Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government News

Kazaa Going to Court 252

msim writes "According to the The Sydney Morning Herald" Kazaa will be going to court after their appeal to the Federal Court was dismissed. The case will be going ahead on March 23rd"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kazaa Going to Court

Comments Filter:
  • Say cheese! (Score:5, Funny)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:34PM (#8465152)
    "It's time for Kazaa to stop using delaying tactics and face the music."

    Oh please! Enough with the cheesy quotes already! It's almost as bad as the RIAA saying "Oops I did it again" after attempting to sue yet another innocent victim.
  • So... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Savatte ( 111615 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:35PM (#8465155) Homepage Journal
    will I be able to download the transcripts of these hearings on Kazaa?
    • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Deflagro ( 187160 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:41PM (#8465269)
      You know that's not so much funny as it is interesting. They want to crack down on all this evil P2P stuff but, it CAN be used for legal means. I have a telephone but it doesn't mean I make prank calls all day long.

      I dunno, just liked the comment and have no mod points.
      • Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by turnstyle ( 588788 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:49PM (#8465362) Homepage
        "They want to crack down on all this evil P2P stuff but, it CAN be used for legal means. I have a telephone but it doesn't mean I make prank calls all day long."

        Most cases so far have upheld the "don't blame the technology" view, and I would tend to agree.

        However, following your own analogy, do you think that you should be held liable if you did make prank calls all day long?

        • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by iminplaya ( 723125 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:05PM (#8465565) Journal
          ...do you think that you should be held liable if you did make prank calls all day long?

          Maybe the "prankster" should be, but not the telephone company for providing the technology.
          • "Maybe the "prankster" should be, but not the telephone company for providing the technology."

            Ok, so now comes the next obvious question: should those who trade copyrighted works via P2P be exempt from that same logic?

            • Well, since I believe that the copyright/patent laws are bad laws(like the "controlled substances act"), people who break these laws shouldn't be punished. On the subject of the culpability of "user vs. technology", which is what this case is about(I think), you always have to go with the user, whether it's P2P or guns, whatever.
              • "Well, since I believe that the copyright/patent laws are bad laws(like the "controlled substances act"), people who break these laws shouldn't be punished."

                Ok, then, so you believe that it's just perfectly ok to run off duplicates of an independent musician's CDs and sell them on the street?

                Perhaps you have been indulging in a little too much controlled substances for the day... ;)

                • Copyright law does not protect the indie artist from being ripped off by the big companies at all. On the contrary, it's used to protect big companies(music, software, etc.) from the independants. So, if the artist doesn't want me to sell dupes of his music, I won't, but he's getting very little "protection" from the law.
                  • "Copyright law does not protect the indie artist from being ripped off by the big companies at all. On the contrary, it's used to protect big companies(music, software, etc.) from the independants. So, if the artist doesn't want me to sell dupes of his music, I won't, but he's getting very little "protection" from the law."

                    What in god's name are you taking about? It's cool for everybody to rip off all artists because some signed bad contracts?

                    I'm an independant, and I can tell you that copyright protec

                    • I didn't anything about it being cool to rip anybody off. I said the law is a bad law. Artists made money before there was copyright. Copyright just makes it easy to re sell old work over and over again. It's a gravy train for the lazy who don't want to really create, but who want to control.
                    • "Copyright just makes it easy to re sell old work over and over again. It's a gravy train for the lazy who don't want to really create, but who want to control."

                      Spoken like a creep who knows nothing about how hard it already is to make even a meager living as an independent. Crap thinking like this just makes it even harder.

                    • Spoken like a creep who knows nothing about how hard it already is to make even a meager living as an independent.

                      Maybe you're just not that good and should look for something else to do. :-) It seems that like too many other supporters of bad laws, etc., you simply insult people instead of actually defending the laws(I can understand why, since the law is indefensible). It's like hearing Halliburtan defend the war in Iraq.
                    • Sorry, but your viewpoint that you should be allowed to copy and sell independents' works without permission isn't going to hold water with most people.

                      Cast me as Halliburtan, but you're the thug.

                    • Sorry, but your viewpoint that you should be allowed to copy and sell independents' works without permission isn't going to hold water with most people.

                      Abolition of slavery or allowing women to vote didn't "hold water" with most people a while ago either. Maybe you need a gun pointed at you(in the form of copyright) to force you to respect others, but I don't. I'll repeat what I said before. If the artist doesn't want me to sell dupes of his music, I won't. Just don't tell me I can't. I'll decide what's
                    • Maybe you need a gun pointed at you(in the form of copyright) to force you to respect others, but I don't. I'll repeat what I said before. If the artist doesn't want me to sell dupes of his music, I won't. Just don't tell me I can't. I'll decide what's ok or not."

