Kazaa Is Legal, Dutch Appeals Court Rules 409
Killjoy_b writes "
First, the courts in the Netherlands rule against Kazaa, in a higher appeal, the courts rule in favour of Kazaa saying "The software itself doesn't commit any illegal acts, it's the users that could do that, therefore the software is legal" Read the Dutch article on Webwereld
I like the way this turned out :)" Another Dutch reader wrote with this: " The Judge ruled that even if the users violated copyright, Kazaa did not. Important in the ruling were the facts that Kazaa does not rely on a central server, and that it is not bound to music or video files alone.
According to Webwereld (in Dutch) Kazaa is pondering if they should sue back for lost damages. After the first court ruling against Kazaa, they were forced to sell part of their business, for supposedly a too low prize. " And despite the the fact that both Taco and I are from Holland, MI, no, neither of us can speak/read Dutch - so don't ask us to translate. Update: 03/28 14:39 GMT by M : Reuters has an English summary.
Amazing. (Score:5, Funny)
"Duh" added the Judge.
Re:Amazing. (Score:2, Funny)
In other news - guns are not illegal, since it is the users who break the law in shooting someone.
Apart from in most civilised countries
Re:Amazing. (Score:2, Insightful)
Imho a beter analogy would be knifes. While it is usualy illegal to kill people with knifes, no-one will blame the manufacturer for making them.
Re:Amazing. (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Amazing. (Score:2)
People who think nothing of eating a chicken sandwich but are horrified by hunting are just stupid.
I should also point out that guns are used for things besides killing animals and people. I really like using mine to poke holes in pieces of paper. Shooting is challenging and fun. Like golf, skiing and many other individual sports it's a skill that can never be mastered.
Re:Amazing. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Amazing. (Score:3, Insightful)
where I live (Indiana), there is a tremendous deer overpopulation. Numerous studies have been done, and if they were left to their own (and we didn't hunt them), they would continue to overpopulate and spread, and would be a serious problem to the environment
That's a problem in quite a few places. In large part it's a problem that we've created, but it's pretty much inevitable. In order to feed ourselves and protect our livestock (and ourselves!) we eliminate the predators and turn great stretches of land into fields of corn, wheat, alfalfa, etc. As a result, the deer population explodes. Not only does that lead to deer eating all the farm produce and large numbers of deer slaughtered by automobiles it also causes massive deer starvation whenever a slightly harsh winter comes around. And, as you said, the starving deer do a great deal of damage to the flora, ringing trees, shredding bushes, etc.
Since we've artificially eliminated the "natural" predators (the non-human ones, at least; humans have certainly preyed on deer for a long, long time) and boosted the summertime food supply, we really have to control the population as well. Some would say we need to stop causing the problem, but that's not really possible without drastically reducing our population, which is not an option.
Another point to remember is that nearly all of the public funding for the protection and enhancement of both game and non-game wildlife in the U.S. comes from hunters. Hunters don't mind paying for it, either, because we derive a great deal of pleasure from healthy wilderness.
So, I think killing an animal is wrong
Well, we disagree there. You may have made a choice to become an herbivore, but humans, by nature, are omnivorous. We have always been predators and there's nothing wrong with that. Predators are not bad, they're a natural part of the chain of life.
I love nature, but I have a very human-centric view of the world. I think it's important to protect the environment and the wildlife, but not because I think we have any sort of duty to "Gaia". I just want the world to continue being a nice place for me, my children, my grandchildren (someday) and so on. I don't believe in inflicting pain needlessly, but I see no problem with killing and eating animals. Each and every one of them will die eventually anyway. We need to protect the populations and help them thrive, but humane taking of individuals does not harm and often helps.
People that think we should get rid of the 2nd amendment need to really think about it.
