criminalize to stifle innovation   (link)

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,19509-1542213,00.html

"Uh-oh, this is more efficient than our disproportionately expensive (to the person who buys it) distribution method. Let's NOT offer it for sale, let's criminalize it and threaten everybody who thinks about it (and some who don't even do that)."

Yes, most of the traffic flowing through the peer-to-peer networks involves breaches of copyright. And yes, music sales did fall by almost a quarter in the five years to 2003, as fans realised that technology offered a free alternative to extortionate CD prices. But the roughly 10 per cent of “legal” file-swapping on these networks allows programmers to swap code, academics to exchange learned papers and little-known musicians to gain a fan base. Why should the music industry be able to close such communications channels? Just because technology comes along and disrupts existing business models, should copyright owners not find clever ways to adapt, rather than suing 12-year-olds and fighting software developers in court?

If the studios do win, it will be the consumer who loses. The next generation of digital music players, internet telephony, TV recording equipment — all will suffer from a new legalistic caution that will stifle progress. The music lobby may have more star names on its side: a Sheryl Crow and a Brian Wilson for every Terence Trent D’Arby on the software companies’side. But if the music lobby wins, you might as well swap your iPod for a Thomas Edison wax cylinder.