Last Wednesday, President Bush signed The Family Entertainment and Copyright Act making file-sharing a pre-release movie, music or software on the Internet a felony, punishable by up to three years in prison.

The bill – S.167 (also H.R. 357) – was introduced by Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, in January and passed the Senate with unanimous consent in February. (Boy, where are those filibustering Democrats when you need them?)

The bill wasn’t primarily intended to stop movie piracy, however. It also included initiatives to implement technologies into future DVDs to omit offensive content through parental controls. That’s right, you and I can finally watch Fahrenheit 9/11 without the liberal bias or Michael Moore’s whiny voice.

What’s interesting about S.167 is that it’s not the actual file-sharing that can put a person behind bars, it’s just the act of making something available. Transferring is not the crime, availability is. Putting “intellectual” property, such as Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, online before theatrical release could put you in a jail cell darker than the spice mines of Kessel.

Things aren’t looking too bright for file-sharers these days. In addition to backing legislation in Congress to institute tougher penalties on file-sharers, the entertainment industry has kept up their efforts. Since September 2003, the Recording Industry Association of America has sued more than 10,000 file-sharers (along with a few children and grandmas).

An endless stream of lawsuits only proves one thing: the threat of a lawsuit isn’t enough to deter people from engaging in piracy. The RIAA’s war on piracy is arguably more futile than the Bush administration’s war on terrorism.

While I agree that corporations and individuals do have a right to protect their intellectual property, I disagree that the problem of file-sharing can best be remedied through legislation. Criminalizing copyright violators does not solve the problem; instead, it just creates a larger percentage of the population as criminals.

Three years for putting a movie online? While the law is the law, and should be obeyed and respected, the punishment seems a bit excessive when put into context with other offenses. Let’s play the game of “which one of these things is not like the other”: child molestation, assault, robbery, criminal possession of a weapon, illegal manufacture of drugs, vehicular homicide and Internet piracy. If the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act is any indication, computer geeks are the new destabilizing element of our society.

Apparently, owning a computer is now as dangerous to society as NAMBLA members, drunk drivers, meth lab owners and gang-bangers. I guess the law enforcement community wasn’t busy enough already. Better organize neighborhood watch and look out for the bandwidth whores!

Perhaps the rational argument is that these deviant users are costing the entertainment industry money. I don’t doubt it, but it’s hard to sympathize with corporate entities and much easier to relate to those who you used to hang out in the dorms and swap movies with while eating a $5 pizza.

If the government and the entertainment industry are right, then I’ve been associating with the most dangerous felons in the United States. I think that’s a bit of an exaggeration. No ‘net pirate ever killed the radio star.

As the entertainment industry continues to clamp down, I’m reminded of Star Wars: “The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.” Putting more pressure on peer-to-peer networks only moves independent innovation forward and further out of the grasp of their control. The next realm of peer-to-peer will more than likely incorporate encryption technologies that will obscure the users dedicated to making everything available to everyone for free.

There’s nothing the Internet and its users won’t innovate around. When the law no longer protects them, they’ll find ways to protect themselves.