The arrest in Auckland of Kim Dotcom, founder of Megaupload, one of the largest file sharing sites on the internet, opens a window on a parallel universe which, while entirely foreign to a great many people, nevertheless is inhabited by countless others.
The most obvious border post separating these two classes of individual is called "Age", but this, in turn, is shorthand for the analogue/digital divide.
While there are early adopters within the baby-boomer demographic - after all, much of the pertinent technology has been pioneered by it - the world is increasingly populated by generations for whom digital technology is second nature - it is all they have ever known.
With this, and the tools it provides, has come unprecedented access to digitally inscribed information at the press of a computer key, or the touch of an app-loaded portable screen, and much of it has to date been "free".
This includes collections of music, videos, movies and television programmes routinely downloaded from sites such as Megaupload.
Last week, the older empire comprising traditional corporate structures, acting according to established copyright and intellectual property laws, struck back - with varying results and consequences. Kim Dotcom (also known as Kim Schmitz) was arrested in the $30 million Coatesville (north of Auckland) mansion he shares with his family and other Megaupload associates.
The operation was mounted with well-planned precision and came after surveillance involving the FBI, the New Zealand Police and the Organised and Financial Crime Agency New Zealand.
The US authorities are seeking extradition of the arrested persons for alleged criminal copyright infringement and money laundering.
Their site is alleged by the US Department of Justice to have been involved in reproducing and distributing infringing copies of all types of copyrighted works including movies, television programmes, music, software and books.
The estimated harm to copyright holders is believed to be more than $NZ624 million, a statement released by police following the arrests said.
In a simultaneous move, which came as a direct response to the arrests, angry "hactivists", including those belonging to a computer hacker group called Anonymous, launched a series of cyber attacks on websites for the White House, the US Department of Justice, the FBI, the Recording Industry Association of America and the US Copyright Office.
This came as Wikipedia blacked out its site last week to protest against legislation before the US Senate and the House of Representatives.
Internet companies such as Google and Facebook have equally raised their concerns.
The concerted response had almost immediate effect.
The Bills known as Pipa (Protect IP Act) and Sopa (Stop Online Piracy Act) have been halted in their tracks as politicians in the United States reconsider the possible consequences of passing such laws. Opponents claim these laws would have a chilling impact on freedom of expression and the internet as it is known.
Creative content providers, and artists themselves, on the other hand, simply want to restrict the ability of companies and sites to profit from materials they have not paid for.
This is where the battle lines are being drawn in what could prove to be a defining cultural, political and economic clash of the current era.
Already the broad "piracy" movement has established political representation. The Pirate party is Europe's youngest and fastest growing political movement.
Founded in Sweden in 2006, it achieved its first seat in the European Parliament within three years and has a growing following in other European countries.
It is united by demands for digital transparency, freedom of information and access for all.
Echoes of it can be seen in the related WikiLeaks phenomenon and the Occupy movement.
While one response to the Auckland arrests, by the Labour Party and New Zealand First, has been to question how and why the Megaupload associates were in the country in the first place, there are larger issues at stake.
Where once the "ownership" of creative content and information could be assumed to be protected by copyright and intellectual property law, the digital generation, in all its various manifestations, is presenting an urgent and influential challenge which may upend the status quo - with as yet unforeseeable consequences.