I agree. The original purpose of the 2nd amendment was to ensure the citizenry never lost the final recourse against tyranny. Unfortunately, I think it was mostly lost quite some time ago. The most modern weapons that the average citizen is allowed to possess were state of the art in about 1900. Maintaining the spirit of the 2nd amendment would mean that we should be able to privately own fully automatic weapons, tanks, rocket propelled grenades, fighter aircraft and maybe even nuclear weapons. Obviously there are good reasons why we don't want individuals to have that much firepower. If our system of government should break down, however, I have no doubt that while I'd be hopelessly outgunned matching a 1906 era rifle against an M-16A2 or a SAW, I'd still be much better off than if I was facing the M-16 with a knife.
I have no reason to think that we'll need to rebel against our government, but it's a good idea, IMO, to maintain the capacity insofar as we can.
Re:Amazing. (Score:2)
"MIAA screaming all the way from the Netherlands" (Score:2, Insightful)
This ruling happened in Holland, meaning I could use in the EU to defend myself.
I'm quite sure an US court will be delighted, when you try to use a foreign precedent...
Re:Amazing. (Score:3, Funny)
You mean killing? What about turning off the TV, scaring off the neighbor's cat, and settling arguments?
Sounds more like a Swiss Army Knife to me!!
Re:Amazing. (Score:3, Insightful)
A lot of people would like to hold the manufacturers of p2p software responsible, but are prevented from doing so by the need to protect strong freedom of speech rights (including software distribution.)
Other people would like to hold gun manufacturers responsible, but are prevented from doing so by the need to protect the people's strong right to arm themselves.
I'm not going to say which right is more important-- that's up to the people of the various nations involved. But let's not munge two different sets of rights together.
Re:Amazing. (Score:3, Funny)
No, it's the BOFH who makes the users shoot themselves. Get your facts right. :P
victory is ours! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:victory is ours! (Score:3, Informative)
The Dutch attitude towards laws (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, how does this fit with file sharing? Well, here creative hypocrisy isn't even needed, since it's clearly within the letter of the law. It's American courts which are going beyond both law and common sense, embracing monopolistic behavior as an extension of the puritan self-constraint we too often perversely pleasure ourselves by.
Re:victory is ours! (Score:2)
Since the police have far too much work dealing with real criminals (and they can't be arsed with the paperwork) you probably won't hear anything though... even now it's pretty much tolerated (over a dozen cannabis cafe's to open in the next couple of months).
Global Implications? (Score:5, Insightful)
I am wondering if the judge in this case was in some manner technically savy, since he noted Kazaa didn't depend on a central server and thus the user network is out of its control, thus Kazaa was just considered a software provider and did not directly break any laws.
We will have to see how this affects other court cases surrounding p2p in other countries.
Well... (Score:2)
Re:Well... (Score:2)
BTW IANAL
Re:Well... (Score:2)
Excuse me if I dont believe this, the US has a history of unilaterally changing things previously agreed on.
//rdj
Re:Well... (Score:4, Insightful)
There currently isn't, and I'm **EXTREMELY** happy to see it that way... Why? Simply because then all the stupid US laws would then apply to me and my fellow european citizen. There's no death penalty here, no DMCA and generally less (none that I know of) corporate-bought laws.
Keep the US laws in the US, thank you...
Re:Global Implications? (Score:5, Insightful)
KaZaa doesn't trade copywritten material, they just make software.
Funny thing is, though, that I see the truth in all these arguements. PEOPLE pull the trigger, PEOPLE swap illegal files.
Since I can use a garden hoe to hack my neighbor to bits, should the hoe company be help liable?
OK, enough rambling.
Re:Global Implications? (Score:2)
garden hoe
kitchen knife
VCR
...
CD burner (because currently it's much easier for most people to copy a CD than a VCR tape)
rifle
handgun
...
Kazaa
Napster (because it can only swap music files, unlike Kazaa)
I draw these lines in between because I think that, currently, the vast majority of the uses of the first group are legal, while the vast majority of the uses of the last group are illegal (according to the copyright laws of most countries). Not sure about the middle group, but there are certainly at least a large minority of legal uses for the products in the second group, while I would guess that the ratio of legal to illegal MP3s swapped over Napster-like products is somewhere around 1%.
Then the only remaining question is, where do you draw the line of legality of the product?
