Outdated licensing models provide incentives for infringement.

I was reading a Globe and Mail article talking about the Canadian use of MySpace and saw an all too familiar note.

None of that new content, however, will reach Canadians online because licensing rights only cover U.S. audiences. Negotiating rights for a global audience remains an obstacle for MySpace, which could see international sites dealing in a second tier of content.

The antiquated model of having location specific licensing, and releasing content in different parts of the world at different times, only increases copyright infringement. The world is a much smaller place than it was in the days of horse-and-buggies, and the entertainment industry needs to catch up to modern times. If a citizen of a given country cannot purchase content legally where they live, they aren't going to wait until it is released (if it is released at all). They will source the content that they want from whatever sources are available. If this is an infringing copy it is hard to blame the audience member when the copyright holder didn't make a legitimate copy easily available.

This is not to excuse copyright infringement, something that affects independent creators like myself (FLOSS software author) more than the big companies like those that control the Business Software Alliance. This is simply to point the finger at the real sources of the problem, rather than where the majors in the content industry try to put the blame.