A fascinating example of artists vs publishers conflict: Fahrenheit 9/11

[walktalker]

'Fahrenheit 9/11' sparks file-sharing flare-up
The political firestorm surrounding filmmaker Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" has found its way into the file-sharing world. The controversial film -- like virtually every new release -- has been circulating online for days. Early in the week, anti-Moore Web site MooreWatch.com posted a link to a pirated version of the film available elsewhere on a file-sharing network, noting that the director himself has publicly backed downloading the movie online. The result has been a torrent of criticism from Moore supporters and his distribution company, Lions Gate Entertainment. [...] The online flap may say more about the often-conflicting desires of creators and their business agents than it does about the political debate over Moore's film. While studios and record labels have uniformly excoriated unauthorized sharing of movies and music online, many artist -- particularly those eager for the propagation of their political messages -- have sent more mixed messages.
http://news.com.com/%27Fahrenheit+9%...l?tag=nefd.top

"I don't agree with copyright laws, and I don't have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it...as long as they're not trying to make a profit off my labor," Moore said in that interview, comparing file sharing to a person sharing a purchased DVD with a friend. "I make these movies and books and TV shows because I want things to change, and so the more people who get to see them, the better."

This somehow reminds me of a very interesting story about sharing gospel songs over P2P networks: the artists and the publishers were arguing about whetever it was an act of faith ("If someone steal my bible, then I'm happy, because he/she needed it more than I did") and encouragement for spreading the Words, or it was a shameful sin of thievery...