Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Government The Courts Your Rights Online News

Interview with Student Sued by RIAA 594

Posted by michael from the look-at-this-in-depth-analysis dept.
TinoMNYY24 writes "Jesse Jordan, owner of chewplastic.com, was on CNN this morning discussing the RIAA settlement. You can read a poorly spelled transcript of the interview. Jesse is one of the two students at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute that were sued by the RIAA."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Interview with Student Sued by RIAA More

Interview with Student Sued by RIAA

Comments Filter:

  • Poor Kid... (Score:4, Funny)

    by tony_ratboy ( 228844 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:19PM (#5893873) Homepage
    First he gets sued by the RIAA, then his personal web site gets Slashdotted.

  • As we have known all along (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Transient0 ( 175617 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:21PM (#5893896) Homepage
    One of the big problems with our legal system is that it is easy to bully someone with a frivolous lawsuit when they can't afford the time or money to defend themselves. As the defendant pointed out, a lawsuit against AltaVista would have just as much justification behind it (little to none) but they didn't go after them because AltaVista can afford to defend themselves.

    • Re:As we have known all along (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Keighvin ( 166133 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:29PM (#5893994)
      Such threats are called baratry, and as has featured prominently on /. serveral times it is now a viable economic model for some companies (especially those wielding unenforceable patents).

      The most disturbing issue about the RIAA's work to shut people down, is that they're going after those who do little economic harm in order to frighten their uninvolved or only marginally involved (in the file trading scene) supporters into compliance somehow. Why do you want to threaten your customers?
      • The most disturbing issue about the RIAA's work to shut people down, is that they're going after those who do little economic harm in order to frighten their uninvolved or only marginally involved (in the file trading scene) supporters into compliance somehow.

        For the record, those they chose to use as examples were not casual fil traders, they had (in general, can't speak for all of them) chosen to set themselves up as some sort of central clearing house, operating some sort of website/index to help/enco

    • Basic synopsis: he didn't want to end up like the goatse.cx guy... and find out years down the line that he was right all along. Better to pay off the extortionists and get on with life. Sad, but true.

    • My fix :-) (Score:5, Interesting)

      by A nonymous Coward ( 7548 ) * on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:38PM (#5894106)
      I'd like to see the legal system set up so that neither party can spend more than the other, with some minimum allowance. For instance, if the RIAA wants to sue a student, and the student doesn't want to spend more than $100, the RIAA can't spend more than that, plus some basic allowance, say $1000. If the RIAA wants to spend more, they have to get the student's permission to loan him the money, and if they lose, they don't get the money back.

      Apply it to governments too, so a state can't send in the well paid DA and his staff to prosecute some illiterate scum bag for a capital offense, while the public defender is only budgeted for one hour of time.

      And yes, I do know about snowballs and hell.

      • Re:My fix :-) (Score:5, Interesting)

        by realdpk ( 116490 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:42PM (#5894151) Homepage Journal
        How about this? If you prevail in a suit against you, you win the amount sued for! ;)

        So the RIAA comes after you for billions like they did here (IIRC?), you have a huge incentive to fight back and get justice. Then again, the RIAA wouldn't be suing folks for billions if they had that much to lose.
        • "if they could lose that much"

        • Re:My fix :-) (Score:3, Informative)

          by Skater ( 41976 )
          Because, even if you win, you have to fund the lawsuit for years until you do.

          There was a case years ago where a widow was suing an insurance company for the life insurance payment from the death of her husband. The insurance company dragged their feet for years, clearly in the wrong, but hoped she'd drop it. She didn't. She won punitive damages at the end ("unconscionable" actions by the insurance company) in addition to the amount she was owed to punish the insurance company for doing that, but there
      • Interesting idea. However, if bad megacorp has lawyers on retainer or staff, how would one determine exactly what it costs to send them to court?

    • Re:As we have known all along (Score:4, Insightful)

      by puppet10 ( 84610 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:51PM (#5894262)
      Another problem is that corporate officers and employees are shielded from civil action brought against a company because of the way corporations are set up. Thus the officers directing the company in a lawsuit against an individual in many ways have less to lose personally than an equally funded individual does in directing or defending a similar lawsuit.

