eclectica
2005-01-31, 13:07
Peace and cooperation in the filesharing community. It sounds like a good principle, right?
It depends on who is considered to be part of the filesharing community. If the RIAA is considered to be part of the filesharing community then would the idea of peace in the filesharing community be a good one? In that case peace and cooperation would mean that we would have to shut down our p2p applications and settle all lawsuits, or share only non-RIAA material on the networks.
Okay, so most people don't think of the RIAA as part of the filesharing community. But how about DCIA members who want to commercialize p2p, or the ED2K and BitTorrent sites which seem to have sold out and betrayed their users, or the latest makers of crapware p2p applications? Is Suprnova/eXeem part of the filesharing community? Is Sharman Networks part of it? Is Simon Moon's ShareReactor/RespectP2P a part of it? Is Zeropaid with its promotion through advertisements and its subforums of applications like ES5 and eXeem, its inflated userbase, and the employment of Chris Hedgecock with a DRM company a part of it too?
I propose that all of these factions including the RIAA are a part of the filesharing community. So I dispute the notion that peace in the filesharing community is a good thing.
There are basically three factions in the filesharing community. There are those who support an open and free version of it that is uncorrupted. There are those who want to commercialize and corrupt it with adware, spyware, or claims of needing funds to fight off the dubious existence of legal threats and lawsuits. And there are those who want to destroy it such as the RIAA.
Those of us amongst the righteous faction of p2p ought not to seek peace in the filesharing community, because in doing so we would become impotent by losing our vigilance towards fighting for our vision of a free, open p2p that is not corrupted. If someone in the community is promoting a scam or commercialized p2p product, it is not enough to say that you won't use it yourself and go about "minding your own business". You have a duty to educate other filesharers who are your brothers and sisters on the dangers and scams that exist. If you hold your tongue in order to preserve some kind of peace in the filesharing community, then you've done wrong to your peers by standing idly by when your voice could have made a difference in preventing the further corruption of p2p. There is a saying by Edmund Burke which is: "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."
Peace in the filesharing community can be a good idea, but not if it requires us to turn a blind eye towards the wrong doing of others. What concerns me are the greedy factions who are using this concept of peace as a way to neutralize any opposition or criticism of their plans.
It depends on who is considered to be part of the filesharing community. If the RIAA is considered to be part of the filesharing community then would the idea of peace in the filesharing community be a good one? In that case peace and cooperation would mean that we would have to shut down our p2p applications and settle all lawsuits, or share only non-RIAA material on the networks.
Okay, so most people don't think of the RIAA as part of the filesharing community. But how about DCIA members who want to commercialize p2p, or the ED2K and BitTorrent sites which seem to have sold out and betrayed their users, or the latest makers of crapware p2p applications? Is Suprnova/eXeem part of the filesharing community? Is Sharman Networks part of it? Is Simon Moon's ShareReactor/RespectP2P a part of it? Is Zeropaid with its promotion through advertisements and its subforums of applications like ES5 and eXeem, its inflated userbase, and the employment of Chris Hedgecock with a DRM company a part of it too?
I propose that all of these factions including the RIAA are a part of the filesharing community. So I dispute the notion that peace in the filesharing community is a good thing.
There are basically three factions in the filesharing community. There are those who support an open and free version of it that is uncorrupted. There are those who want to commercialize and corrupt it with adware, spyware, or claims of needing funds to fight off the dubious existence of legal threats and lawsuits. And there are those who want to destroy it such as the RIAA.
Those of us amongst the righteous faction of p2p ought not to seek peace in the filesharing community, because in doing so we would become impotent by losing our vigilance towards fighting for our vision of a free, open p2p that is not corrupted. If someone in the community is promoting a scam or commercialized p2p product, it is not enough to say that you won't use it yourself and go about "minding your own business". You have a duty to educate other filesharers who are your brothers and sisters on the dangers and scams that exist. If you hold your tongue in order to preserve some kind of peace in the filesharing community, then you've done wrong to your peers by standing idly by when your voice could have made a difference in preventing the further corruption of p2p. There is a saying by Edmund Burke which is: "All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing."
Peace in the filesharing community can be a good idea, but not if it requires us to turn a blind eye towards the wrong doing of others. What concerns me are the greedy factions who are using this concept of peace as a way to neutralize any opposition or criticism of their plans.