So after failing to stop the file-swopping services, they're now targeting individuals. The Recording Industry Association of America is planning to sue individuals for alleged copyright infringement, and have obtained close to 1000 such subpoenas demanding the names of file-swoppers. ISPs handed them over without complaint (except Verizon who is bravely challenging the subpoena in court). Quixotic? Maybe, but there will be some of the intended effect. Parents will punish their kids (true, not many tech-savvy parents but I think that will change if the parents think they're in danger of lossing thousands of dollars) and universities will crack down on their students even though the schools will try to shrug off the subpoenas. Just thinking about going to court costs lots of $$$.

Not that I condone the RIAA. In fact with the vast majority of its critics I think it's a very short-sighted move. I also believe that file-swopping as it exists now is truly illegal, and that musicians have a right to a decent living. However, copyright law is simply too convoluted and counter-intuitive to grasp for most ordinary people. Hence all these myths about downloading MP3s like : "It's OK if you get rid them within 24 hours (who does anyway?)."

In my opinion, the record companies are to blame for all this. The current business model employed -- charging incredible amounts for CDs and producing lots of trashy expensive music videos to go with the overpriced CDs -- is probably responsible for the current glut of substandard acts. Popular music these days is awful. Teenage pretty boys and scantily-clad pre-teens who release a few forgettable albums and then fade into obscurity.

The artistes are criticising the wrong people. They should be rising up against the record companies for screwing them in unfair contracts instead of accusing the fans of depriving them of a decent living.

The Internet is making the existing business models that record labels and their executives got fat on, obsolete. The industry has been chosen to be blinkered. It took Apple -- a computer company and a great one at that! -- to show that selling music on the net was workable where so many others failed.

Perhaps these lawsuits are mostly useful as the stick to the carrot of online music services that are actually workable. I hope for a massive backlash against the industry. Will we see an industry where artistes have freedom to distribute their work online and to earn a fair amount from their songs instead of having a disproportionate amount siphoned off to music videos, paying industry executives and other costs? Will people be able to pick and buy the songs they want instead of buying CDs at more than 15 times their cost of production? Will the market be allowed to weed out good talent from one-hit wonders?

I'm not too optimistic, but let's see. The RIAA has lots of enemies, but also friends in high places.

For those interested in this subject, I heartily recommend Jessica Litman's Digital Copyright, for starters.