    • Re:As we have known all along (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Boycott the RIAA. I've been doing it for years.
      The whole reason the RIAA is doing this is that they realize that technology has made them obsolete, and they don't know of any other way of dealing with it other than 'brute force' methods. The RIAA exists as a 'middleman' in the distribution channel. With internet file-sharing, downloading (legal or otherwise), ability to burn our own cd's, etc., we no longer need their distribution channel. They've been riding a fabulous gravy train (re: Pink Floyd 'Have

  • Let me get this straight...

    This guy ran a search engine on his PC that essentially turned every particpating client PC into a single unit of a JBOD RAID array?

    It would have been interesting to see the court case unfold if the guy had had the resources to fight

    • Re:Clarification of the 'offense' (Score:4, Informative)

      by Silvers ( 196372 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:35PM (#5894065)
      It simply ran a Windows Share crawler which indexed files people were already sharing over the standard Microsoft networking tools. When you searched, it would provide a link to the file in question with a url pointing to the windows name of the computer and directory the file was last indexed in.

      It is very very similar to google and web services. They both index public information, and rely on the technology of the client and server in question to procede further with the connection and transfers.

      The reason I think these students were targetted was because they also were sharing, or had on their computers music that (allegedly, this is what I hear) didn't belong to them. So while the lawsuit about the search engine itself is sketchy at best (imo, ianal, etc), if they didn't settle a music piracy suit could probably easily be brought up against them.

  • "poorly spelled transcript"? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Rayonic ( 462789 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:22PM (#5893913) Homepage Journal
    So... I hear that those glass houses are a bitch to cool in the summertime. :-)

  • Holy Columbine! (Score:5, Funny)

    by gpinzone ( 531794 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:23PM (#5893917) Homepage Journal
    Daniel Peng, one of the defendants at Princeton, may think that the lawsuit was "settled amicably", but I do not think that this is an "amicable" settlement. In fact, I am outraged. They will pay for what they've done.

    Hey RIAA, if you see a nerd dressed in all black wearing a trenchcoat, ala "the Matrix", coming into your building...DUCK!
    • Hey RIAA, if you see a nerd dressed in all black wearing a trenchcoat, ala "the Matrix", coming into your building...LAUGH!

      when you see him fall on his ass trying to do bullet time kung-fu.

    • Re:Holy Columbine! (Score:5, Funny)

      by gosand ( 234100 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:58PM (#5894373)
      Hey RIAA, if you see a nerd dressed in all black wearing a trenchcoat, ala "the Matrix", coming into your building...DUCK!


      Better yet... don't.


      Please note that I do not promote the killing of anyone. The RIAA is a figurehead, and my comments against it are merely symbolic.

  • Summary (Score:4, Insightful)

    by I am the blob ( 239590 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:23PM (#5893919) Homepage
    CNN: So, you can steal music with your tool, then?

    Student: Well, sorta. You can find any kind of document on the network with it.

    CNN: Like music.

    Student: Music, along with any other type of file.

    CNN: Illegal music.

    Student: Well, I suppose.

    CNN: So you're stealing music, then?

    Student: No.

    CNN: But you've created a tool for stealin music.

    Student: I've created a tool that is a search engine, like AltaVista or Google.

    CNN: There you have it, folks, one of the evil communists trying to get something for nothing.

  • Slip of the CNN anchor's words... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by moogla ( 118134 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:23PM (#5893929) Homepage Journal
    So what did the government... I mean the RIAA [claim you did]

    Sounds like something a slashbot^H^H^H^dotter would say about them. I agree with the goatse man post a few comments up.

  • This article has a great opening (Score:5, Funny)

    by Rev.LoveJoy ( 136856 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:24PM (#5893936) Homepage Journal
    Direct from CNN's bad transcript:

    ANCHOR: Hey, Jesse, why do you think the government came after you?

    JESSE JORDAN, SETTLED LAWSUIT WITH RECORDING INDUSTRY: Well, actually it was the recording industry association.

    Kind of hard to tell these days, isn't it?

    Cheers,
    -- RLJ

  • Did you see the spin... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gfxguy ( 98788 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:24PM (#5893937)
    The government came after you...

    Twice (although corrected the second time). Glad Jessie had the mind to correct the interviewer - it's not easy to think on national television - watching the news "professionals" should be evidence enough, think about when you're just a college student.

