Ernest Miller is on a roll over at LawMeme. His latest post asks why people treat HTTP (i.e., the web) and peer-to-peer systems so differently:

P2P and http uploading and downloading of copyrighted MP3s are, essentially, functionally equivalent from a copyright point of view. From a technical point of view, however, there are significant differences. If anything, http has some serious advantages over P2P filesharing in many cases. Although P2P would still be useful in a world where http filesharing were allowed, http could easily and more effectively handle the vast majority of filesharing.

…

I venture that there seems to be a different set of copynorms for the practice of filesharing via P2P and http. Certainly some defend filesharing via both P2P and http, but others strongly defend P2P with nary a word in favor of http filesharing.

This is just a sample. Read the whole thing!

Eugene Volokh and Lawrence Solum are having an interesting debate on the theory behind intellectual property. So far there have been four postings:

Volokh’s initial posting, explaining via a clever example why it might make sense to treat information as property

Solum’s response, challenging Volokh’s example

Volokh’s response to Solum

Solum’s response, digging deeper into the issue

Presumably we will see more on Volokh’s blog and Solum’s blog.

Louis Trager at the Washington Internet Daily (no link; subscription only) reported yesterday that the RIAA is planning on filing hundreds of additional lawsuits against peer-to-peer users within the next month.

RIAA VP Matt Oppenheim also expressed outrage at the criticism of the group’s amnesty program. Trager quotes Oppenheim as saying, “We can only give away what we can give away….” Oppenheim also claims that the public supports the RIAA’s lawsuits, citing poll numbers and talk radio callins.

The RIAA launched its long-awaited lawsuit storm today. John Borland at CNet news.com reports that 261 copyright infringement suits were filed against individual defendants.

Several of the suits have already settled, reportedly for around $3,000 each.

The RIAA is reportedly planning to offer amnesty to file sharers. According to the reports, just after the RIAA launches its upcoming flurry of lawsuits against file sharers, it will offer a deal to everybody else: send a letter to RIAA admitting that you have infringed in the past, and in exchange RIAA will promise not to sue you for your past infringement. If you continue to infringe, though, the RIAA gets the right to sue you for wilfull infringement.

Mary Hodder at bIPlog points out that this may not be as good a deal as it might seem. The RIAA and its members don’t own all of the copyrights that cover recorded music. If you infringe, the RIAA and its members are not the only people who can sue you. An amnesty from them is worth something, but it doesn’t shield you fully from lawsuits. Given that, a written admission of infringement might not be a wise move.