Re:Global Implications? (Score:2)
Besides that, a product can also be made partially legal. In the Netherlands, you may only buy a gun if you've been an active member of a shooting club for a year or so. That keeps guns available to those who which to use it for legal means, while providing substantial barriers to weirdo's/criminals/angry people.
Re:Global Implications? (Score:2)
What you CHOOSE to do with a gun is up to you. In fact, in the owners manual, most handguns state that you specifically SHOULDN'T shoot people with it.
I use them to shoot at targets at the pistol range. For me, gun control means not missing your target.
Re:Global Implications? (Score:2)
I'm wondering how this can be since it has been proven they control who is on the network. They were able to lock Morpheus users out of the Kazaa network, so it MUST depend on a central server, at least for user logins. How exactly can Kazaa kick people off their network, but still claim they have no control over the network?
Re:Global Implications? (Score:2)
The real question that you were asking is will anyone in a US court (or elsewhere) listen.
That is far less likely. Especially in the US. Elsewhere in the world, courts are more likely to look at examples of how other countries have grappled with a legal issue and craft laws carefully to ensure the same or a different result. But this happens very seldom in the US.
You *can* cite to international precedent in a US court, just like in court in Kansas you *can* cite examples of what courts in California did under similar circumstances or with similar laws. And if you are really in new ground and the laws really are similar, they might decide to do the same thing. Or they might decide that Those People Over There have nothing to do with Us so who cares what they did or think?
What will also be interesting is to watch how this case and its international implications and developments compare to the Yahoo/LICRA [cdt.org] case moving forward in parallel in France and in California.
Liza
Global Implications (Score:3, Insightful)
In effect, the dutch court displayed uncommon intelligence, rarely seen in in the Spin before, during and after passing legislation which strangles citizens in the US, and forces US courts to side with venal 'entertainment interests'.
The Hollywood Way:
Here's a new offering, enjoy!
How DARE you enjoy in a manner not in keeping with our wishes!
Here's a law we bought which does one or more of the following: Makes you a criminal, Makes you pay more, Makes it impossible to enjoy our offerings
Oh, and by the way, since the US always knows what's best for the world, we'll have the federal government employ economic and diplomatic pressure (extortion) to make other countries accept our way, too.
Have a nice day!
oooooooooh the US is not going to like this one (Score:2, Insightful)
VCRs, etc (Score:5, Informative)
But the NYT summary has some interesting points:
KaZaA attorney Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm expected the Dutch ruling to be closely watched in the U.S., as his defense was partly built on a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court ruling which said manufacturers of video recorders are not liable if consumers use their products to abuse copyrights.
a step in the right direction.
Nice spin by Reuters (Score:5, Insightful)
Nice spin. Yes, there wasn't anything else at stake other than "copyright abuse". Nothing at all. And the efforts to halt copyright abuse? That's all they're trying to do - just halt abuse.
Sure.
Actually (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nice spin by Reuters (Score:2)
Now if they were refering to user's sharing music illegally, the term would be "copyright violation".
Now the way the MPAA and RIAA are trying to wield copyright and destroy fair use, *that* is what I would call copyright abuse. Maybe Reuters meant to say "victory" instead of setback, then they would be right..
Reuters is a laughing stock (Score:5, Interesting)
Ask anyone in the media business -- the newsfeed that comes out of Reuters has steadily degenerated over the past several years.
They say they apply the spin that they do in order to maintain impartiality and retain access in less friendly countries around the world. A rather infamous quote from them, in response to criticism of their coverage of September 11: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
However, in the process they have become nothing more than a clearinghouse for press releases. They no longer engage in any real investigative journalism because such investigations must have some angle going in and will always piss someone off. Reuters would rather keep their access and not step on any toes.
Stick to the Associated Press.
Re:Reuters is a laughing stock (Score:4, Insightful)
Take it up with the White House. "[The mujahideen, from whence sprange the taliban] are the moral equivalents of our founding fathers," [google.com], by a Mr R. Reagan.
Try and remember that Reuters are writing for the record, and that the definitions are always changing. Look at Arafat: terrorist, freedom fighter, or inspired statesman? Depends on whether a peace deal can be brokered, right?