  • RIAA are poopy-heads. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:25PM (#5893941) Homepage Journal

    Smooth move, RIAA; this really endears your customers to you.. Talk about cutting your own throat.

    • Hey, they just know their classics (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Men are less worried about harming somebody who makes himself loved than someone who makes himself feared, for love is held by a chain of obligation which, since men are bad, is broken at every opportunity for personal gain. Fear, on the other hand, is maintained by a dread of punishment which will never desert you.

      -- The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • The scariest and best part is when the INTERVIEWER actually confused the RIAA with the Government. That sure gives the RIAA some big clankin' balls.

    Next... RIAA orders bombing of Canada, because its acutally legal to download music here!

    Ratboy666.

  • You've got to wonder (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Snowspinner ( 627098 ) <(ude.lfu) (ta) (dnaslihp)> on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:27PM (#5893966) Homepage
    How does the RIAA decide which students to sue? I mean, do they do careful research on who's most likely to settle, rather than contest it, or counter-sue for harrassment? Of all the piracy that goes on college campuses, how do they pick which people?

    Oh well. Pity that the record industry has had to resort to extorting $12,000 out of people who can't defend themselves who probably aren't doing anything illegal.

  • This is predatory (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Necrotica ( 241109 ) <cspencerNO@SPAMlanlord.ca> on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:27PM (#5893967)
    Its unbelievable that the RIAA would go to such lengths to make examples of these people. But what did they gain? The story mentions that the students settled but did not admit guilt. So the RIAA recoups "lost revenue" but did they really get what they wanted? An admission of guilt would have given the RIAA more ammunition for future witch-hunts. But on the other hand, now they know that they can coerce people out of ridiculous sums of money just by sharing MP3s. What will happen in the future?

    While I realize that what these people did is illegal why doesn't the American government try and come up with a reasonable solution to this?

    Any moment now I expect to hear a jarring noise and then Cardinal Ximinez, Cardinal Biggles, and Cardinal Fang bursting out saying "NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

  • From article: A few freshman machine came out of one their dorms, and they said, could you turn the volume down, we're trying to study for finals?

    Ah, the freshman machines... they were to beautiful then even with their freshman 15!

  • They sued? (Score:4, Funny)

    by RealBeanDip ( 26604 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:29PM (#5893982)
    They sued an interview? Man, those RIAA lawyers are slick!
  • I say it's time the people put forth a bill for all elections state and national to require full disclosure of all contributions. The current system allows for too much sneaky back room deals. This way everyone can see exactly which politicians are being bought out by which companies. That's the only real way people can make well informed decisions. Not, vote for the person with the best ad campaigns on TV.

  • Other methods (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Zelet ( 515452 )
    My family, friends, and I set up a network of FTP servers. Right now we have about 7 servers that I use regularly. A few are pop a couple indy and a few are rock. I can find anything I want within a couple of minutes. Anything I can't I ask the nodes and they will look in their network of FTP servers (friends of theirs that I don't know) usually this doesn't take long and the bandwidth is better than kazaa lite. I encourage each of you to teach friends and family how to set up FTP servers and sample yo
    • Kind of dangerous, isn't it? One of the benefits about Kazaa is its supposed anonymity in sharing files. If you set up an FTP server, wouldn't it be a lot easier for RIAA to find out who owns the server and shut it down?
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:Other methods (Score:3, Insightful)

      by aardvarkjoe ( 156801 )
      Remember to support your favorite artists and go to their concerts and buy their merch.

      I've never bought into this. I don't particularly want to go to concerts. I don't want T-shirts or other such stuff. What I want is a piece of plastic with the music on it; and I'm perfectly willing to pay for the privelege. If the band members signed a contract that doesn't give them money for it, I don't feel terribly sorry for them. I'm certainly not going to pay for something that I don't want, and then go and

  • Too bad no one came to the rally (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Patik ( 584959 ) * <cpatik@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:29PM (#5893997) Homepage Journal
    For the first time ever, I actually felt like protesting something. I showed up at around 1:40 (it should have started at 1:30) and there was absolutely no one there. Shame. Though it was probably because it was poorly advertised (a few posters and an email to a handful of people) and during finals week.

