Okay, I'll bite.

And now for your enjoyment, roswell1329 plays Devil's Advocate:

Even if you are hacked by them, what are they deleting? Their product which you have illegally. You steal something from a store and are caught with it, you have to give it back. There's no civil liberties infringement involved there.
I'm afraid I'll have to disagree there. In this country, even criminals have civil liberties, and the example Troy11277 gave in the above quote is not quite an accurate depiction of what is being debated. These organizations are proposing methods that can cause hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars of permanent damage to individual systems. It would be state approved vigilantism! Their actions are beginning to rival that of a common street thug. It would be much more precise to offer the following analogy:

What the MPAA and RIAA are attempting to legallize is the state-sponsored severe beating/limb breaking of a shoplifter taking a stick of gum.

I understand that MP3 trading is an epidemic that the MPAA and RIAA claims is causing extreme hits to their profit margin (something I'd rather not go into), but lashing out with crippling retaliation is hardly the solution.

I'd also like to go into a rant of my own about today's corporate view on intellectual property, but that's another post altogether.

Sufficed to say, I agree with the points of souleman and Troy11277 that the MPAA and RIAA are entitled to protect what they are selling, but this proposed legislation seems to be more like a knee-jerk reaction that could have devastating consequences.

Perhaps the future of cyberspace will simply be an exorbitant charge for admission that covers all these silly incidentals like pirated media and software.