Grokster aftermath

At the risk of continuing somewhat "meta" items, every time I've had the notion to write a substantive long post on the Grokster decision, it's seemed inadvisable. Remember, general blog punditry (overall, to a first approximation) selects for appeal, not accuracy. That is, barring some external constraint (e.g. newspaper journalism is to a large extent riding the coattails of a product bought for fish-wrapping and puppy-training, or at least classified ads and horoscopes), there's sadly little point to being right rather than popular.

There's a few different aspects conflicting in the overall filesharing issue:

1) Conventional music business models (copyright) are under stress from copying technology changes.

2) These changes have a positive side in new means of distribution.

3) These changes have a negative side in new means of distribution.

I doubt a Supreme Court of Solomons would be able to easily resolve all of it, especially in one case. In dealing with these changes, there are existing-company businesspeople who would reflexively do the equivalent of suppressing a cure for cancer so they could continue to sell quack medicines. There's wannabe-company businesspeople who would love to make a quick buck any way they could, and don't hesitate to wrap themselves in cause of innovation as a PR strategy. There's an army of promoters and hypesters of all stripes.

It's intellectually lazy to write "a pox on all your houses". But, on the other hand, my writing much against the conventional civil-libertarian wisdom will only get me flamed.

Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog (Wikipedia, Google, censorware, and an inside view of net-politics) - Syndicate site (subscribe, RSS)