THE new book "Darknet: Hollywood's War Against the Digital Generation," by J. D. Lasica, covers ground that's been pounded before: the often-draconian or clueless ways big entertainment companies try to control content or subvert emerging technologies, and how people work around those efforts by sharing content online often in walled-off, anonymous places like private Internet Relay Chat rooms and the Free Network Project (freenet.sourceforge.net).
Mr. Lasica, a journalist, brings a storyteller's flair to the subject, but what really makes Darknet unique is that it was born online and lives there still at www.darknet.com. The book, just one part of the overall project, was written in collaboration with its audience via a wiki - a Web application that allows any user to add or edit content. At the site, Mr. Lasica and his readers continue to share news and expand on the ideas presented in the book. His site also offers many excerpts.
"Darknet" was a term coined by a team of Microsoft researchers in 2002. According to Mr. Lasica's account, they advised that "media companies ought to use copy protection judiciously."
"Because users don't like digital locks, somebody will figure out how to pick them, and content will spill into the Darknet despite the best efforts to wall it off. The best way companies can fight darknet piracy, they said, is by offering affordable, convenient, compelling products and services. In other words, the most effective copy protection system is a great business model."
Big media have largely ignored that advice - to their peril, Mr. Lasica says. The industry's war on its own customers will just alienate them further, and darknets will thrive.
PLAYING GAMES When it was discovered recently that the video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas included a hidden sex scene, many questioned the resulting moral outrage. Why, some people asked, is anyone appalled by this, given the way the game has for years made a rank sport out of ugly brutality and breathtaking violence?
Now Bethany McLean, a reporter for Fortune magazine, in an article (fortune.com) is asking a new question.
"What's most shocking about the controversial - and top-selling - Grand Theft Auto isn't embedded sex scenes," Ms. McLean writes. "It's the financial chicanery of the game's maker. Why don't investors care?"
She recounts the "history of financial improprieties, hefty stock sales in the midst of scandal, and revolving-door management," at Take Two Software, the game's maker, and wonders why the stock hasn't appropriately tanked.
LESS IS MORE More data is better, especially when it comes to investing. Right? Wrong, says Jim Waddell, keeper of the Watchful Investor.
The aim of watchfulinvestor.blogspot.com is to present "the underreported, the underappreciated, and the overlooked news from the markets." But there isn't enough of that, Mr. Waddell decided this week. So he's broadening the site's scope. "Most days, there isn't that much news you really need to know as an investor. Sure, a slew of statistics are reported, almost daily. Most are just noise."
The new material - political rants, personal finance tips - hews to the site's mission, though, to cast a contrarian eye on news events . The site's smart investment commentary continues, including Mr. Waddell's thoughts on Google's secondary offering this week.
FILLED TO THE RIM Ever wondered how much of your favorite caffeinated drink it would take to actually kill you? O.K., you haven't. But if you're curious, you can find out by using the Death by Caffeine Calculator at energyfiend.com, an odd little blog dedicated solely to buzz-inducing beverages. Just pick your poison from a drop-down menu then enter your weight and hit the "kill me" button. Someone weighing 175 pounds would die upon consuming 1,592.50 bottles of Diet Sun Tea Snapple, according to the blog. A mere 99.53 cans of Starbucks Double Shot would kill the same person.
