It was interesting to see how completely both parties talked past each other here, and how their biases almost completely blinded them to the other's arguments.

Clarke clearly does not care about illegal use of his system due to an obvious religious zeal for free and anonymous speech (which, as an American it's hard to disagree with).

Oppenheim, on the other hand, completelely (and obviously willfully) ignores the idea that the debate is about anything other than the protection of IP rights; Corporate control of government and free speech aren't even issues worth discussing to the RIAA (gee, wonder why?).

Still, though I'd hardly call this a debate, it's nice that someone beside the directly involved parties still cares enough about these issues to present both sides.