  • Where is the EFF? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rossjudson ( 97786 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:31PM (#5894015) Homepage
    This seems right up their alley...this kid was running a general purpose search engine. It indexes everything it finds. It returns results. He made no money off of it. He was intimidated into settling, pure and simple.

    Can I run a search engine now? Exactly HOW are google and alta vista immune from similar suits? Simple -- they can pay lawyers who could kick the crap out of the RIAA.

    It's a travesty of justice. I wish one of the multi-letter organizations would help this guy.

    • Re:Where is the EFF? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by st0rmcold ( 614019 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:38PM (#5894097) Homepage

      No you missed the point, along with the rest of the crowd here posting same as you.

      Notice how he said he's bringing the server back online when he gets back? He didn't settle due to the search engine, he settled due to his collection of mp3s, which he was clearly infringing on and there was no defense for that.

      The settlement had nothing to do with the fact that they created a search engine, because they clearly cannot go after such services.
    • Can I run a search engine now? Exactly HOW are google and alta vista immune from similar suits? Simple -- they can pay lawyers who could kick the crap out of the RIAA.

      You can run a search engine. And be immune. You can do it the same way that Google and AltaVista do it, and you don't even need lawyers.

      Just follow ALL of the relevant requirements of 17 USC 512 (specifically 512(d), (c)(2), (c)(3), and (i), IIRC). Which is not at all hard to do, and shouldn't seriously interfere with the legal use of your

  • RPI's other search engine [rpi-acm.org], run by a school-funded computer club [rpi.edu], was taken by the school's request [rpi.edu].

  • The whole thing doesn't sound right. He didn't fight because he has finals? Giving away $12,000 is worth having time to study for finals??
    Sounds like an elaborate plot created by the RIAA. this is a hoax to scare people..."Oh I don't have time or money right now to go to court over something I'll win...here's $12k, I have to go study. Thank you"
    Something is defiantly going on here...

    • When Were You Last Sued? (Score:5, Informative)

      by blunte ( 183182 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:39PM (#5894122)
      Consider spending months and months, and 100s of thousands of dollars to defend yourself.

      Yes you could countersue, and you might get your court costs covered. But where do you get the money you need to fight with (not even considering you might never get it back, even if you win)?

      The US justice system is a tool for people/companies with money. If you can't afford to fight a suit brought against you, then you have to settle (which despite not admitting wrongdoing, always makes you look guilty.)

    • Re:Conspiracy theory? (Score:2, Informative)

      by ldspartan ( 14035 )
      Speaking as an RPI student...

      RPI costs >$30,000 a year to attend. Assuming this kid is paying full price and living on campus, it comes out to somewhere around $17,000 a semester, plus incidental costs (books, etc). If he needed to do well in his finals to pass his courses, it would be more economical to pay off the RIAA than have a shitty semester.

      --
      Phil

    • Re:Conspiracy theory? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by SoCalChris ( 573049 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:49PM (#5894240) Journal
      Actually, this makes sense. How much money would he have been out if he had attempted to fight the lawsuit, and didn't pass his finals because of that? I'm pretty sure that Resalier (sp?) costs at least $12k/semester. Plus he would have been out a whole bunch of time that he spent working on passing those classes. He would have also had lawyer fees, and the time it takes to fight the lawsuit.

      So actually, the "Oh I don't have time or money right now to go to court over something I'll win...here's $12k, I have to go study. Thank you" makes perfect sense if you think about it. The RIAA realized that, and is probably one of the main reasons they chose to go after someone at a large university, instead of someone who was at a local community college with much less to lose by fighting.

  • Wow (Score:3, Funny)

    by tarsi210 ( 70325 ) * <[moc.ellarpnahtan] [ta] [nahtan]> on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:37PM (#5894085) Homepage Journal
    Something poorly-spelled on Slashdot? I can't imagine.

  • Oops... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:39PM (#5894120) Journal
    A. JORDAN: We didn't have any choice. The RIAA had a deadline. What they didn't tell the press, when they first hit Jesse with the papers, is while they were serving the papers on him, they also had a letter that they didn't give to the press and they told us that, oh, that was supposed to be the cover letter to the papers that he received, gee, we'll get it to right away. It was an offer to settle.

    that's a mighty convienent mistake considering the media attention this has gotten.