But given that, it sucks even more that they chose to run this as an inflamatory anti-piracy story. Bear in mind though that it's entirely possible that the person who wrote it simply doesn't understand the issues.
Good News (Score:2)
Also, it'll be good news for the writers of Back Orifice, who can now publish their software quite freely, or sell it in PC World, since it's the *user* that's doing something wrong.
Re:Good News (Score:2)
So this will be good news for anyone who writes software that gets round e-book encryption. After all, its the user that's instructing the software to do it, just like the user is instructing Kazaa to download the pirated music.
If the only use of the software is to get around legally protected encryption, then the software is intended to perform an illegal act, and the software programmer intended it as such. (Yes, I agree that making it illegal is stupid, personally.) The Kazaa software, however, is not restricted solely to performing an illegal act, therefore it is the users that direct it to perform the illegal act, not the programmer.
Re:Good News (Score:2)
First hand story? (Score:2, Informative)
Why do they want damages? (Score:3, Funny)
What about the Terms & Conditions ? (Score:2, Interesting)
What part of responsibility or role do the hosting companies hold in this ? We provide an Acceptable Use Policy and I think if we had a Kazaa user as customer, trading MP3s, and we get a court order to cancel service, we'd have to.
Has anybody had such experiences/similar scenarios they'd share ? What are the implications of such a judgement on current AUPs legal documents in the hosting industry ?
Score one for sanity. (Score:5, Insightful)
The users on the other hand, are the ones who take the tool and turn it to evil (insert diabolical music track here), depriving the MPAA of their hard-earned money. Except well, most of the 'bad users' buy a lot more music than the 'good users' anyway.. and the MPAA execs don't actually create the music they sell.. hrmm...
It'll be interesting to see what impact, if any, this will have on filesharing software in North America. Given the typical 'Our laws apply to you but yours don't apply to us' view of the US legal system, I'd say not much. Eh, at best it might give the software producers a safe haven in which to register their businesses. Go global village.
Sanity: 1 Insanity: 27 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Score one for sanity. (Score:2)
and sometimes that 2 minute posting delay is a huge PITA
Re:Score one for sanity. (Score:2)
gee.. how i managed to confuse two power-hungry money-grubbing entertainment entities just baffles me... but yah it was a dumb mistake *grins* which i realised just after i hit "submit" of course.
Proud (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Proud (Score:2)
Hey! Hollings is an honest politician. When he's bought, he stays bought.
Re:Proud (Score:2)
Re:Proud (Score:2)
EFGearman
Re:Proud (Score:2)
Can this ruling help us in American courts? (Score:2)
Makes no sense (Score:2, Interesting)
- Do we charge gun manufacturers with murder?
- Do hold car manufacturers responsible for allowing people to operate their cars will intoxicated?
Yet for some reason people feel that those who provide the means to illegally copy software or music should be responsible for the actions of others.Re:Makes no sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Makes no sense (Score:2)
Ummm...yes. We do. See: http://www.ncpa.org/studies/s223.html
Now, whether that's a Good Thing (tm) or not is a totally different question.
Re:Makes no sense (Score:3, Insightful)
Do we charge gun manufacturers with murder?
The sad truth is that in America, many cities are suing the gun industry for "problems" caused by their "defective products." What a great way to spend taxpayer money. Fortunately, state governments are stepping in to stop this nonsense, but in some cases it is too late, the cities find themselves losing badly in these cases, and the money that could have been spent to hire more police and build more prisons has instead been wasted on litigation.
Do hold car manufacturers responsible for allowing people to operate their cars will intoxicated?
Considering that people sue the cigarette industry for their self-inflicted problems caused by voluntarily smoking, I think it is only a matter of time before we see this BS as well.
However, this same kind of ruling in the Dutch court can happen in the USA as well. VCRs and tape recorders (and most recently, the Diamond Rio) were once "illegal" because of industry objections, however, because it was shown that these devices were shown to have legitimate, non-infringing uses, they could not be banned simply because people would use them for infringing purposes. The problem with Napster was that its creators could not prove its whole raison-d'etre was not for infringing copyrights (that system being tied down to MP3s, along with the central-server architecture contributed big time to this).
