Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


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

Kazaa Ruled Legal in The Netherlands 313

Posted by michael from the good-place-to-start-a-business dept.
DreamerFi writes "Developers of Kazaa cannot be held liable for the way people use their software, the Dutch Supreme Court has ruled. The dutch version of the RIAA, BUMA Stemra is now expected to start lawsuits against individuals, following the american lead, according to dutch news channels."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kazaa Ruled Legal in The Netherlands More

Kazaa Ruled Legal in The Netherlands

Comments Filter:

  • rant time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:47AM (#7763847) Homepage Journal

    Well d-uh.

    Any successful attempt at making code illegal will just turn it into samizdat and speed the adoption of encrypted & anonymous P2P apps (ala FreeNet). It's too bad the recording industry doesn't put as much effort into signing new and original bands as they do fighting to protect their antiquated business model.

    Yes, I buy CDs but nothing you'd see on a Top 40 chart, will that make me a criminal one day?

    • Re:rant time (Score:5, Funny)

      by ArmenTanzarian ( 210418 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:49AM (#7763872) Homepage Journal
      Your refusal to buy Justin Timberlake CD's has been noted. Please save us some time and handcuff yourself before we get there.

      - Die Nationale Sozialist... ich meine... RIAA
      • Since Christmas are very few days away...
        Check out What a crappy present [whatacrappypresent.com] (CDs make bad gifts for kids).
      • "Please save us some time and handcuff yourself before we get there."

        The East Point Georgia Police department has made arresting yourself easy with thier Citizen's self arrest form.

        [eastpointpolice.org]
        All you pirates head here to turn yourself in

    • Re:rant time (Score:4, Funny)

      by AKnightCowboy ( 608632 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:38AM (#7764443)
      It's too bad the recording industry doesn't put as much effort into signing new and original bands as they do fighting to protect their antiquated business model.

      Yea, that's what I tell Microsoft when I pirate their products too. If only they weren't such monopolists and came up with a better business model to promote a more open software industry, I wouldn't have to pirate Office and Windows 2000. The damn stuff is like crack cocaine! I can't help myself! Honest officer! It's all Microsoft's fault! It's the 21st century, personal responsibility is dead.

    • Re:rant time (Score:3, Informative)

      by bev_tech_rob ( 313485 )
      At the same time, see article [cnn.com] from CNN this morning saying that the methods that the RIAA are using to find infringers is not legal....go Verizon, Go!

  • A victory for common sense (Score:3, Interesting)

    by L-s-L69 ( 700599 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:49AM (#7763868)
    Nuff said.

  • P2P RIAA, and all that shit (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mpost4 ( 115369 ) * on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:50AM (#7763883) Homepage Journal
    Because of all this shit over music I have stoped buying. I use to try out stuff on the old napster (tells you how long ago that was) and if I liked I would get the CD, but now that the RIAA (and co.) has made it clear they don't want my busness, I have stoped, stoped listening and stoped buying. And the radio music stations have way to many comercials to be enjoyable. I have moved on to talk radio, and I have to say I think I enjoy talk radio more, and there seams to be far less comercials then music radio. Good by music, hello talk.
    • I have stoped, stoped listening and stoped buying.Same here, and I advocate your choice. In my case I'm a DVDjunkie, but my titles mostly include independent stuff like "Ghetto Brawls" and anything by Teckademics street racing. Musically, I'm stuck with whatI have, 5000 mp3 of 70s-90s music, an era right before all the artists (including Metallica) started sucking (including Pepsi in your lyrics isn't gonna sway a consumer to buy your CD).

      Although I don't have a plan for the future of the music industry,

    • agree with you there (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Diaspar ( 319457 )
      I was really sick and tired of buying a CD and having to skip most "non-advertised" songs. What da hell?! i don't listen to radio much either, mostly in the car, but the commercials HAVE gotten annoying.

      What I have found more enjoyable is actually internet radio. there seems to be plenty of choices, and non-stop supply of music. There are less and less free stations now, but even if you pay $10 or so per month and have a month of music to enjoy it still beats buying 4 cds and getting sick of them in a wee
    • It seems that you have also 'stoped' using the spell checker.