    I'd have to agree with the father, this was just a big PR trick for the RIAA and its a shame they aren't suing someone with the $$$$ to fight back.

  • limerick (Score:5, Funny)

    by Joe the Lesser ( 533425 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:40PM (#5894127) Homepage Journal
    There once was a man from RPI,
    who the RIAA decided to try,
    he was forced to settle,
    but we'll continue to mettle,
    and share musical art till we die.

  • RIAA/MPAA type attitudes cant win (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Honest Man ( 539717 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:40PM (#5894130)
    I believe Jesse Jordan's point to be the same as mine and many others hosting p2p-type networks, searches, etc. MP3 trading has not hurt sales of anything but music singles - do that math (since the RIAA obviously cant) and you'll see they only handle 4 billion a year in total cash flow, so unless they intend to show entirely different numbers reflecting a 100% loss in revenue I suggest they get a new story. Jesse Jordan is awfully brave though to admit he intends to bring his search back up in the next couple days. Not the smartest thing to say but at least he was honest about it. People have forgotten what 'fair use' means and the BONO term of copyright length is insane - the 14-year with one max 14-year extension for ALL works makes sense and is what our founders wanted. As for fair use, as long as we are not making a profit I don't see the problem, heck - music sales are holding strong when most other business markets are struggling so give me a break. This is the old VHS fight all over but this time we don't have big business on our side. They are more than willing to make mp3 players for us to use but if we go to jail or have to fight for our right to use them, too bad. So, I say to you RIAA/MPAA - Are you afraid to attack the big boys again for fear they will shut you down again? Come on, lets have you attack Sony or RCA or any mp3 player mfr and see how long it takes you to get smacked down. I'll just keep hosting my p2p hub thanks.
  • J. JORDAN: Yes, basically. I don't think it's going to work either. People are still sharing the same amount of files. There's still actually a search engine available right now at RPI.

    We'll see Jesse, we'll see ;-)

  • CONTRIBUTE (Score:3, Informative)

    by TinoMNYY24 ( 569172 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:45PM (#5894189)
    Help Jesse pay the $12,000. Go to Chewplastic.com [chewplastic.com] and click the "contribute via paypal" link that's at the top of the page right now. Fuck the RIAA.

    • Re:CONTRIBUTE (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Mononoke ( 88668 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @03:00PM (#5894387) Homepage Journal
      Help Jesse pay the $12,000.
      Why? He probably has a car that costs more than that. He's going to an outrageously expensive school. He'll probably see a 6-figure income the instant he gets out. Is he really poor enough to need our assistance?

      RIAA doesn't care who pays his fine. They get the money and publicity either way. If you wanna "fuck" them, give $12,000 to the EFF or ACLU or something like that.

  • Misleading... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Kazoo the Clown ( 644526 )

    There's really nothing in this interview that implies that the reason the RIAA went after him was because of the search engine and not some other reason-- such as him possibly having some bootleg mp3's on his computer. It seems likely to me that the reason he settled was because he in fact was doing or aiding some infringing in some more direct way and at this point he'd prefer everyone think that the RIAA went after him for some more arbitrary reason (as it makes him seem less guilty). Not that I agree w

    • Re:Misleading... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Eloquence ( 144160 )
      such as him possibly having some bootleg mp3's on his computer.

      Sigh .. having some "bootleg MP3s" on your computer is not going to get you sent to prison, or held liable. Copyright infringement is illegal, possessing copyrighted materials -- in whatever form -- is not. To prove copyright infringement, you have to prove that the person actually offered the files through a file sharing network. If he just obtained them through one, making a strong case for CI is very difficult for various reasons ("copy of

  • Interview with Student Sued by RIAA.

    Explain... are they suing the student, or are they suing the interview? This reminds me of the old "table for sale by lady with Heppelwhite legs" joke I heard in English class.

  • They edited it! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Andrevan ( 621897 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:53PM (#5894300) Journal
    They edited the transcript, it was really like this.

    REPORTER: Hey, Jesse, why do you think the government came after you?
    JESSE: Well, actually it was the recording industry association.
    REPORTER: Yeah, that's what I said. The government.

