Mr. Bannon told the court that Kazaa had a zero tolerance policy towards child pornography and promised to stomp out trading of child porn on Kazaa. He then made the argument that if Kazaa can control the sharing of child porn then they can also control the sharing of pirated mp3 files on the network. "Either that is true or that is false. Either they are saying to the community, the world community, that we do have a no tolerance policy on child pornography and we have set up a system which permits an extraordinary proliferation of material around the world but children of this world should rest easy that we have the ability to terminate Kazaa users, our users of our system which we set up, if they breach that no tolerance policy. Either that is true or that is false," he said.
In my own opinion, you cannot compare child porn to pirated mp3 files, and that’s probably the opinion of most of the worlds P2P users. It also would seem that any action taken on child pornography on Kazaa was in co-operation with authorities as several home raids and arrests did take place. Other than that the only other action against it was the adding of filters as default to each downloaded Kazaa client. I would not find this as successfully controlling the sharing of child pornography. I think the recording industry just had nothing else to say so decided to bring up child porn in court in the hopes of turning people against Kazaa, a pretty dirty tactic but the Recording Industry has proven in the past that they are full of dirty tricks. If you believe that Kazaa is evil because a small number of people share this type of content, then I'm sorry to have to tell you about the thousands of child porn websites on the Internet, this horrible material doesn’t just exist on P2P networks.
So the Recording Industry thinks it would be just as easy to control 100,000,000 file-sharers who have some pirated MP3 as it would be a small number of people sharing child porn. I don't think so.
Sources:
The Guardian
seven.com.au