  • Yes! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by radicalskeptic ( 644346 ) <x AT gmail DOT com> on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:51AM (#7763886)
    Ah, it's refreshing to see some sanity in the courts, even if it is on another continent. If the courts blame kazaa for what its users do, it would logically follow that we'd have to blame gun manufacturers for the actions of bank robbers, blame car manufacturers for the crimes of people involved in hit-and-run accidents, and blame alcohol manufacturers for the stupid things drunk people do.

    • Re:Yes! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mopslik ( 688435 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:02AM (#7764025)

      That's already happened.

      blame gun manufacturers

      New York Sues Gun Makers [bbc.co.uk]

      blame car manufacturers

      Car manufacturers, dealers and mechanics are sued for consequences of breakdowns [legalsurvival.com]

      blame alcohol manufacturers

      Bourbon Drinker Sues For Son's Birth Defects [millersv.edu]

      • Re:Yes! (Score:2, Insightful)

        by codefool ( 189025 )
        From the above cited article Bourbon Drinker Sues For Son's Birth Defects:
        In his opening statement April 24, a lawyer for the Thorps, Barry M. Epstein of Newark, N.J., said he intends to prove that Michael was the victim of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and deserves enough money to take care of him for the rest of his life.

        Every time I read a statement like this, I consciously append "... less 30% and expenses."

      • It's absurd, but it's really no surprise. Big government teaches us that we are not responsible for our own actions. Goverment provides the incentive to sue not for justice, but for quick and easy profit. Absurd lawsuits only exist because government is willing to acknowledge them.

    • Re:Yes! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by w128jad ( 643759 )
      Can anyone say Tobacco lawsuits?
      We are quickly becoming the "poor me" society here in the US.

      Although I detest smoking, and the tobacco companies, anyone that actually ever thought that breathing smoke wasn't harmful lacks common sense.

      It goes like this: make fire, breath smoke, cough, cough, die. Any firefighter could tell you that.
      • I agree with your 'poor me' sentiment, but there was much more to the lawsuits than your acknowledging. First off, the tobacco companies added addictive chemicals and targetd children. They also obstructed reports of the health hazards for as long as they could. And it hasn't always been common sense that smoking is bad for your health. Especially before all the extra chemicals were added to get people hooked on it. I could be wrong, but I don't think the lawsuits were like civil suits by individuals, or ev
      • The Tobacco lawsuits happened because the Tobacco industry intentionally lied about the harmful effects of their products, colluded to contain such information or destroy it, and hire firms to showcase that in fact, cigarette smoking was not harmful to the person smoking or others around them.

        They also purposely advertised to children and teenagers to hook new users for life, as their more profitable users were dying of cancer and other illnesses.

        Tack on the fact that they mislead their own users by marke

    • Re:Yes! (Score:3, Funny)

      by sangdrax ( 132295 )
      I like my weed, whores, whiskey and WMA's legal but guns banned, thank you :)

      Greetings from Holland.

  • Why don't they just sell the music? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I use Kazaa to find the music that the recording industry refuses to sell online OR in CD stores. If they are so concerned about losing revenue, why don't they just sell the music?
    • Because that would make too much sense.

      The whole point is to create rarity in the market, my friend. They sit on crap for 30 years, because they CAN, because they own it. Slowly, the existing copies disappear -- misuse, breaking of LP decks/8-track players, obsolescence of the playback technology.

      Then, when just about nobody can play them back even if their original copy is still in decent shape, they release a "new" edition and charge ridiculous amounts of money for something that, though they claim it's

  • This is the way it should be!!!!!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:52AM (#7763904)
    The dutch version of the RIAA, BUMA Stemra is now expected to start lawsuits against individuals, following the american lead

    It's about time some judge realizes that P2P is perfectly legal. If there is illegal activity going on (piracy), then it is up to the authorities/owners to find out who the perps are, and do what they feel is necessary.

    Hopefully, if these RIAA-led anti-piracy campaigns are successful, it will be more ammo against the DMCA. After all, why would that unconstitutional law be necessary if they have a more effective means of enforcing their copyrights?

  • Ok but seriously... (Score:5, Funny)

    by FrankGibson ( 722021 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:53AM (#7763907)

    What isn't legal in the Netherlands?

