Napster has put peer-to-peer sharing into the public spotlight. Like it or not--and I don't--the Napster brouhaha has equated copyright violations with an innovative, collaborative, sharing technology. There is nothing inherently illegal about file-sharing. What is illegal is reproducing materials that don't belong to you. Sharing is a normal adult activity. We share food with friends and family. We share ideas, work, and files with colleagues. We share information of all kinds with just about everybody. We ask a neighbor to recommend a plumber. We give directions to a lost traveler. We share our talents by singing, playing an instrument, dancing, acting, composing, or creating art. We share our knowledge by helping fix a car, coaching a sports team, or writing articles. We share our financial resources by giving money to charity. We work hard to convince children to share their toys. Libraries would not exist without resource-sharing. Companies are coming to realize the importance of sharing the expertise that resides in the heads of their employees. The entire knowledge management discipline stems from the notion that, if both tacit and explicit knowledge are shared, profits will increase and employees will be more productive. Hoarding information is becoming recognized as counterproductive, although this is not a universal belief. PEER OF THE REALM The international legal system puts barriers in our path to sharing. Intellectual property laws often lag technology. Napster may, in fact, be adding to a redefinition of copyright and a rethinking of intellectual property philosophy. Privacylaws, well meaning as they are, sometimes hinder team building within multinational companies. Balancing the rights of creators, producers, intermediaries, and end-users is not an easy task. Rationales for peer-to-peer file transfers differ considerably.
展开▼
