The real problem is that, say, Joe Schmoe decides muic ought to be liberated. He goes to his CD collection. He rips an MP3 off it. He sets up a website. He posts the MP3 to the website with no download restriction or SCMS (serial copy management system). Fred Schmoe (no relation) copies it off the website. Both Joe and Fred have infringed copyright - but no record company or whatever is going to bother to sue them, even if they can trace them, because the Schmoes have no money and the costs of the lawsuit would exceed the recovery many times over.

But the ISP's are lobbying very hard that they should not be liable for money damages - because they say they can't control waht people post. Result - a million digital copies of recordings, no royalties for musicians (or record companies).

There are two possible answers. One is a sort of Macrovision type security feaature, so it can't be done. Technically that is years away 'cos no two MP3 comapnies can agree on the standards yet. The other is for someone amenable to jurisdiction and financially able to pay damages to be and remain liable for the infringments.

Actually, there might be a third, and this scares me because it could be the key to government control of the internet. Suppose all ISPs agreed not to accept ANY posting unless it carried a digital signature, something like verisign, indicating the current certificate of insurance of the poster against legal liability and costs. Sort of a bit like having to have car insurance.

But again, the real question is why are more musicians not interested in this? It's their money which is being stolen.