

The Death of File Sharing - jwallaceparker
http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/the-death-of-file-sharing/

======
pnmahoney
The conclusions here feel overblown to me. I'm all for being vigilant, but but
there's nothing compelling Dropbox to madly scramble to (as the author puts
it) "pass muster under the new regime".

But what new regime? I'm not totally sure what the basis is for claiming that
the old-line industry _just now_ went after MegaUpload because of their
legitimate features. Sure, shutting down MU is done on behalf of the interests
of copyright owners, however vested they may be . . . but just because
SOPA/PIPA (regrettably) come close to passing through Congress and this,
truly, seems to betray the pull that RIAA/lobbyists exert over legislators
does not also imply that - suddenly! - copyright owners control the
government. Cf. "The U.S. government. Government in league with old-line
corporate elites." U.S. Government? Which part? Which law? Since when? Which
you know about . . . how?

And E-Mail?? That seems absurd. It's not as though your ISP garners revenues
from you e-mailing a track to your girlfriend - ie, the basis on which your
e-mail service would be disqualified for the DMCA safe harbor exemptions . . .
not to mention that it seems an _exceptionally_ remote likelihood that they'd
even have knowledge of the e-mail you sent.

Just pause and notice how incredibly _top-down_ for lack of a better term, the
author's path to his conclusion really is. What only slightly less obvious is
the implied conspiracy and obvious legal ignorance: "...the gigantic protest
against legislative moves (SOPA and PIPA) that would smash the Internet turned
out to be superfluous. The thing everyone wanted to prevent is already here."
What?! I didn't see the laws change; all I really see is an egregious
violator, a couple of trumped-up conspiracy charges with not much to them
(sidenote: piling on grounds for action is standard practice), and an
organization picked on for the immense and immediate unlikability of its CEO
(Kim Dotcom). To say nothing about the differences between MU and Dropbox.

On that note, we're forgetting the evidence cited in Megaupload being shut
down. This is referenced elsewhere, but there's a mens rea (state of mind /
intentionality) requirement for infringement to rise to the level of criminal
law. Ie, the reason why MU was shut down with a criminal action, etc. For
another, it's not even clear that banning U.S. users would actually keep
flagrant DMCA violators from breaking the law anyway.

The DMCA is working. Er, rather: it does a pretty good job of balancing what
content hosts (Youtube, Scribd, Reddit, etc.) can do to keep functioning and
continue doing what they're doing today, while leaving intact pretty good
rules prescribing the means for that "old-line" elite to take content down.

Contrast this with

>SOPA/PIPA on the one hand, which is a comic and internet-autistic attempt for
media co. to replace the current, working equilibrium we have with a way for
them to call the shots on how the internet _functions_ and

>MegaUpload on the other, from whom those enforcers already had found e-mails:
not about the manner in which to address DMCA takedown notices, but rather
explicitly writing e-mails outlining how/when _not_ to do it.

Just remember, the charges being piled on megaupload right now don't have
scant evidence or case law, or fall squarely under that class of things which
smart/conscientious content providers would _NEVER_ do. Sure, the instant
reproducibility of digital content and flat ability for people to do so has
_CLEARLY_ outstripped that understanding of copyright law that was devised a
couple of centuries ago . . . and, probably against their own interests, folks
like the RIAA would like to see the clocks reset to those old days.

But MegaUpload being shut down seems more likely a show of how easy it should
be to NOT get shut down, than it is any kind of trend for Box.net to be next.
Let's not exaggerate the portability exposed by some kind of megaupload-styled
"19th Century is back!" generic censorship strategy, ok? I think we should all
be watching but there's nothing peculiarly concerning - or at least not here.

~~~
andrewfelix
Check out the author's previous articles:
<http://lfb.org/today/author/jeffreytuckerwng/>

Just about every one of them is angled to attack the federal government.

------
andrewfelix
This article is hyperbole in the extreme. Lots of questions without any
insightful answers.

For example this sweeping summary of what's causing the _'death'_ of file
sharing: _"And who is doing this? The U.S. government. Government in league
with old-line corporate elites."_

It's media company lobbyists pushing for things like SOPA.

------
naner
That obnoxious popup can't possibly have a good success rate. Tacky as hell.

