Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather….

…Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here….

…In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media…

…We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.

John Perry Barlow, A declaration of the independence of cyberspace February 8, 1996

Yesterday a barrage of news, shattered Barlow’s vision of cyberspace. Legal concepts of copyright, governments and collosal companies made clear their presence in cyberspace.

First, in peer-to-peer networks. TorrentSpy was found guilty for facilitating the online exchange of films, music and TV programs without permission.

Then in the blogosphere. Apple succeeded in shutting down the ThinkSecret blog, for exposing unreleased information.

And finally in search engines. China found Yahoo! guilty of copyright infringement.

Are we slowly witnessing a fate that was feared and expressed by Lawrence Lessig (for example in: The furure of ideas and in Free Culture), Andrew Shapiro (in The control revolution ) and others?

Peer-to-Peer Networks

TorrentSpy - according to the verdict of a California judge - has violated copyrights owned by the MPAA.

TorrentSpy was also found guilty of destroying evidence (for example deleting logs of user IP adresses). A very noble act - if i may add - protecting the privacy of its users. After this behavior, it seems TorrentSpy will have difficulties participating in the file sharing community.

As Matt Jensen noted, “…this case sets a precedent for future cases, potentially making user information more transparent”.

Prominent figures (Chris Anderson, author of the Long Trail) have argued that p2p networks and file sharing are an ideal way of low-cost marketing and that the reason of the decrease in blockbuster sales is not just unauthorized file sharing. But Hollywood prefers to be short-sighted and to disregard the fact that the public is now more demanding.

The Blogosphere

A debate of similar context but in a different community rose, when Apple succeeded in shutting down the ThinkSecret blog. It seems to me that this subject has received much more attention (not that it shouldn’t). Legal discussions have taken place in Wired, ethical ones in gizmodo and the role of context in similar cases has also been accounted. Even possible settlement scenarios and polls are publicized.

I understand that this was a David against Goliath fight, and logically it received more attention. But the wider context still remains; putting the web under control.

Search engines

And the final strike: Yahoo was found guilty of mass copyright infringement by a Chinese court, while Baidu (who were also sued) got away with it. Nat Torkington suspects Baidu got off the hook because “…it is viewed as a local (chinese) product” and China supports its local companies. I agree, that this is a potential scenario.

Conclusion

I believe it all comes down to this: The cyberspace is increasingly gaining in popularity and everybody wants a piece of the pie; and control is the way to get that piece.

Update: Meanwhile, the Japanese file-sharing population explodes