    My blog [s200.org] | My webcomic [combustibleorange.com] | My other webcomic [moviepoopshoot.com]

    • Re:Ok but seriously... (Score:5, Informative)

      by fruey ( 563914 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:58AM (#7763977) Homepage Journal
      Most stuff that Holland is famed for is indeed illegal: they adopted a stance of decriminalising which is, quite frankly, the best way to go. You still can't deal massive quantities of dope or run prostitution scams involving pimping and extortion. The laws are just relaxed at a small time level and for people who pay their taxes on products and services that they buy. Black market activity (which usually means higher quantities or non declared employment) is still illegal.

      • Re:Ok but seriously... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:09AM (#7764105) Journal
        Most stuff that Holland is famed for is indeed illegal: they adopted a stance of decriminalising which is, quite frankly, the best way to go. You still can't deal massive quantities of dope or run prostitution scams involving pimping and extortion. The laws are just relaxed at a small time level and for people who pay their taxes on products and services that they buy.


        Decriminalising is exactly what they did not do! Holland is famous for our "gedoogbeleid", which means "the policy of turning a blind eye". most of the stuff we are famous for is still illegal; these law are simply not enforced. While I think taking small-time dealing and usage of soft drugs out of the arena of criminals is a good thing, I do not think that not enforcing the laws is the way to do it. Either something is illegal or it isn't. Make the laws accordingly.

        Why? Because many of these issues are fundamental questions that should be answered by parliament. As things stand now, these issues are handled on a local level ie. by municipal governments, since they simply can choose to enforce (or not enforce) these laws. The "gedoogbeleid" gives them that power.

        • Re:Ok but seriously... (Score:2, Interesting)

          by jrest ( 539296 )
          I have to disagree with you. I can not believe that in other countries all criminal acts are acted upon by law enforcement.

          My opinion is that this "gedoogbeleid" happens in other countries too. But then why do we Dutch think we are the only ones having it?
          Recently there have been some incidents (fireworks explosion in Enschede, fire at new-years party in Volendam) where poor law-enforcement has been part of the discussion. However, I think that a major reason why soft-drugs usage, copyrighted file tradin

          • My opinion is that this "gedoogbeleid" happens in other countries too. But then why do we Dutch think we are the only ones having it? Recently there have been some incidents (fireworks explosion in Enschede, fire at new-years party in Volendam) where poor law-enforcement has been part of the discussion.

            The difference between 'gedoogbeleid' and what you describe as happening in other countries (and Holland as well), is that 'gedoogbeleid' is just that: an official policy. I'll illustrate with some exampl

      • You still can't deal massive quantities of dope

        Can't you? [expatica.com]

    • Re:Ok but seriously... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by HiQ ( 159108 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:58AM (#7763978)
      Well, riding a bicylce at nigth without lights. And the police in Amsterdam are checking this like mad. On the other hand, since last week people smuggling up to three kilograms of coke into the country just get sent away. They don't get arrested, they will just be sent away. Amazing country, this! It's just that we don't have enough prison cells, so over here it's better to smuggle large amounts of drugs than to ride a bike without lights. ** blink, blink **
      • The moral of the story? Always have a working headlamp when your smuggling copious amounts of cocaine on your bicycle.

        "Say hello to my little friend." Tony Montana on a big wheel.

        --
      • Well, the plan on letting people who have just smuggled up to 3 Kg of white powder go without a warrant was nothing but a 'luchtballon' (en: hot-air balloon) 'let up' by the clueless minister Donner of the dutch ministry of justice.

        He got flamed so bad, that this ridiculous plan will never see the light of day.
    • Ok, a bit off-topic but even importing 2.9 kilograms coke is illegal but you don't get punished and just sent back to where you came from.

      This is only valid if you travel from one of the Dutch carribean islands (For instance Curacao).

  • Ok.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JawFunk ( 722169 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:54AM (#7763917)
    If the KaZaa software itself is legal is the smaller battle. The BUMA can still sue people the way the RIAA does in the US for downloading copyrighted music files. So far, suing has been the main repercussion from KaZaa and file sharing. Once a court upholds that I cannot be sued for downloading such files, be it using direct connect, gnutella, KaZaa, then we'll have gotten to the next step. Until, then, I definately approve of this courts decision.

