To watch Pepsi’s latest commercials, it would be easy to assume the soft drink giant and recent partner, Apple computers, are musical heroes railing against the much reviled Recording Industry Association of America. A little digging, however, reveals little more than a clever marketing campaign and massive bid for greater profits on both companies’ behalf.

The new ad campaign, touting 100 million free songs to Pepsi drinkers, began Feb. 1 as Pepsi promised a one in three shot at winning a “free” song from Apple’s iTunes MP3 music store.

Pepsi’s latest television spots show a slew of doe-eyed youth sitting near computers or on playgrounds as taglines of “incriminated,” “accused” and “charged” roll across the screen over the din of Green Day covering “I Fought the Law.” The real problem with the ads is the impression they give of Apple and Pepsi as defenders of the proverbial free music faith instead of profiteers passing off clever marketing as sympathy for persecuted downloaders.

The commercial concludes with the same chastised youths grinningly wildly with Pepsi bottles held proudly. Apparently the RIAA has no problem with file sharing or “free music” as long as soft drink or computer conglomerates are careful to give record companies a rightful cut out of which the labels will promptly cheat artists.

If either Pepsi or Apple really wanted to champion file sharing or the idea of fighting the good fight, why not support labels that endorse file sharing or expand Apple’s meager music store to include more than the largest six record labels in the world?

It’s the mixed message here that’s confusing. All the commercial proves is that downloading something as simple as a song can end in monolithic fines, but as long as a pair of ber corporations are in on it, everything is OK.

Apple currently houses a mere 500,000 songs all from a cadre of approved labels with which Apple splits profits. Despite the miniscule selection, Apple tauts itself as the largest database of purchasable music on the Internet but never acknowledges former peer-to-peer sharing programs amassing libraries in the millions.

Customers can find music, but don’t expect any independent or underground artists or much in the way of new music. Apparently, convenience has a good month-long learning curve at best.

If Apple intended to make a real statement about the music industry, why not play up children being criminalized by the monopoly that is the RIAA, consumers grossly overcharged for music, or private citizens being busted with the help of taxpayers’ money? That would be a far more iconoclastic gesture. Instead viewers merely get “Drink Pepsi, they fight the stsyem,” which isn’t the case.

Apple has already sold more than 30 million songs at 99 cents a pop, making it far and away the most successful online MP3 sales venture in the Internet’s short history. This figure of 30 million songs accounts for roughly 70 percent of online MP3 purchases.

Sadly, however, all of these sales are comprised of music from the largest record companies and most mainstream artists. Does anyone truly believe Apple, Pepsi or the RIAA would be involved in the venture if everyone involved wasn’t set to profit immensely from the campaign? This new incentive is far more about profiting than rebellion or “fighting the law.”

In a statement released by Pepsi, it was estimated that only 10 percent of the “free” music was expected to actually be redeemed, thus selling millions of bottles of Pepsi, introducing iTunes to new customers and not actually requiring much effort from either company.

The “free” song offer is the new-age equivalent of buying cereal specifically for the toy surprise inside. If customers really want to support file sharing, they need to not only redeem any and every “One Free Song” bottle cap, but also demand better selection from Apple even if it means the computer giant has to deal with labels and artists beyond corporate America and the Forbes 500.