Wired's Threat Level has a good article on its interview with two lawyers from the MPAA. The blog was one of many that covered the MPAA's "making available" position in the Thomas P2P case. Said one lawyer, "It is a distribution by putting works in a shared folder. You can deem that copies are being made. That goes for the indirect proof. Having it in a shared folder is indirect proof of actual copying of another user."

The Progress and Freedom Foundation (see list of sponsors on its Wikipedia page) comes in on the side of the RIAA. You can read a post here.

Extra reading:

• Patry Copyright Blog on an amicus brief filed by the Progress and Freedom Foundation. "That’s one reason the RIAA should lose: it has no proof there was ever a distribution of a physical object, a copy. Forget policy arguments; that’s what the statute says. Everything else (including many of the amicus briefs) are irrelevant."
• "More on the Metaphysics of Making-Available" at the Silicon Valley Media Law blog.

[music jobs] Boosey & Hawkes is looking for a Royalty Tracker.