    Let's say I use Quickbooks to bookkeep an illegal betting service at my school. Is someone going to sue Quicken Software (or whoever the mfg is) for my use of their software. NO! If anythingthey should allow programmers and designers to learn from the program and develop new ideas on future software. The fact the KaZaa had to be established on the Island of Vanuatu, where corporate laws are far different form US or other westernized economies is ridiculous! Let business flourish! As Adam Sith would say: "laissez faire!"

    • Re:Ok.... (Score:4, Informative)

      by roalt ( 534265 ) <slashdot.org@roa l t . com> on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:10AM (#7764119) Homepage Journal
      ...The BUMA can still sue people the way the RIAA does in the US for downloading copyrighted music files. So far, suing has been the main repercussion from KaZaa and file sharing. Once a court upholds that I cannot be sued for downloading such files, be it using direct connect, gnutella, KaZaa, then we'll have gotten to the next step...

      In the Netherlands downloading .mp3s is NOT illegal (AFAIK I think it's even proved in court), but sharing them (making them available for others to download) IS.

      The later one will be the next step of our local RIAA (called Buma/Stemra).

      • "In the Netherlands downloading .mp3s is NOT illegal (AFAIK I think it's even proved in court), but sharing them (making them available for others to download) IS."

        So I'm wondering, why hasn't some enterprising company moved offshore, and shared up all the files to places where it is legal to download, but not share? It could be a subscription service, or they could pay with ads etc. Would this solve the legality issue?

    • Let business flourish! As Adam Sith would say: "laissez faire!"


      You're right. and your sister is kind of hot, so why not legalize prostitution while we're at it. And why not legalize crack and heroin too? It's all in the name of business. How about contract killings next? /sarcasm

      I'm not implying that Kazaa has a responsibility to police it's users, I'm just commenting on parent's "laissez faire!" attitude.
      • well... prostitution IS legal in the netherlands(this had nothing to do with business interests, there are now less brothels than before legalisation. it was done to stop human trafficking..
        • yup. I've been there. It's not legal in America though, except somewhere out in Nevada (I think). My point is that a business above-all attitude doesn't work because there are other considerations, namely a conservative agenda that denies recreational and medicinal use of basically harmless drugs (marijuana, LSD, MDMA). Prostitution i really don't care for, but properly regulated (for safety reasons) i am ok with it.
    • "Once a court upholds that I cannot be sued for downloading such files, be it using direct connect, gnutella, KaZaa, then we'll have gotten to the next step."

      And why would/should they do that? I think the RIAA is well within their rights to sue people who download songs they did not purchase.

      If you want to listen to the music the RIAA sells, you should pay for it. If you don't want to pay for it, you shouldn't listen to it.

      If you insist on making the third choice, downloading/listening to music you

  • individuals?? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Dreadlord ( 671979 )
    You mean 12-year-old girls? This isn't going to help either, the only way to solve the p2p piracy thing is to provide better ways for the customers to get music without them feeling robbed, buying a CD with 1 good song, and 10 fillers doesn't make the customer feel right at all, so customers use p2p instead.
    Napster and iTunes are good steps on the way, lots of people are buying music through them instead of the old, above mensioned ways.

    • Re:individuals?? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by philbert26 ( 705644 )
      You mean 12-year-old girls? This isn't going to help either, the only way to solve the p2p piracy thing is to provide better ways for the customers to get music without them feeling robbed, buying a CD with 1 good song, and 10 fillers doesn't make the customer feel right at all, so customers use p2p instead.

      If you don't like Windows or Mac OS, for whatever reason, does that make it OK to use a pirated version? Shouldn't you use Linux instead? If people stuck to legal software, Linux would probably be much

      • I don't like this idea that because the RIAA provides poor value for money, it entitles people to violate the copyright law. If you don't like the licensing terms, don't use the product. We complain if GPL code gets ripped off. If that copyright should be respected, why should others be ignored?

        Good point, but I'm not saying that it's OK to violate laws (download pirated music) when there is nothing better you can do (buy single tracks for a reasonable amount of money), what we can really do is tell the

  • The Dutch are right (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fruey ( 563914 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:55AM (#7763927) Homepage Journal
    No point making software illegal. The concept is out there, and not so hard to implement, so stopping Kazaa is just like taking a cup of water out of the sea and hoping that you'll stop the tides.

