The law never got lost in the race behind the advancement of technology, only law enforcement. The same old copyright infringement laws worked just as good then as they do now. Any law that only works when you make extreme examples out of someone is a pointless law. If there are so many people committing infringement then copyright itself needs to be reexamined. It never occurs to many that copyright itself is what needs to catch up with the "digital age." The number of infringing Americans is now probably around 30%-40% of our country.
When you have numbers that high you have to question the principle and the law. Copyrights should still be respected and mass infringers should be sued, but it should not be a criminal offense unless you are selling the copies. Copyright needs to evolve and become more liberal, not more authoritarian.
In this debate you are either with those of us who want to reform the law and bring it into balance with the realities of modern technology and society or with those who want to regulate everything that could infringe into the ground. There is no middle ground here. You are either for total government intervention or against it. Without total government intervention into all areas of computer development you can't stop this phenomenon. You simply couldn't enforce the laws without it.
Well stated. This simple fact seems to go over the head of most of society and, amazingly, most on this freedom loving forum.
What really upsets me is when I hear a Senator or a Congressman (or the RIAA) explain how a new law they want passed is intended to "send a message". If it is the law then it is the law. If you are not willing to arrest all the offendors, charge them with a crime and prosecute them then you have bad law. (I will avoid getting into the drug laws here since we are focused on the P2P-RIAA issue but the principle is very much the same.)