But I think this points to a serious issue, because many people are trivializing Hollings and people who think as he does. It's a way of "explaining" someone who disagrees in a very simplistic way so that one doesn't have to ask: "What is he seeing that convinced him to have the point of view he has?"

People like Hollings see the world something like the following, if we translate the entertainment world into the banking world:

Right now, banking is conducted on open-air banks with the cash lying out on tables. People with no rights to the money are walking in and taking whatever money they want whenever they want it.

The banking industry is saying: Hey! Let's build walls so they can't take the money! Some senators are saying: Yeah, that makes sense, let's pass some laws that will help get the walls built!

The people who are used to walking in and taking the money respond by saying "Obviously those senators are saying that because the banking industry paid them off! Wait, the record shows it was only pocket change that they received... how do we explain that it bought them off... Hmmm... Ah, it's because they are so SUPER sleazy and evil that they can be bought off for a trivial amount of money!!! What horrible people!!"

Such an argument may make the people who want to keep taking the money from the tables feel better about themselves, but that is the one and only effect it will have.

In the minds of those on other side, theft of valuable property is going on, and such silly accusations about their characters are not going to stop them from working hard to solve the problem.

Indeed the effect will be just the opposite.

Personally, I can see both sides of the debate. It's true that the entertainment industry is not using the technology available to give the people the kind of access to entertainment that they want. On the other hand, people who get their entertainment for free by means of digital copying are getting something for nothing. That entertainment took money and effort to create, and the fruits of that work are being enjoyed without giving anything back in return. And if the creators don't get paid, they can't go on creating, at least not on the scale we're all used to.

And right now there is very little evidence that, in a world where people can get whatever prerecorded entertainment they want at no charge, they will choose to pay for it. Yes, there have been polls where most people say they would pay if they could. But the point is, saying that to a pollster is one thing and doing it is another. People who are not convinced by those polls are not simply evil morons. Yes, of course, Eisner is trying to protect Disney (and the shareholders who depend on Disney's continued success), but it is also true that they are trying to make sure that entertainment as we know it will continue to be created.

Because it is, in fact, at risk. We may be facing a world of more and better entertainment that is more accessible than ever. Or we may be facing one in which creators aren't paid so most of them have no choice but to stop creating, and with the result that there will be less entertainment available than there is now. The outcome is nonobvious at this point. There are good reasons for concern on both sides of the debate.

It's in the best interests of all concerned for Hollings and Eisner and people who agree with them to be able to sit down and talk intelligently with those of us who are on the computer industry side. We could tell them:

"Look, we understand what you're saying, you obviously have important concerns. We'll try to help with yours if you try to help with ours.

If we cripple computers the way you propose it will have a lot of negative side effects, such as severely harming our economy by eliminating sales of our computers to people in foreign countries, who will buy uncrippled computers from non-US companies. Why don't you look at the technology, instead, as a way to get entertainment to people that more suits their needs than does the traditional, mass-marketing, star-system approach? People would be willing to pay for that customized approach, and in fact the industry has the opportunity to grow to be more successful than it ever was. Help us figure out how to support you in that, that would be great for everyone!"

Etc., etc. But that discussion can't be had if we're making base and silly accusations about the other side's characters. That will only cause them to dismiss us as we dismiss them.
8:47:23 AM