] The entertainment industry says these digital versions
] of Prohibition-style speakeasies are of little concern. Since
] darknets typically include no more than 50 or 100 people
] because of technology limitations or security concerns, music
] and movie companies think they can't do much damage. "If
] they are using private networks, there is very little
] risk of being caught, but there is very little risk of
] them really doing much harm to the entertainment
] companies," says Randy Saaf, president of MediaDefender
] Inc., a copyright-protection security company.

This article is kind of annoying because it invents this term, "darknet," and then applies it to a bunch of different things without defining it. This allows them to say that Glaxo's VPN and FreeNet are the same type of thing. There are important similarities, but there are also important differences. Use of private networks by companies is not under some new growth spurt, and has no relationship to the development of private file trading networks.

Having said that, this article is public acknowledgement that we have now moved to the next phase. People are moving over to anonymous networks. Also, the spin from the recording industry has changed. Their first statements where "we can crack this technology." That was good spin. They can spread FUD for a long time that way and they never have to prove it. Here they instead say that private networks are not going to cause large financial problems for them. Thats quite an interesting take. If they think these networks will be less effective they are confused. Maybe they think they will be less visible (I.E. Shareholders will be less concerned about them)...

[IP] Businessweek Article on Darknets