I don't believe that that's intentional. If if was that might be better because we might have a chance at stopping it. Its an emergent behavior. The tighter control, even enacted for "good" reasons now, attracts the type that use it for evil later. It sucks because you can't fight the evil up front. You sometimes have to fight the good intentions now to prevent the evil later. That's an impossible political sell.
>> The tighter control, even enacted for "good" reasons now, attracts the type that use it for evil later.
Are you so sure that those good reasons aren't conceived by ill intented guys knowing what you have just described: It sucks because you can't fight the evil up front.
More commonly refered to as wolf in sheep's clothing.
In essence you've called out the fact that its the slippery slope.
In this case though its intentional. These structures affect the power structures, so the power structure will react to it in order to either minimize/control/remove its effect.
Sadly you have to play ball in a manner that shows that the power on the other end (the anti RIAA portion of the spectrum) has the ability to create/co-ordinate voters.
The RIAA supports its cause by spending tonnes of money to 'educate' legislators.
If you can influence their voting base though, that education is pointless, since voting power is far more important.
