And that has nothing to do with this blog post - I am just still in awe. I mean two fat pugs in a baby stroller being pushed by their owner - what did they need some fresh air? and why can't they walk? Seriously. What a silly thing.

Anyway, I can't say I'm understanding a ton of the concepts in this book since I'm not familiar with all the references/don't have time to read slowly/have been skipping around a lot. The section that interested me most was the one about the ideology behind peer to peer, especially the last section "anarchy of access versus the stability of ownership." Vaidhyanathan talks about the way in which peer-to-peer technology "encourages both 'inconspicuous consumption' and 'conspicuous production.'" It's a big potential function in a society in which conspicuous consumption dominates.

The Constable mentioned in his blog that he would like to hear the view of Lars Ulrich, the leader of METALLICA, regarding Napster and copyright infringement. What follows is Ulrich's statement, read to the U.S. Senate in 2000. I've obnoxiously copy-and-pasted the whole thing into this blog, but if you want to read it from the site, go HERE. Ulrich's statement is honest and heartfelt, but just a tad annoying because 1) Lessig and Vaidy both mentioned that there is no PROOF that downloading ever hurts the artists or even the industry and 2) If anything, downloading hurts the actual musician the LEAST out of everyone else (the distribution company, manager, etc.). They get a tiny fraction of the overall yield of their record sales; they make much more money off personal appearances and concerts. In a sense, the record companies are the ones that rip off a band's intellectual property.