In essence then, there is a significant legal precedent in the USA which should keep the developers of P2P software safe for the time being, even if laws were enacted to prevent such things, they would most likely be struck down because of precedent.
Re:Makes no sense (Score:2)
Re:Makes no sense (Score:2)
-russ
Once again common sense prevails... (Score:5, Insightful)
And instead of refocussing on the users of Kazaa who do illegal things (almost all users) all that corporate power should be spent building a system where people can legally obtain music. If the downloads are fast, the available tracks are 'what the people want' and the quality is good there is some serious money to be made. And the musicbusiness can have their precious profits back.
The Reuters summary. (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=in
heh (Score:2, Funny)
At that point, I started wondering if I needed more sleep.
Translation (Score:3, Informative)
The Court of Amsterdam has decided so this morning. The court has broken the decision from judge R Oribio de Castro in the affair that Buma/Stemra had against KaZaA.
Following the Buma/Stemra, KaZaA make it easier with it's software to break author-rights. The software was mostly used for music-swapping, with the authors NOT being retributed.
Oribio de Castro decided that KaZaA should take measure to prevent the breaking of author-rights. If KaZaA didn't take there in account, should the company get a big fine. The people from KaZaA decided then to sell the software to the australian company Sharman.
As it can be seen now, thuis was not needed. The court of Amsterdam decided in het higher appeal that KaZaA was right agaisnt the ruling of Oribio de Castro and can not be held responsible for the breaking of author-rights of the users of the program. "As far as author rights are concerned, the infrigements are done by the users of the computer progam and not by KaZaA".
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm is happy with the ruling but find the whole way the affair went "a little [zuur---acid ?]". The CEO Niklas Zennström got the ruling with mitigated feelings too. "For KaZaA, the ruling came too late. I hope that music-organisations like Buma/Stemra will now be ready to come to speak instead of going to the court", said Zennström.
The court has seen the difference between Napster and KaZaA as said Alberdingk Thijm. "With Napster, there is a central server, with KaZaA, not. To go further, KaZaA is not only about sharing of music files".
"What must still be seen is the meaning of the arrest for KaZaA" said KaZaA in a press declaration. The sharing diesnt said that they were forced to end their worldwide company activity by the earlier court ruling and have thus sold the most important company-parts.
This was acknowledged by the court too [Sorry, can't translate this]
This means that Buma had applied a ruling that was not valid, said Alberdingk Thijm. "In theory, Buma is responsible for the selling at a value much lower than it would have been otherwise". It is still unknown if there will be step taken against the athor-rights organization.
Buma/Stemra was unavailable for comments.
Human translation :-) (Score:5, Informative)
(Note: my English legal vocabulary is limited... but you'll get the gist)
Court: exchange service KaZaA is legal
Thursday, March 28 2002 The music exchange server KaZaA is not responsible for the copyright violations of the users of the program.
This is the decision of the court in Amsterdam. The Court nullified the decision of Judge R. Oribio de Castro in the case that Buma/Stemra [the Dutch copyright and royalties collector organisation] had set up against KaZaA.
According to Buma/Stemra KaZaA encourages with its program copyright violations The software is mainly being used to exchange music, without paying any royalty fees.
Oribio de Castro therefor declared that KaZaA should take countermeasures to end these violations of copyright. If KaZaA failed to comply, it would face severe fines. The founders of KaZaA then decided to sell the software to the Australian based Sharman company.
A bitter pill
Eventually, that hadn't been necessary. The Amsterdam Court ruled in the appeals case that KaZaA had set up against the sentence of Oribio de Casta, that KaZaA can not be held responsible for the copyright violations of the users of the program. "As far as there are any copyright relevant actions, these actions are performed by the users of the program and not by KaZaA"
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm is very satisfied with the ruling, but still finds the complete proceedings 'a bitter pill'. CEO Niklas Zennström also says he received the ruling 'with mixed feelings'. "It's too late for KaZaA. I hope that music organisations like Buma/Stemra will, in the future, be prepared to make a deal instead of going to court", says Zennström.
