art and the price of creation

as i remember from my high school science class, for something to be alive it needs to be able to reproduce. put differently, either you reproduce or you are not alive.

the wide spread of new technologies has brought about many changes in art. not only in techniques and content but also in its distribution. we live in times where it is easier that ever in history to create and share your creations. blogs and virtual communities are examples.

corporations rather than admitting their failure to adapt to the new environment, fight to make their property rights respected and sue individual consumers for sharing contents. every time more people realize that the power of oligopolist distribution companies is diluting. internet providers in europe are starting to collude with multimedia corporations to share the identity of the consumers that share files over the net.

but the price of creation and distribution is going down and everyone is doing something, which, in my view, can only be good.

after all if we are alive, shouldn't we reproduce? Because, what is creation if not reproduction?
and do we really need property rights to be respected? is that really efficient? isn't that old economics? what they want us to think? i am sure a couple economists would agree with tearing down this culture distorting monopolies.