    :P

  • Hotbed for piracy (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mariox19 ( 632969 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:53PM (#5894303)

    For what it's worth, I lived down the street from RPI for two years, and it is a "hotbed for piracy," however the kid's father may protest.

    What you have, basically, is a campus full of geeks and alpha geeks, and the half-secretive tradition of cracking that goes with it. Years ago it was phreaking the telephones for long-distance calls (I got this straight from an alumnus), and people I know who still go there have told me that tons of students ("everyone" is the phrase he used) have hard drives full of MP3's.

    However one feels about so-called "sharing," it's only honest to admit that plenty of it goes on at RPI.

  • PayPal Donations? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by telstar ( 236404 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @02:55PM (#5894333)
    Is there anywhere to donate to help pay for the penalty these kids paid? I'd be happy to throw in a few bucks.

  • Cover Your Assets (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jhines0042 ( 184217 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @03:01PM (#5894403) Journal
    This disclaimer found on the Altavista MP3 Search page:

    Disclaimer
    Please be aware that the multimedia files referenced, made accessible or made available to you on these pages or by means of the AltaVista multimedia search engine are protected by the copyright and trademark laws of the United States and other countries. Therefore, you may need to obtain authorization of the owner of such materials before using them. Some of the multimedia content accessible through our search engine may be offensive to you. AltaVista accepts no responsibility or liability for such content, or your use of such content.

  • DONATE!!! (Score:5, Informative)

    by bert33 ( 655799 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @03:06PM (#5894457)
    The kid set up a paypal link on his site (chewplastic.com) so help him pay the rediculous extortion by the RIAA. I threw the kid $20 to help.

  • Guess I'm stupid, might as well share ... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pantropik ( 604178 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @03:37PM (#5894804)
    The courts just ruled in favor of Morpheus and Grokster, which are basically just search engines of another kind (compared to, say, Google).

    Now, if it's true that all these guys did was provide a search facility, why doesn't that ruling apply?

    If all they did was provide a means to search for information they do not control or distribute themselves doesn't that mean ALL search engines could be sued? I mean, dang, I can go to MSN right now and find any number of sites willing to give me cracks and CD keys for Microsoft products (among many, many others). Does this mean the BSA should go after the Microsoft Network for ... violating Microsoft's copyright and IP rights? AOL Instant Messenger and Yahoo! Messenger both allow users to share files (even entire directories). How is this different?

    I really don't get it. If it's as simple as that, why didn't any number of search providers and special interest groups (Google, MSN, Lycos, AOL, Yahoo!, EFF) step forward and say, "You know what, we don't think so. You will back off. You will do it now."

    What am I missing? They had to do something other than just provide a neutral search facility, right?

    Under the Morpheus/Grokster ruling they could claim they designed the engine just for legit uses (or just because they felt like doing it as an intellectual exercise) and cannot be responsible if individuals not under the creators' direct control use the tool for uses other than those for which it was intended.

    This goes back to the hammer analogy, I suppose: If I go to ACE and buy a hammer to bludgeon someone to death with, can the victim's family sue ACE and/or the manufacturer? That would be insane since the primary use of a hammer is not the braining of people who piss me off. Justification could be made for anything from automobiles to peanuts (ie, secretly feeding them to someone who is deathly allergic to them).

    If all they truly did was create a search engine, it seems to me the RIAA simply used its gigantic financial power (in the form of threats of endless, costly litigation) to extort money from a tiny foe because going after a much larger, more dangerous but identical (in principle) foe (such as Google, MSN or Lycos) wouldn't be so easy, and because certain foes (Morhpeus, Grokster) had already been declared off-limits.

    That is, I believe, the very defintion of "bully."

    • And another (hopelessly offtopic) thing ... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by pantropik ( 604178 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @04:29PM (#5895308)
      To the mods: I have Karma to throw away, so that's what I'm doing. This is a totally worthless rant and only marginally connected to the topic of this story.

      That said, I am so sick of hearing about litigation. It seems the Great American Dream is no longer to succeed in life through hard work, innovation and entrepreneurial prowess but to be on the constant lookout for someone to sue for wholly unrealistic sums.

