I'm not sure where this thread is supposed to be
going. 
#define soapbox
For many years, "content" was owned and controlled ... not by the creators themselves, who were in a position considerably worse than that of an employee, but ... by well-heeled conglomerates. These moguls controlled the
only avenues that existed for allowing "your song" to make money, and they controlled them with fists of iron.
The Internet changed all that, forever. But there are
some moguls who see that as tremendous opportunity, while others see it only as a threat.
("The bad news is: it's the end of the world as you know it. The good news is: it's the end of the world as you know it.")
The "clueless moguls" want to find a way to kill the golden goose ... to put a quarter-drop slot on your computer so you have to insert a coin to hear a tune just like your grandpa did. They won't
succeed, but they of course do know how to
bribe. 
The "smart moguls," on the other hand, will leverage this new, essentially cost-free method of worldwide(!) data distribution as a vehicle for providing undreamt-of services that people
will buy and will be glad to
buy. They're already doing that.
So, where does that put all of us
now? Really, the situation is unchanged. The United States still represents only a mere 5% give-or-take of the world's population. Its actual influence in world affairs, while important, is not and never will be absolute. This new form of communication will never go away, any more than the "newfangled" telephone will be replaced by telegraph or by Pony Express. Data will continue to be encrypted (and to require encryption), and encryption will continue to be attacked and broken. People will continue to
buy music, in much greater numbers than anyone actually
(why bother?) tried to
steal it. The "clueless moguls" will fade away, to be replaced by the "smart" ones.
#undef soapbox