Alberdingk Thijm thinks the Court has seen the differences between Napster and KaZaA very well. "Napster has a central server, which is not the case for KaZaA. Plus you could exchange more than just music."
The practice
"It remains to be seen what the practical implications of this ruling are for KaZaA", says KaZaA in a press statement. The exchange service claims that by the previous ruling they had to cease their activities worldwide, after which she sold her most important company assets.
This is, by the way, recognized by the Court: "It is reasonable to assume that she would not have taken these measures if she would have been able to comply in any other way with the president's ruling."
This means that Buma has enforced a sentece that is not valid, explains Alberdingk Thijm. "In theory, Buma is responsible for the sale against a lower price than would otherwise have been the case". It is still unclear if they are going to countersue the copyright organisation.
Buma/Stemra was unavailable for comment.
Justification for CBDTPA? (Score:4, Insightful)
While this is a happy moment for common sense, this is just going to play into the hands of the CBDTPA supporters. The arugment will be that, given that piracy is rampant, the economics of prosecuting each and every infringer is overwhelming. The more economically efficient solution is to impose a technological lock on hardware to block such economic losses
We still need to get the argument away from the question of copyright infringement and onto the subject of copyright itself - why it exists, who and what it is supposed to protect, etc. This is not easy, but the public policy debate is misdirected now and we have to get it changed. Otherwise, this is going to just make things easier for Hollings
Who else can we blame? (Score:2)
Khalded and mIRC
Microsoft and Outlook Express (USENET binaries)
GetRight, Internet Explorer, CuteFTP (countless warez have been spread because of these programs)
And the list goes on....
This has been a 'duh' for ages. (Score:2, Insightful)
Does that mean that MS-Dos was illegal software because it allowed me to pirate games ?
It's frightening to think that these lawyers have gone through university, yet are so incredibly short-sighted.
European Judges are smarter (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:European Judges are smarter (Score:2)
Re:European Judges are smarter (Score:5, Informative)
Re:European Judges are smarter (Score:2)
"What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 85?"
"Your Honor."
["Your Honor" is the term used when addressing a Judge in the U.S., for those unfamiliar with the U.S. legal system]
How to win here in America (Score:2, Insightful)
Translation... (Score:5, Informative)
Courts: Exchange Service KaZaA is Legal
Thurs 28.03.2002 - The music exchange service KaZaA is not responsible for the copyright violations of users of its program.
That was the decision of the Court today in Amsterdam. The Court reversed the decision of Judge R. Oribio de Castro in the matter de Buma/Stemra had raised against KaZaA.
According to de Buma/Stemra KaZaA's program facilitated copyright violation. The software was used primarily for exchanging music without the authors rights being considered.
Oribio De Castro judged therefore that KaZaA had to take measures to stop copyright violation. Failure to do so would result in a heavy fine. The founders of KaZaA then decided to sell the software on the Australian firm Sharman.
A Little Bitter
That seems not to have been necessary. The Amsterdam Court overruled the judgement of Oribio de Castro, deciding that KaZaA was not responsible for the copyright violations perpetrated by its users. "Inasmuch as authors rights are relevant the actions are taken by the users of the software and not by KaZaA".
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm is very satisfied with the judgement, but was a little bitter about how the whole thing had run its course. Also the CEO Niklas Zennstrom took the judgement "with mixed feelings". "For KaZaA this comes too late. I hope that music organisations [publishers?] like Buma/Stemra will be more amenable to making an agreement rather than just taking it to the courts" according to Zennstrom.
The court clearly distinguished between Napster and KaZaA, according to Alberdingk Thijm "Napster has a central server, which is not the case with KaZaA. Furthermore, fate played to our side in that not just music can be exchanged with KaZaA".
Practical Application
"It remains to be seen what the practical application of this ruling is for KaZaA", said KaZaA in a press release. The exchange service said that the previous judgement forced the shutdown of their world-wide operations, after which they sold their most important business components.
