I know everyone here purchases all of their music legally from iTunes or buys CDs, but someone out there must be concerned at what the music labels are able to push the US lawmakers into. CNET News article A recent example is the "Piracy Act" championed by ultra-conservative Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). This law gives the Justice Department authority to sue alleged p2p file traders for copyright infringement. Since when does the US government act as the personal bully of a private business ( Marsh V. Alabama )? I thought the Supreme Court already decided this was unconstitutional. Is "fair use" dead? Why don't music labels use the p2p networks to their advantage? The Berkman Center for internet and society at Harvard has discussed an "alternative compensation system" where artists will get paid for all files traded over p2p networks. This is accomplished by requiring, for example, all broadband internet users to pay an extra $5 per month. This money is placed into a pot then distributed to artists depending on how often their file is traded. I know this is such an old issue among hackers, but sending people to prison for sharing music and making back-ups of very expensive DVD collections? I am interested to know if I am the only one who is seriously worried about this? Any possible solutions? Who is going to win? Music labels or fair use?