Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Piracy The Courts

Spanish Court Rules In Favor of P2P Engineer 365

Posted by samzenpus
from the no-fine-for-you dept.
Sir Mal Fet writes "In line with previous rulings discussed here, a judge in Spain has ruled that P2P technologies are 'completely neutral' (original in Spanish ; Google translation ), thus dismissing a lawsuit originated in 2008 from the Spanish Association of Musical Producers (Promusicae), Warner, EMI, and Sony suing Pablo Soto, a Spanish man who created the Blubster, MP2P y Piolet programs to share files. The labels demanded 13 million euros in damages arguing that the mere existence and distribution of P2P technologies violated copyright, but the ruling stated the technology itself was neutral, so the creator could not be held responsible for how the software was used, and demanded that they pay for legal expenses. Promusicae said it was going to appeal the ruling."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spanish Court Rules In Favor of P2P Engineer

Comments Filter:
  • by slackware 3.6 (2524328) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @01:56AM (#38456802)
    because a deranged criminal killed a pedestrian with a stolen car. Wow the judge did his job no story here. Unless the story is about judges doing their jobs, in which case we have a winner.
    • by Lisias (447563) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @02:02AM (#38456840) Homepage Journal

      You know, it's good to hear that there're judges doing their jobs nowadays.

      If by no other reason, it make us hope that some of them live on America.

      • by InterestingFella (2537066) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @03:38AM (#38457164)
        Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".
        • by dredwerker (757816) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @04:19AM (#38457316)

          Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

          No rappers do.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 22, 2011 @04:29AM (#38457348)

          Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

          "If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars make people drive drunk, and spoons make you fat." -- Unknown

          • by ohnocitizen (1951674) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @05:13AM (#38457514)

            "If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars make people drive drunk, and spoons make you fat." -- Unknown

            What do buses, cars, trains, p2p, and http all have in common? They are general methods of transportation. Guns just transport bullets. At high velocity. Into a target. A gun is a weapon, not a neutral method of data transport. Unless the next step up from fiber-optic cable is bullets.

            • by AJH16 (940784) <ajNO@SPAMgccafe.com> on Thursday December 22, 2011 @10:20AM (#38458984) Homepage

              Actually, bullets have higher latency, though I am now wondering what the bandwidth of a bullet would be if you made it with microSD cards. Perhaps we can have a new wireless internet spec based on the cell carriers shooting their customers. Doesn't seem to far off from the current model.

            • A gun is a weapon, not a neutral method of data transport. Unless the next step up from fiber-optic cable is bullets.

              I don't know, I think shooting someone conveys a message...

          • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

            by Darfeld (1147131)

            I knew it was the spoons! They're after me!

          • Pencils kill people too. (at least, mine does)

        • Most often, it's the bullets that you have to watch out for.
          • by Darfeld (1147131)

            Technically true, but once the bullet is fired, it's generally to late to do anything... But yeah, you can do something about it before, but then you just have to be sure the loaded gun is on the good side of the bulletproof whatever.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by sqldr (838964)

          "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

          People with guns kill people.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SharkLaser (2495316)
      Which also makes TPB's name choice "The Pirate Bay" stupid. It would be like naming your kindergarten "The Rapists Playground" and then jabbering how people need to have privacy there. It's obvious what happens on the site and what it is intended for, and therefore makes the owners liable too. They should had used some more neutral name. Of course, they wouldn't had grown so big and make millions otherwise.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 22, 2011 @02:34AM (#38456942)

        Uh that's a website, not BitTorrent or any other software. The developers who write P2P software are not running that site.

    • Spanish Court Judge In Favor of P2P Engineer

      There, fixed

    • by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @02:58AM (#38457010)

      Why single out car makers? Just to have a car analogy?

      It's like any technology. Think of any kind of technology, any kind of device, any kind of tool. There are no "good" or "bad" technologies, all of them can be used for good or bad. From a rock which can be used to crack open a coconut or to crack open a head, to a rocket which can be used to transport a satellite to orbit or a bomb to some other place on the surface of our planet. And if fissionable material only had nefarious applications, we wouldn't have a hard time convincing everyone that it's not a good idea to hand any to "questionable" countries. Hell, not even enriching it to make it weapon grade material is a dead sure indicator that someone has bad intentions, due to the way some reactors work only with such material.

      I'm glad a judge finally caught on and noticed that progressing technology and inventing a tool cannot be seen as a crime by itself. It's how the technology is used that should be judged. Do not blame technology for anything bad happening. It's the people using it, not the technology!