      A few years ago I was at work and suddenly found myself in so much pain I actually went to my knees. It was as if someone was exploring my guts with a red-hot fist and anything but a gentle touch. That lasted a few minutes during which I was fairly certain I was going to die and pretty certain it would have to be an improvement.

      I was a healthy guy in my early 20s and had had no previous symptoms. The doctor at my HMO didn't see me straight away. I was seen by a nurse practitioner. She did a lot of tests, all of which came back negative right away or would take a day or more to show results. The abdominal X-Ray was mostly inconclusive, but I didn't appear to be bleeding internally. The nurse mentioned an MRI in passing and I immediately had the urge to bolt from the office -- I'm somewhat claustrophobic and pretty sure I'd go batty in that little tube. She smiled, said that was a common reaction and she didn't think it would be immediately necessary. She called in a nurse, they chatted; a bit later the nurse came back and said the only OpenMRI lab in town was booked solid for days.

      More tests. She went over my symptoms with me again, poked around on my stomach until I wanted to hurt her in various creative ways but in reality just laid there and tried not to cry while offering one emphatic "YES!" after another to, "Does this hurt?"

      She decided after that that I had pancreatitis, which is excruciatingly painful but never lasts more than 48 hours or so. She gave me a prescription for antibiotics and pain meds and I called my mom to come get me. The next day was hell. 48 hours! I figured I'd make it, if only just. But then 48 hours passed. And I went back. More tests, more head-scratching. I learned nothing new and was sent home. 72 hours. I felt a bit better, I supposed, or maybe I was just getting used to it. By the fourth day I was fine. It was later in the week that I found out what I'd really had: a small perforation in my stomach. I could have died at any point along the way. Surgery is usually indicated and the condition is considered immediately life-threatening. I was one of the rare few who have the things heal up on their own.

      Everyone said I should sue. Everyone said I should be seriously, litigiously pissed. Especially since the actual doctor didn't see me until AFTER the whole thing was basically over (on the third day, when I was showing improvement, at which she adopted a "Wait and see, but don't hesitate to get to the ER if it gets worse" attitude.).

      Except that I did a little research and I had perfectly described the symptoms of pancreatitis, apparently for good reason. It seems that acid from my stomach was leaking onto my pancreas (which is why it hurt a LOT more to lay down than to stand or sit, I guess). It was a perfect mimic. I was even sore in all the right places. A friend of mine has an uncle who is a trial lawyer and he was ready to jump all over it. "But I begged off the MRI," I told him. "But she didn't stress it hard enough," he replied. "The burden was hers, you have no medical training, you only knew you didn't want to get shoved in a dark hole. She was more than willing to comply because MRI's aren't cheap." To this day I don't actually know if an MRI would have helped. I suppose it would have shown the perforation the X-Ray missed. I suppose, in the end, it would have also caused me to undergo a surgery that, luckily, in the end I didn't need anyway. But ... that really was just luck.

      It went back and forth. In the end, I didn't sue. I might even h

      • WHY? (Score:3, Informative)

        by geekoid ( 135745 )
        so the next person doesn't die, thats why.
        The hospital will only change procedures if they get sued. She should have said "there could be a problem that mimics pancreatitis, so I strongly suggest you take an MRI" then scheduled for an emergency MRI.
        If at that point you failed to show up, or refused, THEN it is on you, but until she insisted she had not done due diligence.

        I am not a big SUE for anything type of person, but it does have other effect.

        Plus, you didn;t have to sue for millions, you could of su

  • He's now accepting donations (Score:4, Informative)

    by shinnyo ( 551702 ) on Tuesday May 06, 2003 @03:41PM (#5894850)
    Right before the site got /.'d he added a paypal donation thing to the top. For anyone that can't see the page anymore, the paypal address is jordaj@rpi.edu. The last time I saw the page there were 1200+ users online. If we all donate $10 that covers what he owes and he can use anything leftover to fight back against the RIAA. We all need to take some action against the RIAA before this gets even worse. Where this guy has already been in court with the RIAA and his lawyers are familiar with them, we could get him to take some kind of action against them with all of us supporting. I dunno, I'm not familiar with the legal process or how our laws work, but I know taking $12,000 from a poor college student for downloading a few mp3s is not justified.

Slashdot Top Deals

Were there fewer fools, knaves would starve. - Anonymous

Close