p2p, anonymity and security

[bscott at ntisys.com]

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, at 12:51pm, greg at freephile.com wrote:
> I sounds like you've bought into the notion promulgated by the popular
> media that because copyrights are automatically granted, that doing
> anything without obtaining and paying for permission is a crime.

  Speaking for myself:

  I certainly hate the media cartel as much as the next guy.  They have such
a strangle-hold on the industry that anyone who doesn't play their game
almost cannot be heard.  The terms of many of their contracts verge on
signing away one's entire life and identity.  The media cartel routinely
engages in price gouging and market control schemes.  They often appear to
believe they can buy whatever laws they want, and enforce them on their own.  
It seems many in the industry will not be happy until they can control every
aspect of content production and distribution, from the time it leaves the
artist's fingers or mouth, to the point where it hits the consumer's
eardrums or eyeballs.  In short, they are the epitome of corporate greed.

  However, as the saying goes, two wrongs don't make a right.

  In my own, personal experience, the overwhelming majority of people
interested in P2P file sharing networks simply want to obtain free copies of
stuff they would otherwise have to pay for.  They generally don't care if
the copies are illegal or not.  Indeed, some (a minority, I suspect)  
consider that a plus.  Most just don't care.

  I'm sure there are plenty of people interested in the legitimate uses, but
by all appearances, they are also a minority.

  (This, incidentally, is part of the larger problem.  If you have a tool
that is used for illegal purposes 95% of the time, and legal purposes 5% of
the time, many conclude the problem is with the tool.  Alas.)

  So.  You ask for P2P sharing.  You say the most important feature for you
is anonymity.  That means you want to hide your identity.  That may be for
perfectly legitimate reasons.  As Derek points out, protecting one's privacy
*is* important (his failure to do so notwithstanding).  But, given my
experience, your statements would make me suspicious of your intent.  I
would not condemn you or anyone else on suspicion alone -- but there are
many (such as the aforementioned media cartel) who would.

  Food for thought...

-- 
Ben Scott <bscott at ntisys.com>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do  |
| not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. |
| All information is provided without warranty of any kind.              |