Who's winning the file-sharing war?
This morning, I visited a new front in the battle over file-sharing. In a room in Westminster, a band of desperadoes gathered to launch a guerilla raid on a hated enemy - the Digital Economy Bill, and in particular measures which could see suspected illegal file-sharers cut off from the internet.
Actually, that's a slightly colourful description of a lobbying session at which the leading "desperado" was none other than that establishment figure Charles Dunstone.
But the Carphone Warehouse boss and owner of TalkTalk, the ISP which has been most vocal in its opposition to the bill, was keen to stress that he wasn't here to push his commercial interests but to protect the human rights of broadband users.
He'd invited MPs and Lords to come and hear the case against the bill from various bodies, including Which, Liberty, Consumer Focus and the Pirate Party.
But I'm not sure the Parliamentarians will have come away with a very clear picture of how to vote; not all of Mr Dunstone's fellow lobbyists shared his view of the bill.
He wanted the whole thing thrown out - his advice to content owners was not to bother asking the ISPs to police their customers: "If you think someone has stolen something from you, take them to court".
But Which had brought along a couple of innocent victims of just that kind of legal action, people who'd received letters accusing them of illegal file-sharing, despite apparently being innocent of any such offence.
The consumer organisation told me the current state of affairs needed sorting out and the system proposed in the Digital Economy Bill, whereby suspected file-sharers would get an "informative" letter from their ISP rather than a threatening one from content owners, was a good one: "Most innocent people if they get one of these letters will try to sort it out," a spokeswoman explained.
The Which representative also saw no problem with the second stage whereby ISPs would have to impose "technical sanctions" on suspected illegal file-sharers.
And she had this to say about the motives of the sponsor of the lobbying event: "TalkTalk don't want to do stuff which is going to annoy their customers or cost them money."
Liberty, which campaigns for civil liberties, had a more nuanced approach.
It saw some problems with the first phase - it would require ISPs to keep information on subscribers - but preferred it to phase two, where the threat of disconnection could be a breach of the Human Rights Act.
And as for the Pirate Party, its approach was simple - file-sharing should be made legal.
So how were artists going to make money, I asked the party's Andrew Robinson, if they had to compete with "free" material? "You just need a slightly different business model," he told me, insisting that file-sharing was just "free advertising" for bands.
So what will now happen to the Digital Economy Bill, currently making its way through the Lords and then heading to the Commons amidst this barrage of lobbying from supporters and opponents?
The music and video industries seem confident that the Conservatives support their case, so that it will get through, albeit with a few amendments.
Charles Dunstone's team at TalkTalk seemed quietly confident that the Conservatives were on their side - after all, the shadow Culture Minister Jeremy Hunt had turned up at their event and listened carefully to the victims of lawsuits.
So I called Jeremy Hunt's office to check out where the Conservatives stood. "Broadly supportive," was the message.
A spokeswoman said Mr Hunt backed the Digital Economy Bill, but wanted a couple of amendments on the technical measures, making it clear that these would be a last resort and would be properly assessed by Ofcom.
If the bill doesn't run out of time before the election - and that's a big if - it looks as though its music industry supporters will win the battle with its ISP opponents.
Mr Dunstone has pursued his campaign against the bill with great vigour and a flair for publicity. But he'll be hoping that the MPs who came to today's event didn't listen too closely to what the people from Which had to say.