"Atualmente nós estamos no meio de outra "guerra" contra a "pirataria". A Internet provocou essa guerra. O compartilhamento de arquivos através de sistemas peer-to-peer (P2P)7 está entre as formas mais eficientes de tecnologia permitidas pela Internet. Usando inteligência distribuída, sistemas de P2P facilitam a distribuição de conteúdo de uma maneira que à uma geração atrás era simplesmente inimaginável.
Essa eficiência não respeita as linhas tradicionais do copyright . A rede não faz discriminação entre o compartilhamento de conteúdo com ou sem direitos autorais. Desse modo existe uma grande quantidade de compartilhamento de conteúdo com direitos autorais. Esse compartilhamento, por sua vez, excitou a guerra, com os donos de direitos autorais temendo que o compartilhamento viesse "tomar do autor o seu sustento"."

Peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing is among the most efficient of the efficient technologies the Internet enables. Using distributed intelligence, p2p systems facilitate the easy spread of content in a way unimagined a generation ago.

When someone asks me where MP3 Newswire stands with regards to file trading (or piracy as some try to call it) I tell them that we support the growth of this notion of an online music industry. One that uses technology to bring us more music, broadening our pallettes while leveraging the Net to reduce distribution costs. The music can be paid for like CDs and tape or it can be free to its audience and supported by advertising like radio and MTV are. Whatever the model, the point is online music easily can and does supplement what we already purchase in the stores.

Since I’ve basically been giving my music away for free under the old system, I’m not afraid of wireless, MP3 files or any of the other threats to my copyrights. Anything that makes my music more available to more people is great. MP3 files sound cruddy, but a well-made album sounds great. And I don’t care what anyone says about digital recordings. At this point they are good for dance music, but try listening to a warm guitar tone on them. They suck for what I do. … I’m looking for people to help connect me to more fans, because I believe fans will leave a tip based on the enjoyment and service I provide. I’m not scared of them getting a preview. It really is going to be a global village where a billion people have access to one artist and a billion people can leave a tip if they want to. It’s a radical democratization. Every artist has access to every fan and every fan has access to every artist, and the people who direct fans to those artists. People that give advice and technical value are the people we need. People crowding the distribution pipe and trying to ignore fans and artists have no value. This is a perfect system.

"Todas essas histórias possuem temas comuns. Se "pirataria" significa usar o valor da propriedade intelectual de alguém sem sua permissão como tal conceito é descrito cada vez mais atualmente [69] então TODAS as indústrias afetadas pelo copyright atualmente são produtos e se beneficiaram de alguma forma de pirataria. Filme, música, rádio, TV a cabo... A lista é grande e poderia ainda assim ser expandida. Todas as gerações davam boas-vindas aos piratas do passado até agora."

P2P nets kick all kinds of ass. Most of the books, music and movies ever released are not available for sale, anywhere in the world. In the brief time that P2P nets have flourished, the ad-hoc masses of the Internet have managed to put just about everything online. What’s more, they’ve done it far cheaper than any other archiving/revival effort ever. Yeah, there are legal problems. Yeah, it’s hard to figure out how people are gonna make money doing it. Yeah, there is a lot of social upheaval and a serious threat to innovation, freedom, business, and whatnot. It’s your basic end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario, and as a science fiction writer, end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenaria are my stock-in-trade.

By the RIAA's terms, we commit piracy every time we share files on the Internet. In reality, the RIAA pirated almost all the 400 million CDs sold in America last year, since the people who made the music didn't get paid for them.

In Kyuss and Queens, we allow people to tape our shows, whether it's audio, video or both. You're doing that tonight, but you're no different than someone who buys the ticket. Because the exchanging of music is what should happen. It's one of the only things I like about The Grateful Dead, it's "do you want a tape from '67 on June 2nd? You can get one". I probably wouldn't like the music on the tape, but it's still possible. My problem is that people sell our live shows for too much money. They should be the cost of the video and shipping. And in turn, MP3 take a record that I've spent money and time and put so much love into, take it, and just give it away. But they make the money. MP3 and Napster, they make tons of money, but they say "Oh, it's about free exchange!", but that just sounds like just another jack-off thief in the dark, that doesn't have guts enough to admit what they're doing. I had someone say something interesting to me in Canada, "Well, would you rather have the label fuck you over, or the fans fuck you over?". And I just said, "Neither!". And when it gets posed to me in such a way I sit there and think, "You know, what am I doing? Maybe I should skip through the countryside, playing flute (?)". Because MP3 certainly is like [stabbing sound and motion]. If you're an unsigned band, then it really helps, but then, you know? I don't wanna censor anyone, and I'm no one's daddy, I'm not going to monitor the internet, but I think there's a moral side to it too; I don't steal from you, you don't steal from me. Seems fair, you know?

If “piracy” means using value from someone else’s creative property without permission from that creator–as it is increasingly described today – then every industry affected by copyright today is the product and beneficiary of a certain kind of piracy. Film, records, radio, cable TV… Extremists in this debate love to say “You wouldn’t go into Barnes & Noble and take a book off of the shelf without paying; why should it be any different with online music?” The difference is, of course, that when you take a book from Barnes & Noble, it has one less book to sell. By contrast, when you take an MP3 from a computer network, there is not one less CD that can be sold. The physics of piracy of the intangible are different from the physics of piracy of the tangible.

I see nothing unethical in the job it does. Why shouldn't you send a copy of some music to a friend?

I figure that since proprietary software developers use copyright to stop us from sharing, we cooperators can use copyright to give other cooperators an advantage of their own: they can use our code.

Most tit for tat sharing has bad assumptions about how ideas spread I think. It’s an outdated top down view of the world.

When I find something cool I share it hundreds of times. I think it’s more valuable to find these people even if they don’t have an audience

We live in a world with "free" content, and this freedom is not an imperfection. We listen to the radio without paying for the songs we hear; we hear friends humming tunes that they have not licensed. We tell jokes that reference movie plots without the permission of the directors. We read our children books, borrowed from a library, without paying the original copyright holder for the performance rights.

There will be a severe backlash against this drift from the usual suspects, but increased sharing is inevitable. There is an honest argument over what to call it, but the technologies of sharing have only begun. On my imgainary Sharing Meter Index we are still at 2 out of 10. There is a whole list of subjects that experts once believed we modern humans would not share — our finances, our health challenges, our sex lives, our innermost fears — but it turns out that with the right technology and the right benefits in the right conditions, we’ll share everything.