- May 6, 2004
- 6,285
- 1
- 0
ok, i will be honest : this is to aid me in writing my english paper... but believe me, it does tickle my fancy purely as a subject matter for a debate, apart from my urge to finish the assignment.
IIRC, both republicans and democrats are looking for ways to reduce our freedom in the virtual realm by banning or limiting the means of p2p file sharing. I chose this topic seeing how this would probably affect my life (or many other ATOTers' for that matter) more greatly than most other issues. my general (yet unpolished, grammar nazis need not apply) thesis is something like : "while it is true file sharing opens the door to many potential problems, it is a necessary evil if anything. " the tough part is this is going to be an argumentative paper, so the supporting ideas should come with solid proofs like statisctics and quotes from credible sources.
the arguments i thought of so far are :
-it is not as clear-cut to define what constitutes copyright infringement online
-file sharing does not hurt the sales of records, dvds, etc
-it is nearly impossible to stop all p2p activities (examples : kazaa lawsuit case, maybe some underground p2p methods like bittorent or winny)
-there are ways to minimize undesired harmful effects of p2p
-a 'war on p2p' would be just as disastrous as 'war on drug', only worse (i.e. waste of resources without meaningful results) besides, incessant efforts to halt p2p activities did not result in a decrease of p2p
-possible side effects of banning all p2p
again, i am not asking you to do my homework, just asking for some suggestions on where to get a head start on
lighthearted jokes are fine by me, but lets try to keep this thread relatively flame-free..
IIRC, both republicans and democrats are looking for ways to reduce our freedom in the virtual realm by banning or limiting the means of p2p file sharing. I chose this topic seeing how this would probably affect my life (or many other ATOTers' for that matter) more greatly than most other issues. my general (yet unpolished, grammar nazis need not apply) thesis is something like : "while it is true file sharing opens the door to many potential problems, it is a necessary evil if anything. " the tough part is this is going to be an argumentative paper, so the supporting ideas should come with solid proofs like statisctics and quotes from credible sources.
the arguments i thought of so far are :
-it is not as clear-cut to define what constitutes copyright infringement online
-file sharing does not hurt the sales of records, dvds, etc
-it is nearly impossible to stop all p2p activities (examples : kazaa lawsuit case, maybe some underground p2p methods like bittorent or winny)
-there are ways to minimize undesired harmful effects of p2p
-a 'war on p2p' would be just as disastrous as 'war on drug', only worse (i.e. waste of resources without meaningful results) besides, incessant efforts to halt p2p activities did not result in a decrease of p2p
-possible side effects of banning all p2p
again, i am not asking you to do my homework, just asking for some suggestions on where to get a head start on
lighthearted jokes are fine by me, but lets try to keep this thread relatively flame-free..