Nobody's saying (well. I'm not, anyway) that FD is worthy of ridicule because of his lack of Netskills, that's absurd. He goofed, period. A goof is a goof, and an act of chumpdom is an act of chumpdom. ("Chump" must be a significantly nastier word in Maine than it is in Texas. Must be the differences in climate...)
Can we have a moment of objectivity (and bad taste) here? Let's say that Screw magazine was still around, and a columnist for that mag published a column about buying the Pamela Anderson/Whatever-his-name-was-rockstar-husband sex tape on the Internet. Well, guess what? THAT was available for free, too, or so I've been told. Don't you think that the more savvy readership of Screw would be justified, in this instance. in calling that columnist a chump? (the matter of anybody and everybody associated with Screw being a chump is besides the point... )
Man, I can and will freely admit that Sonny Rollins has made some stinker albums. Why won't you admit that Francis Davis has written some stinker columns? I'm not Clementine, and I myself have got no problem with an overall positive assessment of FD's overall accomplishments, even if I'm not quite as enthusiastic as you are. But c'mon - this column, this specific column, is nothing to be proud of, unless it's turned into a learning experience by his Net-savvy friends spanking him for it and he gets prodded into digging a little deeper into the matter at hand.
Now THERE'S an idea for a column - the world of free concert recordings (aka bootlegs) currently available on the Net. Might take a little time for research and such, but that's a whole lot more, uh, timely and relevant than the one he did write. Gut turning a lemon into lemonade is a time honored tradition, and a mark of true nobility afaic.
And if the issue of the "propriety" in writing publicly about such things is an issue, the question then becomes - why did he write about this one?