Back in 1968, ground-breaking media theorist Marshall McLuhan declared that "World War Three will be a guerrilla information war with no division between military and civilian participation." Four decades later, McLuhan's words appear more prophetic than ever. Battles over the control of information—whether involving first-hand reports from the war in Iraq or copies of the latest hit single from Flo Rida—are increasing in frequency and intensity.

illustration by Danny Phillips

In principle, the increasing ease with which digital data can be copied and diffused may suggest that "information wants to be free." Or at least this is what the "free culture" movement has been trumpeting since at least the mid-1980s, albeit with greater fervor in recent years. As technological developments push the cost of replicating and distributing a given chunk of data asymptotically ever closer to zero, a growing cadre of infotopian thinkers has pointed to the seemingly limitless possibilities opened up by this so-called "digital revolution."

But as writer and scholar McKenzie Wark reminds us, it increasingly seems that information is "everywhere in chains." Countless reactionary moves by government and corporations are placing fetters on information that might otherwise be freed. And these responses often reflect attitudes from a different time, before the digital data cat was let out of the proverbial bag.

These were the good old days, when the courts stepped forward and affirmed my right to record the latest episode of Alf (that furry alien from Melmack, remember?) on my trusty VCR.

But even if the efforts of groups like the RIAA and MPAA to eliminate music and movie sharing appear out of step with the contemporary reality of widespread file sharing via P2P networks and torrents, they must not be overlooked. In fact, these moves are all too real for the dozens of students at Virginia Tech who in January of this year received pre-settlement lawsuits from the RIAA alleging copyright infringement. Those who opt to settle with the RIAA face average fines of about $3000.

Perhaps even more significantly, big media are also waging battles via both technology and other regulatory channels. They continue to encourage the development and use of Digital Rights Management (DRM) technologies, for example, that severely limit what you can—and cannot—do with your media. The restrictions built into Apple's iTunes service are one well-known reflection of this approach, and Windows Vista is similarly riddled with such "features."

And on the regulatory front, persistent lobbying is encouraging legislation like §2317, or the Intellectual Property Enforcement bill of 2007, which would allow the Department of Justice to file civil suits against copyright infringers. As critics rightly note, the bill could turn federal authorities into the entertainment industry's enforcers—a frightening prospect, indeed. HR 4137 (the College Access and Affordability Act), on the other hand, may require universities to spend millions on technologies to prevent file-sharing, even though only a small fraction of illegal downloading happens on campus networks. Only time will tell if these bills and provisions survive Congressional muster. But if not, similar legislation always seems to be on the horizon.

Spotty media coverage about these issues, coupled with lackluster opportunities for public involvement in legislative decision-making, suggest that big media and corporations are winning these wars over the control of information. But the news is not all bad. Last year, Apple finally leveraged some of its expanding clout with the music industry to loosen up its iTunes policies, including by selling higher-priced tracks sans DRM. Amazon has more recently rolled out its own DRM-free music service. And then there are lesser-known services like eMusic, which sell unrestricted music from independent labels at a fraction of what the bigger players are charge.

Or, one might elect to opt out of this system entirely. Many artists are embracing Creative Commons (CC) licenses, which improves their ability to share their work, albeit with some reasonable restrictions. A creator, for example, might indicate whether or not their work can be used for commercial purposes, or whether derivative works can be made from the original. An expanding array of web sites is making it ever easier to share and search CC-licensed content, ranging from music and video to photos and text. CC creates a middle-way between retaining complete control over copyright and fully giving one's work over to the public domain.

Groups like the Digital Freedom Campaign, on the other hand, are working to raise public awareness about these issues, including through petition drives, public outreach efforts, and online information campaigns. As the group's web site declares: "Digital technologies allow everyone the freedom to be artists, innovators, producers and creators, and to listen, watch, and participate wherever, whenever and however they choose. That freedom must be protected and nurtured." Care to join the copyfight?