    So kudos to the court, who are dead right. Kazaa should not be a special case and made illegal, just like video recorders, DVD burners, CD burners, cassette recorders, MP3 player/recorders, codecs, etc etc. The music industry reply is that the files could easily be filtered to stop copyrighted material from being shared. I beg to know how they propose to find out from an MP3 file whether it is copyrighted; the "copyright" bit in the files is removeable so that's not a solution is it?

    • No point making software illegal. The concept is out there, and not so hard to implement, so stopping Kazaa is just like taking a cup of water out of the sea and hoping that you'll stop the tides. So kudos to the court, who are dead right.

      Well, that was not the reasoning of the court. The case in first instance was that the copyright association should continue talks with Kazaa on how to tackle copyright fees. Some people think the associations stopped the talks under pressure of the RIAA. The case has be

    • There is a very easy way to tell if something is copyrighted. Just ask yourself the following question:

      Was it created within the last 70something years?

      If the answer to that question is "yes" then there is a very good chance that the file is copyrighted. A creator has a copyright on his/her creation the moment it is created, whether he/she chooses to register the copyright or not (though registering the copyright makes it easier to defend against infringement). That copyright lasts until the government s

  • Just like the Canadians (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:55AM (#7763936)
    We (the dutch) pay an extra tax (something like 50 cents) on each blank CD, and up to 1.50 on blank dvd's.... It really gets my heartrate going when I think about that.
    • No. You (We) pay 0.50 Euro per DVD+RW and 1 Euro per DVD-RW
    • Heavy taxation is the best thing for helping the free market or the Austrian-libertarian/anarchocapitalist idealism. When you tax an item, overregulate it, or even criminalize the use of said item, you create a black market. The black market has no taxes, and is generally cheaper to use than the white market -- in some cases its the only way to get said item or service.

      When an item is taxed, it forces people to pay more. If people think they are paying too much, they will find a way around it.

      I say let
    • Ouch!

      Most countries have a high tax, but if you are right, your country's taxes on media are the highest I've heard. The final cost per disc is pretty much double or triple the amounts I pay.

  • Only decision on the programme (Score:5, Informative)

    by Groote Ka ( 574299 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:57AM (#7763953)
    I've read the first part of the 37 page decision [rechtspraak.nl] (sorry, in Dutch. duh...). Well, we don't have a decision on the use of Kazaa yet.

    Furthermore, this decision only affects distribution from The Netherlands. The advocat general briefly touches US, UK and German law, but does not draw any conclusions from this.

    So, also regarding the recent decisions in California, Kazaa will probably live as a programme.

    However, the BUMA/STEMRA (dutch equivalents of the US RIAA) will probably start now with lawsuits to individual end-users who offer large amounts of files on-line. A lot of case law with respect to tort by offering infriningement illegal information on-line is already available, so the real ground battle can start. Bring in the grunts (copyright lawyers, that is).

  • sigh... you know kazaa should be guilty right? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:57AM (#7763955)

    They blatently prodice a place/means for people to illegally share copyrighted material. this is its major purpose, and the kazaa developers know that.

    If you know about a crime, and you don't do anything about it (or at least try to) you are breaking the law in many places. The fact that Kazaa has not ever tried to limit the music swapping is proof that they should be found guilty of at least neglegence.

    Just because you provide a warhouse where people can trade goods, if the goods are mostly stolen property, and you know that, you are in deep shit.

    I'm posting AC because this will likely get modded down, but this is the way it is people.
    • Just because you provide a warhouse where people can trade goods, if the goods are mostly stolen property, and you know that, you are in deep shit.
      Not so. You can expect a visit from the police to see if you yourself took part in traficking of stolen goods, but no more.

      They cannot even shut you down... what they can (and will) do is revoke the license you usually need to host a market such as this.
    • You are making an incorrect analogy. US courts have found that 'warehouse-owners' that set up piracy rings are liable for contributory/vicarious copyright infringement. Yet where is the warehouse in the Kazaa (or Gnutella, any decentralized p2p) example? What property does Kazaa own that is used to set up a piracy ring? P2P programs are disintermediated from the piracy transactions. So your analogy fails.

      Suing users, though absolutely idiotic and comtemptible, is the correct legal remedy.
    • Kazaa, and other truly decentralised p2p software clients have no control over what what files pass through the network.

