Scholar
  30. Klepper, S., & Nagin, D. (1989). The deterrent effect of perceived certainty and severity of punishment revisited. Criminology, 27(4), 721–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kruger, B. (2004). Failing intellectual property protection 101: Character education may be the key to piracy prevention. The Journal of Technological Horizons in Education, 13(9), 48.Google Scholar
  32. Loch, K. D., & Conger, S. (1996). Evaluating ethical decision making and computer use. Communications of the ACM, 39(7), 74–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meier, R. F., & Johnson, W. T. (1977). Deterrence as social control: The legal and extralegal production of conformity. American Sociological Review, 42(2), 292–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mendes, S., & McDonald, M. (2001). Putting severity of punishment back into deterrence package. Policy Studies Journal, 29(4), 588–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Morton, N. A., & Koufteros, X. (2008). Intention to commit online music piracy and its antecedents: An empirical investigation. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 15(3), 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nagin, D. S. (1998). Deterrence and incapacitation. In M. Tonry (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of crime and punishment. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Nagin, D. S., & Paternoster, R. (1994). Personal capital and social control: The deterrence implications of a theory of individual differences in criminal offending. Criminology, 32(4), 581–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nagin, D. S., & Pogarsky, G. (2001). Integrating celerity, impulsivity, and extralegal sanction threats into a model of general deterrence: Theory and evidence. Criminology, 32(4), 581–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Park, J., & Sung, C. (2015). The effect of online piracy deterrence on self-control and piracy intention. PACIS.Google Scholar
  40. Parker, J., & Grasmick, G. (1979). Linking actual and perceived certainty of punishment. Criminology, 17(3), 366–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Paternoster, R., Saltzman, L., Waldo, G., & Chiricos, T. (1985). Assessments of risk and behavioural experience: An exploratory study of change. Criminology, 23(3), 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Peace, G. A., Galletta, D. F., & Thong, J. Y. L. (2003). Software piracy in the workplace: A model and empirical test. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 153–177.Google Scholar
  43. Piquero, A. R., & Rengert, G. F. (1999). Studying deterrence with active residential burglars. Justice Quarterly, 16(2), 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pogarsky, G. (2002). Identifying “ deterrable” offenders implications for research on deterrence. Justice Quarterly, 19, 431–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Scheff, T. J. (1988). Shame and conformity: The deference-emotion system. American Sociological Review, 53(3), 395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Scheider, M. C. (2001). Deterrence and the base rate fallacy: An examinations of perceived certainty. Justice Quarterly, 18(1), 63–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shepherd, J. (2001). Criminal deterrence as a public health strategy. Lancet, 358(9294), 1717–1725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Silver, E. (2002). Deterrence and rational choice theories. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Skinner, W. F., & Fream, A. M. (1997). A social learning theory analysis of computer crime among college students. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 34(4), 495–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tittle, C. R., & Rowe, A. R. (1973). Moral appeal, sanction threat and deviance: An experimental test. Social Problems, 20(4), 488–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van Den Hagg, E. (1969). On deterrence and the death penalty. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 60(2), 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Venkatesh, V., Morris, G., Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wall, D. (2001). Crime and the internet. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Walls, W. D. (2008). Cross-country analysis of movie piracy. Applied Economics, 40(5), 625–632.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850600707337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wilkins, L. T. (1969). Evaluations of penal measures. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  56. Williams, K. R., & Hawkins, R. (1992). Wife assault, costs of arrest, and the deterrence process. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29(3), 292–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wingrove, T., Korpas, A. L., & Weisz, V. (2011). Why were millions of people not obeying the law? Motivational influences on non-compliance with the law in the case of music piracy. Psychology, Crime & Law, 17(3), 261–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Witte, A. D. (1983). Economics theories. In S. H. Kalish (Ed.), Encyclopedia of crime and justice. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  59. Xigen Li, & Nico Nergadze. (2009). Deterrence effect of four legal and extralegal factors on online copyright infringement. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 307–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yoon, C. (2011). Theory of planned behavior and ethics theory in digital piracy: An integrated model. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(3), 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjeev P. Sahni
    • 1
  • Indranath Gupta
    • 2
  1. 1.Jindal Institute of Behavioural SciencesOP Jindal Global UniversitySonipatIndia
  2. 2.Jindal Global Law SchoolOP Jindal Global UniversitySonipatIndia

Personalised recommendations