This was recognized by the court: "One may assume that they [KaZaA] would not have taken these measures had they had in their power any other way to obey the [previous] judgement"
This means that Buma forced a judgement to be executed that was not valid, explains Alberdingk Thijm. "In theory, Buma is therefore responsible for the fact that the sale was done at a price much lower than was otherwise the case". It is not yet clear whether steps will be taken against the copyright organisation.
Buma/Stemra could not be reached for comment.
Machine Translations (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Machine Translations (Score:2)
RIAA sues Microsoft over illegal music sharing (Score:4, Funny)
An unnamed RIAA source tells Reuters "Shockingly, the ability to copy these files is built right into their Windows(tm) operating system!"
Though Microsoft claims the "built-in" programs have legitimate uses, the RIAA has doubts. "Really, what other use could there possibly be for programs like 'copy' and 'xcopy'. I mean, the one has 'x' in the name! It must be designed purely for stealing our profits."
The recording industry contends that it's not simply the ability to copy and listen to music that makes this software dangerous, but the fact that it is so easy for any pirate to do. "They can just drag and drop the files onto a disk and give them to their friends. They even have software which allows people to listen to music. If they simply insert a CD they purchased into their CD-ROM drive, Windows will play it automatically. It does this without charging the user or providing us with any personal information."
Our source even claimed that the software in question allows sharing over a network or the Internet. "Another apparent 'feature' of this operating system is the ability to share files over a network. They even make software available that allows users to create and host Internet sites where files can be downloaded by anyone in the world. These 'ftp sites' and 'web sites' are clearly meant only to violate our copyrights."
Microsoft contends that they have no control over their user's actions. "We are very serious about piracy, and do all we can to protect ourselves against it. However, the RIAA is going about it all wrong. They should really consider product bundling - it's been quite sucessful in protecting and expanding our own monopoly, it would surely work for theirs."
Re:RIAA sues Microsoft over illegal music sharing (Score:2)
Hot Damn! (Score:2)
BlackGriffen
Re: prostitution (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, dutch prostitution laws have a dark side as well. The reason is that prostution is now a legal business, which forces the owners to pay taxes, provide healthcare, have labor agreements, pay attention to municipal hygiene rules etc. Sounds nice doesn't it?
The reality is that prices for `legal' prostitution are going up, due to the legalization, and illegal immigrants (from outside of the EC) are taking over the market. Needless to say, these immigrants are often extorted, traded, threatened, abused and sometimes even murdered by their criminal pimps.
Sometimes, it's better not to legalize morally murky matters, such as prostitution. FWIW, marijuana is still illegal. Coffeeshops (where it is sold) have to buy it illegally, while they can sell it legally.
Re:Hot Damn! (Score:2)
please.. go get informed...
//rdj
Taken to its logical conclusion... (Score:3, Insightful)
Not so fast.
Don't be too overjoyed about this ruling. For a second, pretend that the U.S. Supreme Court makes a similar in favor of Napster, ruling that the company is not responsible for individual copyright violations. So, take this to its logical conclusion: In such a world, whats to stop the RIAA, MPAA, etc. from forming a BSA-like organization to go after individual file traders? Ever lookup the cost of copyright violations? Heck, the legal fees alone could sink anyone. Using some sinister methods, targeted lawsuits could do a lot of damage. The EFF couldn't possibly afford to step in.
Re:Taken to its logical conclusion... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Taken to its logical conclusion... (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't expect this to be over (Score:3, Insightful)
Kazaa now is Australian (Score:3, Insightful)
How will this be spun (used) by the RIAA? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think they will put some fire under their pet senators (Fritz Hollings D-Disney) for example to push even harder to shove the re-made SSSCA (what ever it is called now) down our throats.
And since M$ has a patent on DRM, it will be a double boon to the evil cabal because it will end this pesky monipoly business at the same time of giving total control to big media/software.