      • by Kjella (173770)

        It's like any technology. Think of any kind of technology, any kind of device, any kind of tool. There are no "good" or "bad" technologies, all of them can be used for good or bad. (...) Hell, not even enriching it to make it weapon grade material is a dead sure indicator that someone has bad intentions, due to the way some reactors work only with such material.

        I'm pretty sure no reactor design requires weapon grade material, unless you purposely made one just so you can pretend it's for a reactor. Regular nuclear fuel contains a small bit of weapons grade material, like the fuel for an incineration facility has to have some degree of flammable material - when people started sorting their junk too well, they had to add some small part of paper back into the mix. But weapons grade material is more like napalm, yes it will burn but it's way, way overkill if you just

    • by 517714 (762276)
      You had to use a car analogy right off the bat? Seriously? If you had only used a "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" analogy you would have left a lot of people thinking about which side of the argument they would take.
    • Your analogy is close, but in the case of P2P, most of their use is for illegal things.

      So it's more like suing Ford over a car they sold which included features like secret compartments (that criminals use to hide drugs), a giant bull bar (which they advertise as being able to run over a person with no damage to the car), and is advertised as being completely bulletproof, with holes for you to shoot out of.

      Sure, it could still be end with them being ruled in favour, but it's not quite as clear cut as you ma

      • BitTorrent, a protocol invented by and marketed in a product by BitTorrent Inc. a perfectly legal US company .... who have obviously been shut down because their product only has illegal uses .... ?

  • by thephydes (727739) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @02:11AM (#38456866)
    Well, there's a thought! You mean it has the same neutrality as a car, a knife, a gun? Sorry, where have I been all this time - I've been lead to believe that technology is somehow evil because it "may" be used for illegal activities.
    • by trims (10010) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @03:15AM (#38457068) Homepage

      "Technology", in the sense of basic principles, is certainly neutral. However, specific assemblages of technology - from a car, to a gun, to a spoon, or a computer program, certainly aren't neutral. they have good points and bad points, which are determined by their intended or designed use, their practical or common use, and their potential or possible use. How we allow for the use of given assemblies of technologies depends entirely on how we view the social cost-benefit equation of the assembled tool.

      Many people want to ban certain tools based on their potential usage, which is either irrational or irresponsible (or displays a hidden agenda unrelated to the merits of the tool).

      However, it is equally dishonest to judge a tool merely on its proclaimed intended usage.

      As a society, we must look at the whole picture, and hopefully, error on the side of permissiveness. That does not mean that we should be shy about outlawing things whose negative potential and common usage significantly outweigh any benefit that is intended or common usage provides. Like everything else, it's a balancing act.

      In this case, the judge did just that, much to the *IAA (or Spanish equivalent's) disappointment.

      -Erik

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 22, 2011 @02:18AM (#38456888)

    The Spanish press ( http://www.elpais.com/articulo/tecnologia/Pablo/Soto/industria/discografica/siempre/va/paso/detras/elpeputec/20111221elpeputec_3/Tes )also says this guy might be suing them back, because in the course of the lawsuit against him, these cartels applied some really dirty tactics against him (like hiring goons to follow him every day, etc.)

  • This is rare good news! Just like guns in these Unites States. You see, guns were created for the sole purpose of inflicting harm and to some extent, kill (take lives), which is illegal.

    So if some thug did precisely that, we cannot ban the possession of guns, can we?

  • by Tastecicles (1153671) on Thursday December 22, 2011 @03:48AM (#38457194)

    ...then anyone who uses P2P in any of its forms is automatically violating copyright? We're talking anything from a crossover cable between two computers to a university compute cluster to the INTERNET here, folks - the labels, to put it bluntly, are fucking delusional.

  • World of Warcraft uses Bittorrent to distribute it's client and it's updates
    NCSoft uses Bittorrent or a similar P2P protocol to distribute Lineage 2 files
    Mandriva distribute it's Linux CD and DVD using Bittorrent, including the "powerpack" edition (which is commercial)
    BitTorrent is increasingly used to transfer big LEGAL files by big companies...

    Maybe we should have some big names like Blizzard and NCSoft (which are by no mean affiliated to that bunch of "OpenSource freaks") weight in in favor of the techno

    • Doesn't Twitter use BitTorrent to push code updates out amongst it's data centers?

      (One of the greatest uses of BitTorrent I've heard of actually).

  • Wasn't it designed specifically to be a way to share information even if one or more sources of communication have been disrupted? The "it" being the internet, of course.

To understand a program you must become both the machine and the program.

Working...