Germany's RIAA Sues Rapidshare - YouTube Next?

Hermel writes "The GEMA (Germany's RIAA) obtained a temporary injunction against 'one-click-hoster' Rapidshare.com. If their lawsuit is successful, the GEMA intends to use it as a beachhead against their next targets, including Youtube and MySpace. From the article: 'According to GEMA, the service ... has at times boasted of making some 15 million files available to its users. The operator had however failed to obtain from GEMA a license for making copyright protected files available ... Through its injunctions the District Court in Cologne had now made it clear to the company that the fact that it was the users and not the operator of the services that uploaded the content onto the sites did not, from a legal point of view, lessen the operator's liability for copyright infringements that occurred within the context of the services, the spokesman added.'"

Well...

[Cctoide]

This makes me wonder whether services like these are a good idea. Aren't they somewhat liable to stuff like this? I've seen them remove illegal content, but sometimes it's on their servers for a long while...

Solution to copyright conundrum?

[Bananatree3]

While it may be true that users are responsible for posting copyrighted files, it is true that hosts do need to take down blatent copyright abuses. A simple solution is to follow what many pay-for-hosting hosts have done: simply require plaintiffs to file a formal, legal complaint about compyright abuses. I have found in many hosts terms of use that they require a legal document faxed/mailed to them before they will respond. After such a document is sent, they will then act accordingly.

Shutting down a whole hosting service like Rapidshare is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. The burden for copyright abuse complaints should be on the music/movie/etc. lawyers to file complaints about abuses. This is what they do for many hundreds of other hosts, why noy for Rapidshare?

Re:Well...

[cliffski]

money lost to piracy isn't just lost by 'a few execs'. Its a loss to the whole indsutry and everyone that works within it. Don't spin the old "everyone in entertainment is a millionaire" nonsense.

Re:Well...

[cliffski]

Man, I feel your pain. I *HATE* it when companies don't release demos. It's just like waving a banner saying "we have no faith in the quality of our product". Star Trek : legacy was a fine recent example of a game who decided it was better off without a demo, in case people saw how bad the game was. To be honest, I can't say I can get worked up about people trying out a game from p2p in those cases. Of course, when there is a demo available, that's another story.
Sadly, most people aren't using rapidshare to get games because there is no demo, they are doing it because they expect to get full games for free. That's bad for everyone in the long term ;(
Cheers for buying my game btw!

Artists' Decision?

[lymond01]

At some point, an artist makes the choice to have their music managed by the RIAA, and those made into copyrighted, not-to-be-shared-without-being-properly-licensed recordings. I'm guessing that the advertising the RIAA does for artists they think can be successful is the driving force behind musicians still using them.

Musicians can get a loan and have a high-quality studio recording made of their music. With the internet, they can attempt to market it, and with the new music sites and the ubiquity of the internet, they might even get noticed. But noticed by who? Venues like to see you draw a crowd. How do you become a megastar without radio airplay, music videos, etc? I suppose you can get on the radio by popular opinion (enough calls to the radio stations by your fans), but getting airplay on MTV (do they still play videos?) is a bit more challenging without the RIAA paying for the time.

I guess it takes money to make money, and the RIAA makes that "easier" if not simply "possible" for the artist by saying, "Give us your act, and we'll make you famous." It just seems like the time is coming for artists to dodge the RIAA and publish themselves. Hell yes, it takes effort, but you're artists! You're supposed to starve.

Re:GEMA != RIAA

[hclyff]

The money ends up in the pockets of the copyright and publishing rights holders.

Fortunately, in many European nations (including Germany, I think), you cannot sell or give up your copyright right. Large distributing company still keep the big bucks of course, for making your records available in stores, but at least they can't push you to sell rights on your work. The artist is always the copyright owner, no matter what.