      Unlike napster 1, who provided the central server for passing on who was sharing what, kazaa have NO ability to tell what is being shared.

      Napster were the warehouse owners; kazaa are more like warehouse builders, who then sell them on to other people.

      They don't know what infringements are being made, and don't want to. They join the long list of people who provide a tool with legitimate

  • That would be a turnabout (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Scarblac ( 122480 ) <slashdot@gerlich.nl> on Friday December 19, 2003 @09:59AM (#7763987) Homepage

    A couple of months or so, Buma/Stemra's spokesman had a media interview, in which he said that they would not be suing consumers until there was a good commercial music download option for consumers in the Netherlands. Apparently, at that time they felt (correctly) that the country would be in an uproar if they started suing consumers over trading.

    So if they started suing now, that would be in direct contradiction of their earlier statements (and it would be extremely unpopular, I could even see it leading to a law that makes music sharing over the Internet explicitly legal). In current law, downloading is legal, uploading is not.

    And anyway, all they could get in a lawsuit is an order for the person to stop sharing, I think, as long as there's no commercial piracy involved.

    • the country would be in an uproar if they started suing consumers over trading.

      I have lived in Europe long enough to know this to be true. When there is injustice or unfairness these days in westernized European coutries, people rebel, especially in technologically eveloved and dependent nations. The same should happen in the US. Unfortunately, despite our liberties, we are not inclined to organize and protest. Rather, we prefer to accept decisions at face value and obey them best we can, rather than w

  • new technology (Score:2, Insightful)

    by danidude ( 672839 )
    When the VCR came out, the cinematography industry cried out that they would be destroyed. When the TV came out, the redio stations said that this would be their end. When the computers began, people said that paper would stop being used. Nonsese. Istead of trying to defeat the tide, musical industry should embrace mp3 and find a new bussines model. And I think they will, eventually, but not until they squeez the last dollar from this model.

    • Re:new technology (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "musical industry should embrace mp3 and find a new bussines model"

      Interestingly, a lot of the people saying this are also saying "We shouldn't have to change careers, we're entitled to our jobs, mean ol Bush is sending all our jobs overseas, wah wah wah!", and then they get all pissy when you say "Deal with it, adapt, change, overcome. Everyone else has."

      (Not saying you're that type, just pointing something out that's been bugging me, that finally clicked when I read your post)

  • Not Another Penny From Me (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Schlemphfer ( 556732 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:04AM (#7764043) Homepage
    I think the main thing I've learned by following the RIAA and associated international bodies over the past few years is that what we have here is essentially a cartel, that will do everything possible to keep its outdated business model intact.

    I wish back in high school that I could have known that, when I was buying records, I was providing the bands I liked with almost no financial support. More than 95% of my purchase price was going straight to one of the most corrupt industries on the planet.

    I'm not at all surprised to hear that the Netherlands' version of the RIAA is now going after individual users. The industry has clearly decided that the threat of litigation is about the only thing that's going to keep people buying CD's.

    Except for one tiny thing. In the process of trying to scare people, they've made people like me their lifelong enemies. Now, where music is concerned, I have only two ambitions: one is to give the artists I like as much support as possible. And the other is to not give another penny of my money to RIAA labels. Quite simply, the RIAA has a completely different vision of the future than that of music lovers. They want to keep themselves as the middlemen in perpetuity, despite the fact that technology has the potential for making major labels irrelevant.

    That's one reason why, as much as I love the iTunes radio store, I would never purchase an album from there that was produced by an RIAA affiliated label.

    What people disgusted by RIAA actions need to do is to work hard to educate the public about why the industry does not deserve our support. Music lovers ought to be doing everything possible to starve out the RIAA affiliated labels, and to channel as much of their entertainment dollar directly to artists. And we should especially support artists who are wise enough to help us in this task -- artists who sign with magnatune, [magnatune.com] or who have a website set up so that they keep the bulk of every purchasing dollar.

  • irony (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mraymer ( 516227 ) <mraymer.centurytel@net> on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:05AM (#7764061) Homepage Journal
    I still find it ironic that software which is primarily used to violate copyright law (I know there are legitimate uses, but let's be realistic here) is protected by copyright law, and they won the case against the Kazaa Lite folks.

