Filesharing, as I define it, is a way for people to share files with one and another.
Filesharing programs, are programs that enable people to do so.
The programming instructions which perform the transfer of bits from one computer to another is a technology.
Slicing, as I define it, is a way for people to slice something, ie. a loaf of bread.
A knife, is a tool that enable people to slice bread.
The creation of a knife, and the resulting product, namely a knife, is a technology.
Generally speaking, we condemn the slicing of people. We put people in jail, or otherwise punish them for using the the ‘knife’,
as a tool for slicing people.
Why is it, that when you compare these things to each other, the MPAA/RIAA and other lobyists are pushing a ban of a technology,
such as a filesharing program? Why is it, that they have succeeded in convincing a large part of society, that by definition, filesharing is bad?
I dont dispute that put against each other, the technology that is the knife, is being used primarily as a tool for slicing bread, whereas filesharing
is used primarily as a tool to distribute copyrighted material. But thats just the thing. Are we, as a society willing to ban technology because what it
can be used for? and where does a technology cross the line from being a convenient tool, to being a menace, and ripe for banning?
I dont have the answers (yet), but I dont think banning technology will do any good at all. Doing something about the usage of a technology would
be a better solution. But alas, do You have faith in the already-mentioned entities in doing the right thing? … I dont.