For as long as children have been logging on to the world wide web, parents have been concerned about their security. Often portrayed as a virtual lair, they have been warned that the internet is home to sexual predators, fraudsters, bullies and thieves, ready to pounce on the unsuspecting and naïve while masked by the anonymity afforded by technology.
But in a high tech world, often better understood by the younger generation, it could be the parents themselves who fall victim to their own children's online activities and unwittingly end up on the wrong side of the law.
The illegal distribution of music files, software and movies via so-called peer-to-peer (p2p) networks is one area where unmonitored internet access could cost parents dearly.
While the phenomenal growth in sales of MP3 and iPod digital media players has fuelled the successful rise of a string of legitimate digital music services like Napster, iTunes and Oxfam Music (where 10p from every sale goes to charity), many teenagers are ignoring the possibility of legal action and illegally downloading content while their parents are blissfully unaware of the financial impact a prosecution could have on their lives.
The BPI, the British record industry trade association, recently announced two landmark legal rulings against online filesharers for the illegal distribution of music over the internet, which resulted in a man from King's Lynn and a father of two from Brighton being ordered to make immediate payments of £5,000 and £1,500 respectively, with further possible costs pending.
The BPI defines filesharing as "the activity of trading digital files with other users over the internet".
The most popular method of trading files is by downloading p2p software which allows users access to often massive networks of copyright protected material stored on other users' computers. The networks, with names like Limewire, BitTorrent and Kazza, have the potential to offer legitimate services, however the BPI states: "The vast majority of songs currently available on filesharing networks are being distributed illegally."
It's something which has been going on for years, but the industry is getting increasingly wise, targeting illegal filesharers, logging their IP address (a unique string of numbers that identifies a computer or server on the internet) and through court orders, can now force the internet provider to divulge the identity of the account holder – often a parent who may or may not be aware of their child's online activities.
While those who choose not to settle out of court are given the opportunity to name those they think are responsible, unsurprisingly, according to Matt Phillips, communications manager for the BPI, most account holders take the blame themselves because they don't want to see their children being prosecuted.
It is a growing problem. An estimated 14 million people in the UK have used networks to illegally trade files, but while getting caught may seem as likely as winning the lottery, it's not quite that simple.
"It may seem that your chances of being caught are one in a million," says Mr Philips. "However, just 15 per cent of those who upload are responsible for the vast majority of illegal content available online. We are seeing the same names coming up again and again. The more you upload the more chance you have of being caught."
The BPI estimates that the British record industry has lost £650m in the last two years because of illegal filesharers and the UK singles market has halved since 1999. Prior to this it enjoyed annual sales of around 70 million units over a 25 year period.
The BPI also claims that "independent research has confirmed that any promotional benefit derived from illegal p2p filesharing is outweighed by the loss of sales" although inevitably that's a moot point.
Describing himself as a typical filesharer, a 20-year-old student who asked not to be named disagreed.
"Most people who download music from the internet are students who cannot afford to waste their money on CDs," he said.
"The industry is not losing money because we would not be spending it in the first place. Downloading music is also
good for bands who can
build their fanbase via the internet and make their money touring."
The BPI acknowledge that bands like the Arctic Monkeys, Nizlopi
and Goldie Looking Chain have built up sizable followings thanks to distributing their music online prior to signing a record contract but say: "It's up to the artist and label to give away their music for free or charge for it if they choose, and it's illegal to distribute other people's music without their permission."
Joining the BPI in their fight against piracy is the Federation Against Software Theft (FAST) which estimates a quarter of all software currently used in Britain is unlicensed, counterfeit or pirated. Spurred on by the success of the BPI prosecutions, FAST have requested the names of 150 filesharers from 10 UK Internet Service Providers. If found guilty defendants could face an unlimited fine or even a two-year jail sentence.
Keen to promote legal music downloads and warn parents of the risks associated with illegal filesharing the BPI have developed an easy to follow information pack which can be downloaded from their website www.bpi.co.uk. The site also features a piece of software designed to help parents remove illegally uploaded files and unwanted P2P software from their computers.
With the BPI promising to continue its crackdown on illegal filesharers, parents who turn a deaf ear to their teenager's choice in music, and more importantly where they get it from, risk more than a sulky protest at parental interference. With legal services offering unlimited music downloads from less than the price of a can of coke a day can you afford to risk letting your children downloading music illegally?