Just think about this
So, this Kazaa victory will end up as the battle cry of the "AE" to make sure they will take total control of this medium as have for all others
Non-NYT (no reg need) link, from Yahoo (Score:3, Informative)
at Yahoo [yahoo.com]
and CNET [com.com]
even USAToday [usatoday.com]
Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org) [sethf.com]
Re:Non-NYT (no reg need) link, from Yahoo (Score:2, Insightful)
In an unrelated story... (Score:3, Funny)
Sen. Hollings was later admitted to the hospital complaining of back pain after attempting to lift a giant sack of money that mysteriously appeared in front of his office door during the vote.
Re:Absolutely they should countersue... (Score:2)
Where's the if come from, you say? I think you just answered your own question.
Yes, it's sad that the government wastes money on frivolous lawsuits, and the only companies who can countersue are the ones who actually committed illegal acts (tobacco in the US with advertising-to-minors, for example). Unfortunately, I think the only way to stop that is by voting the offending people out of office.
Re:Absolutely they should countersue... (Score:2, Insightful)
Courts in Holland are not to keen on handing out high damages, and lawyers are paid by the hour, not with a cut of the loot. The term "American Situation" is accepted Dutch vocabulary for the frivolities of the US legal system, which shows how many Dutchmen think of it. (They're weary of it; paying lawyers just clogs the economy). Countersuing will clog the system only more.
Re:Guns dont kill people... (Score:2)
But all the same - take away everything capable of committing a crime, and the world would be pretty boring.
Re:Gnus dont kill people... (Score:2)
Re:Guns dont kill people... (Score:3, Funny)
guns & bullets don't kill people
blood loss and organ damage kills people
ha!
Re:Dutch (Score:2)
Re:Can it be appealed again? (Score:4, Informative)
TWW
Re:Can it be appealed again? (Score:2)
Good point. I have been saying this... (Score:2)
If copying music and distributing it without license is already illegal, then they should be going after individuals.
If they CANT or WONT, then the laws should be repealed.
The solution is NOT to make more laws to keep making it slightly more difficult for people to copy music.
Re:Good point. I have been saying this... (Score:2)
They do go after copyright violaters, namely large scale bootleggers, the only people I can without a second thought say are doing something that *should* be illegal. Sharing music on a large scale without profit shouldn't be legal, but it seems less bad and when you try to tackle that problem you start trying to define what a large scale is, and that will inevitably risk fair use priviliges....
Re:Wait, aren't most Slashdotters anti-gun? (Score:2)
A hot-headed moment with Kazaa is highly unlikely to end with a freshly-murdered, bleeding corpse on your hands.
A breach of trust on the part of someone using Kazaa is therefore completely insignificant compared to that of a gun-toting "friend" (do they have "non-friends" ?)
I could go on, but there's no point really. If you can't see it from the above, you never will.
Simon.
Re:Wait, aren't most Slashdotters anti-gun? (Score:2)
You cannot use a copy of Kazaa to kill someone.
While in general tools should not be banned for the sole reason that they could be used for evil, there is a limit to that argument.
Even the most gun-loving American Redneck would agree that nuclear missiles for everybody would be a bad idea. Even they draw the line somewhere.
Another difference is that most people are agreed that murder (in whatever degree) is to be avoided. On the subject of copyright infringement there is no such unanimity. Not even close. I for one don't think that it is necessarily bad in all cases.
Re:Sony v. Betamax, Not Guns (Score:3, Insightful)
You're ignoring the fact that there are legal uses for guns as well. Target shooting (featured in both the Summer and Winter Olympic games), Skeets, not to mention hunting.
Let's face facts. Both Kazaa and Small-Cheap-Saturday-night-specials do not themselves commit illegal acts. But they both are marketed to their intended audience as a means to commit illegal acts.
Gun manufacturers have put ads of gagsta-dressed men touting the concealability of their weapons (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). Kazaa does similar things - although I think we all can agree that distributing a music program isn't quite the same thing as murder.
So while I do agree that Guns/Kazaa aren't covered by existing laws, that doesn't mean they shouldn't be regulated in the future. I'd prefer a happy middle-ground where neither the RIAA nor the copyright thieves get all of what they want.