If Microsoft tried to pull this off, could you imagine the outcry?

Google just tried to gain the rights to nearly every book ever written, for pennies on the dollar, and they almost got away with it.

Are all geeks so blinded by reflexive anti-copyright attitudes that we can't be alarmed at the prospect of one company gaining so much power at the expensive of authors

Isn't this already covered by existing laws against fraud? Do we need a separate law for each possible variation of fraud? Are they sure they don't need a law that prohibits impersonation over telegram cables or by using smoke signals?

Regards,
Abe Vigoda

Uploaders are not motivated by money, nor altruism.

They are motivated by the social status boost conferred to those who are prolific leakers.

Copying other people's stuff and giving it away isn't "sharing."

If you want to share, create your own work and give it away for free.

In the past (and present) this is precisely what Richard Stallman did with GNU. He wanted software to be free. Instead of bootlegging copies of Windows (or MS-DOS) he created his OWN stuff and gave it away for free. Now Linux is a force to be reckoned with. If he had simply pirated other peoples' work, this innovation would have never happened.

The word "sharing" is used incorrectly here.

Sharing is when you give away something that belongs to *you*. Making and distributing copies of other people's work doesn't quite fit this description.

Apple is not responsible for the DRM used in iTunes. They are required to include this by the majors labels. Most independent music featured on iTunes does not contain DRM.