“It’s a nice list, but totally out there. Almost every one of the items you list would violate privacy rights.”

The only one that violates privacy rights is “-Forcing ISP’s to police their networks looking for piracy, with little or no compensation from the Labels for this service”. The searching digital devices at airports was implemented on the grounds that it would help prevent terrorism, not to search for infringing content. When that rule-laws creation had input from the media industry everyone knew what it was actually for.

“I think there is a very strong potential that laws will be passed for “grand theft of IP” or something similar, where an individual in possession of a significant amount of pirated material would be subject not only to civil penalties (lawsuits) but criminal actions (essentially making “infringing” into theft, as it should be).”

Here are the problems and questions with any “grand theft IP” law. What do you consider illegal content? Is it a format shifted content that someone legally purchased, after all we do have the ability to make copies of CD’s, DVD’s, and Blu Ray’s. Is it a video the someone DVR’d off the TV and then moved to a moble device? Is it a computer full of DVR’d TV shows? What about digitally recording the radio and putting that to your iPod, computer, or mobile device? Each and every digital copy in each of these cases would have its own unique CRC checksum as even a one bit difference changes the checksum.

Where does the burden of proof lie? with the content owner who would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the content is pirated. Or does the person being accused need to prove a negative? Accusation: this content is Illegal, Prove to me its not or I will arrest you. In this case proving a negative is Impossible the person will always be arrested.

“You cannot criminalize P2P software” On that I do agree with you, there are legitimate uses.

“I could see moves made to again criminalize operating a tracker for illegal materials, or operating a “pirate” site. Essentially, I could see ignoring DMCAs (ala pirate bay) turned into a criminal offense, not just a civil concept.”

I can already tell you that it just doesn?t matter that it?s made illegal. As Mike Masnick has pointed out it?s a game of whak-a-mole. Pirate bay has pretty much shut down it operations because of Bit torrents DHT protocol which is a decentralized tracking system.

“I think in many ways this war is already being won. In Sweden, the IPRED laws and similar have made a major shift in how people are getting their music and such, and I could see other countries following down the same lines.”

The shift in music being consumed differently was due mainly to more spending on advertising rather than a shift from pirated music to purchased. “The law certainly seems to be having one effect, albeit not one that helps its aims: demand for anonym zing proxy services, which mask the IP address of users, is reportedly heavily increased this week with some providers struggling to cope.”

More reference material for you read the “undetectable” section

“I think that the grand time of internet anonymity is quickly coming to a close. I wouldn’t be shocked to see ISPs required to keep much more accurate records of who is on which IP at what time, and perhaps a fast track for indentifying users from the IP address. IPv6 is likely to be a big government push in the next little while, and ISPs would likely be the first ones forced into action.”

This is why people are developing software for anonymity that uses IP forwarding, encryption, proxy servers, and VPN, this “meta” internet will make tracking people almost impossible.

“You want net neutrality? Fine – but that would include not being able to hide.”

See the above response ….. because it make the net neutrality rules all but obsolete. If your service provider can?t tell what you are transferring data wise because it?s all encrypted then throttling of a specific protocol is impossible.

“Hephaestus’s Ugly Rug” – You should read this techdirt article.