What I am about to say is nothing new. I have said much of this in the past. Only now, I have a new target. And further thoughts. I am sure what I am about to say is something that some people might expect from me. If you want to stop reading now, go ahead.

And a warning, dear reader – I am sure many will not like what I am going to say. It has to do with hard work, no entitlement because of who you are and where you are from. Of equal importance, that you recognize you need to give up your desire to benefit from my creativity by paying nothing for my hard work.

This is a note to “Students for Free Culture,” of whom I first learned in The New York Times. The story concerns college students who joined together to protect their rights to get free music or anything else free produced outside their orbit. These students do not want to pay for what others create. I do not want what I sweat and labor over to be freely shared for nothing by some elitist students who rail against the current copyright laws contending he or she deserves to steal the hard-earned work of others. Yes, steal.

The students say, “The technology has outpaced the law.” Therefore, in his or her naïve view, technology, the world of the machine – defined however anyone wants – takes precedent over the individual. In the world of 2.0 and beyond, technology is always many steps ahead of the law. The individual usually wants to play by the law because we are essentially law-abiding people. But to these students, the law matters very little in this new scheme of justice. I ask what happens to the artist who, sometimes, after a lifetime of struggle, however long that may be, has success and his or her work finds a place in culture, popular or otherwise? Must the artist suffer because some students would rather not pay anything to compensate the artist for his or her work? The student group in question never gives an adequate answer.

The manifesto of “The Students for Free Culture” further says, “ Students are so quick to fight for this cause because we’re the one’s bearing the burden.” What burden? Is it a few cents out of normally deep pockets? These students sound as if they are digging ditches, hauling blocks of granite to the tops of monuments, cleaning sewers, picking beans in a field under a hot sun. Those who do those jobs, and more, are the ones who really put up with a burden. The file sharing these students want is really about convenience, exclusiveness, penuriousness, and laziness. Pay your buck or two up front and allow someone else to profit from his or her craft. Do not dissemble by contending that you will achieve more by piggybacking on the work of others, because, after all, according to you, it is better to create using the ideas of other people. And probably it is easier for you when someone else’s work is there for the picking.

Those who believe that ideas exist only for “the sharing and reusing of culture” do not seem to realize that only original ideas affect change. For every new thought that comes along there will be someone else who recognizes its antecedents. As long as a person is not a plagiarist, ideas are there to be used. Old ideas have always influenced new thoughts. I have no problem with that, but give credit where credit is due, especially when dealing with words and pictures. Where does it say in the new world of ideas that everything must be free? Where does it say that academics, lawyers and those who seek change only for the sake of change and who live in a narrow, insular, closed and unreal world are the ones who have the right to change the concept of intellectual property?

If any student wants to change the world, there is the chance he or she can do something useful and lasting. Fledging organizations such as “Students for Free Culture” sometimes see an increase in membership. With that increase, leadership realizes it can impose new values onto its original manifesto. It tends to broaden the outlook of the organization by taking on causes far from the original intent. Some advocate for causes that have real meaning, such as medicine for all rather than the puny desire to get something free. Often, the proposed changes mean nothing and go nowhere.

It is not easy for crusading youngsters to make you think they are sincere. It is more difficult to morph, at least on the surface, into helping other people better their life. Until the leadership in “Students for Free Culture.” and the larger mass of unaffiliated students realize that you only get what you legitimately pay for, any new cause under its umbrella will never become real. I see no evidence of that happening. Students have to understand that nothing comes easy in this world. Everything has some cost. When students understand this, maturity could result. In the end, that maturity may prove more useful and realistic than free file sharing another’s creativity and then complaining in public about “bearing the burden” of paying for it, even if it is only pennies.