    However, I don't see how this ruling changes anything. It doesn't matter what is legal where, because people will always find a way to swap files. There are a million peer-to-peer apps, there's IRC, there's UseNet... I cannot see how any ruling in any country is really going to change the way things are, because I cannot see how any nation can actually enforce that ruling. Perhaps that's one of the reasons they didn't rule against it in the Netherlands. How do you stop a country from swapping files? Even the RIAA with its police powers isn't able to do that here.

    I'd like to believe that more workable business models will evolve that can exist peacefully with file swapping, but I guess only time will tell.

  • Punk Rock store owner looking for labels! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dada21 ( 163177 ) <adam.dada@gmail.com> on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:22AM (#7764253) Homepage Journal
    This is obviously off topic, but I need help...

    As a retail store owner of a punk rock music shop, I really want to open a section (and eventually make it my only section) of "Non RIAA Punk Rock music." It should be bands of national scale, doesn't have to be popular bands, and definitely shouldn't be radio or MTV bands.

    Does anyone have a link or knowledge of which labels are not RIAA linked? The distributors have no idea...

    • Here you go: RIAA Radar [magnetbox.com]
    • "Does anyone have a link or knowledge of which labels are not RIAA linked? The distributors have no idea..."

      I believe you can find the list of RIAA affiliated labels on their webpage here [riaa.com].

    • I guess it's not exactly what you're looking for, but this might still interest you: I recently read that the new CD of German band 'Die Aerzte' (actually written with an umlaut-A instead of Ae, but, you know, slashdot ...) was for many people the first album they had bought in a _really_ long time, because the cover boldly exclaims something along the lines of "fuck copy protection". In Europe, problems with copy-protected CDs that don't play in many (or even most) players already started surfacing years a
  • Craftsman Tools can not be held liable when people drive around town throwing hammers at innocent bystanders. The judge was quoted as saying "just because a tool can be used for something illegal, doesn't mean it encourages illegal activity and should be held liable for such activity."

  • Verizon WINS! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cosmicpossum ( 554246 ) on Friday December 19, 2003 @10:50AM (#7764585)
    This just in:
    From The Associated Press:

    Dec 19, 10:45 AM EST

    Record Industry May Not Subpoena Providers

    By TED BRIDIS
    Associated Press Writer

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court on Friday rejected efforts by the recording industry to compel the nation's Internet providers to identify subscribers accused of illegally distributing music online.

    In a substantial setback for the industry's controversial anti-piracy campaign, the three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia overturned a ruling by the trial judge to enforce a copyright subpoena.

    U.S. District Judge John D. Bates had approved use of the subpoenas, forcing Verizon Communications Inc. to turn over names and addresses for at least four Internet subscribers. Since then, Verizon has identified dozens of its other subscribers to music industry lawyers.

    The appeals court said one of the arguments by the Recording Industry Association of America "borders upon the silly," rejecting the trade group's claims that Verizon was responsible for downloaded music because such data files traverse its network.

    Verizon had challenged the constitutionality of the subpoenas under the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

    The law, passed years before downloading music over peer-to-peer Internet services became popular, compels Internet providers to turn over the names of suspected pirates upon subpoena from any U.S. District Court clerk's office. A judge's signature is not required. Critics contend judges ought to be more directly involved.

    Verizon had argued at its trial that Internet providers should only be compelled to respond to such subpoenas when pirated music is stored on computers that providers directly control, such as a Web site, rather than on a subscriber's personal computer.

    In his ruling, the trial judge wrote that Verizon's interpretation "makes little sense from a policy standpoint," and warned that it "would create a huge loophole in Congress' effort to prevent copyright infringement on the Internet."

  • If you are keen to read the Dutch court ruling [rechtspraak.nl] or the Dutch News Channel [www.nu.nl], you can use World Lingo Translator [worldlingo.com].
  • Then I can smoke really good inexpensive pot and fileshare all I want. Moreover I wouldn't have to live in this nutso country (USA) as it dumbs-down its populus and careens into a fear-drive death-spiral. Woohoo!

Slashdot Top Deals

"The vast majority of successful major crimes against property are perpetrated by individuals abusing positions of trust." -- Lawrence Dalzell

Close