Further down the page in the comments, Cory has posted a rather elegant rebuttal to a previous comment.
Here's another success-factor for systems that gets drowned out in the noise about which artists get paid how much: Whether the pre-Internet system was doing a very good job of enabling a diverse group of creative people to create a diverse pool of art that was pleasing and available to a diverse audience (this, presumably, is the goal of copyright policy -- it's not government's job to pick winners in the marketplace, but ensuring a plurality of participation in the market is assuredly good policy). In this regard, the Internet is so fantastically ahead of all the commercial distribution systems and business-models and ethics that preceded it that its lead can only be measured in astronomical units.
The second item is something we've been debating in the UK. In Scotland the DNA is destroyed if there is no charge or conviction made. In England it is retained indefinitely even with no charge or conviction. This has since been declared illegal by the EU and may well be changed to allow a UK policy of destroying all DNA evidence if no charge is made.
Oh really? I got the standard boilerplate letter back from both my MP and Harriet Harman's office. Basically saying "Thanks for your letter but we're going to ignore it anyway". Good to know at least one of our elected officials is taking this seriously.....
"Tom, we're now entering the second day of the rock band MOOP's refusal to play, and the second day of absolutely no other news to report on. In a recent poll we asked people if MOOP's refusal to play would stop them from downloading music off the Internet. 1% said yes. 2% said no. And 97% said, "Who the hell is MOOP?" Back to you, Tom."