When Techfocus interviewed EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) spokesman Fred Von Lohmann, the RIAA decided to re-align parts of the story in accordance with the RIAA motto, 'If The Truth Doesn't Fit - No Problem'.

So Techfocus decided to ban the RIAA (and, for good measure, the MPAA) from its site via a simple .htaccess file. And it worked. Thirty-six times, in fact. Techfocus' Bill Royale told us, A normal *month* usually gives us 33. I'd crunch those numbers more, but I'm wiped ..."

Go here for a copy.

In the meanwhile, "our traffic is still going up substantially each day!" Bill continues. "The last time I checked our site stats [July 23] we had hit 5312 downloads. Not bad - the number of daily downloads actually doubled today.

"Support for the effort has been great - I've seen a few critical comments, but even those have been very mild. I've gotten a ton of emails on the issue, so much in fact that I'm behind a bit in responding to everyone! I'm doing all I can :)

"In terms of the steps we're now taking, we've set up a forum on the site just so people could work specifically on the .htaccess file and help each other out. In visiting sites around the net, I've seen people adding to the file, taking things out ... all sorts of stuff going on out there. I'm betting it's been a while since many of the webmasters out there have given much thought to .htaccess! That in itself is useful, as .htaccess can be a valuable tool in a site's security policy."

Bill says a rough game plan is coming together with, naturally, 'open-source' as the key phrase.

And, "the quality of the list is critical," he emphasises. "This effort will go nowhere if sites accidentally block out too much of a network. As a result, we'll need to establish some method of quality control for any file we put out. I'd like to see some inroads made between the P2P communities working on blocking and perhaps a few people working on the .htaccess file.

"Most of the information needed can be interchanged, so I think it would be beneficial to all of us."

In the meanwhile, the RIAA has apologised to Techfocus for using its Von Lohmann story out of context. Says RIAA suitperson Andy Tweiss ...

Fat chance.

Actually, "The RIAA hasn't contacted us to apologize," says Bill. "Even if an apology was to come, it would be irrelevant. The ban is non-negotiable on our site and this is the basic message we're trying to put across:

"1. The RIAA tells users not to respect artistic work. While we don't claim to be artists at Techfocus, our content is our work. They violated our terms, and thus they did not respect our work. And they are supposed to be the protectors of intellectual property?

"2. The RIAA said that they would not legally pursue individuals. They lied. How long is it until they start serving subpoenas on websites like ours to get the identities of users? What does a site owner do then? By blocking them pre-emptively. Cutting them off at the pass by using a technological measure (such as applying the htaccess method we use.) The Digital Millenium Copyright Act forbids them from circumventing a technological measure. Throw something in your footer that forbids them from access or put up the image suppled, and block their networks. As far as we can tell, if they still access your site, they are breaking their own favorite law.

"3. This is all unnecessary. If the DMCA was able to establish a business model that was worth anything, they would be a lot more successful. I personally think Apple's iTunes service is a step in the right direction, but of course that market is essentially closed to the mass public as most don't use Apple. Why doesn't the RIAA approach this situation with a solution like that? It is clear that Apple's got it pretty much figured out - why can't a group representing an entire industry? If the RIAA focused on providing an alternative that respected fair use and spent less time on litigation, they might actually be successful in raising revenues."