                      Cool, now I get it -- basically the idea is, whatever you say goes. Yes, I think that will work, and I'm sure everybody will be greatful for your benevolent leadership!

                    • ...nd I'm sure everybody will be greatful for your benevolent leadership!

                      Why...yes...they would :-)

                      See the latest article posted to see what copyright gets ya...

            • Bait and switch.

              The prankster is responsible for the prank calls, and the telephone company should not be.

              The copyright infringer is responsible for their actions... and yet the RIAA is going after KAZAA

              Are you following the analogy yet ?

              • "Are you following the analogy yet?"

                Perfectly well, and as I said, I don't think that technology should be held accountable for how some may misuse it.

                But you can't turn a blind eye (or perhaps you can) to the obvious consequence: if you can't blame the technology for how some misuse it, then you can blame those individuals that do.

        • The end user of the technology - or device or whatevet - is ultimately responsible for its use.

          Regardless of laws, the maker of a device should not in any way be liable for the actions of the end user.

          • "The end user of the technology - or device or whatevet - is ultimately responsible for its use."

            Note that this is the argument that the EFF themselves used to make when they suggested that the RIAA should be suing the infringers [com.com] rather than suing the technology.

            But then the EFF logic fell apart when they moved on to justifying the infringers too.

        • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Nurseman ( 161297 ) <nursemanNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:11PM (#8465638) Homepage Journal
          However, following your own analogy, do you think that you should be held liable if you did make prank calls all day long?
          but I think a better analogy is should the phone comany be held liable if the customer made prank calls ?
          • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

            by fireduck ( 197000 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:20PM (#8465742)
            but I think a better analogy is should the phone comany be held liable if the customer made prank calls ?

            and following this analogy, if 99% of all calls were prank calls, should the phone company be required to do something about it?
            • What percentage of email is spam? Bulk mail?

              Really it comes down to whom is injured and who is benefitting. Almost everyone will agree that SPAM is a pain in the butt, so something is being done about it

              Not many are offended by P2P, in fact most like it. RIAA and some artists (note: some) don't... but they have more money that most of the average people, and more to spend on lawyers or taking their pet politicians out for a swanky meal to "discuss" the issue.
            • if 99% of all calls were prank calls, should the phone company be required to do something about it?

              "Requiring them to do something about it" is not the same as "Holding them liable for the actions". And by "something" you'd better mean something specific, not just "Flail about as your lawyers think is appropriate, based on our vague and fuzzy laws".
            • They weren't when the calls were telemarketers. How are prank calls any different?
          • "but I think a better analogy is should the phone comany be held liable if the customer made prank calls ?"

            You're kind of missing the point -- if we're going to say that the phone company shouldn't be liable for prank calls placed by its customers, we are then implying that the customer should be liable, no?

            And that in turn leads to the question of whether those who trade unauthorized copyrighted files should be reasonably held accountable.

            If Kazaa is like the phone company here, and is therefor unac

            • If Kazaa is like the phone company here, and is therefor unaccountable, where is the accountablity?

              It lies with the people that allow unjust laws to be passed.
              • Your problem is that you see no benefit to protecting creative works, nor the people making them, at all.

                You don't work as a creative professional, and have little understanding of how copyright protects artists, and gives them an opportunity to sell their work.

                You seen an independent working in a garage as no different than a multinational corporation -- neither worthy of protection.

                You may argue that people should be able to sell copies of others' works without permission, but most people won't agre

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:35PM (#8465166)
    I thought they lived there.
  • Weird (Score:3, Informative)

    by Pingular ( 670773 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:35PM (#8465170)
    You can no longer download Kazaa, but the network seems fine. You can still download songs etc...
    • Re:Weird (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I know you are being funny, but K++ the good kazaa client without spyware also works great and HAS NOT dropped in useage online.

      basicalyl there is now 2 "kazaa" networks. 1 the official new client and the other the K++ client.

      although dietK has great dll's that replace all the kazaa spyware crud and it will block ad's also.

      doesn't matter antyways...

    • Re:Weird (Score:4, Interesting)

      by millahtime ( 710421 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:47PM (#8465345) Homepage Journal
      It's a gnutella network. All the machines connect to each other rather than a central localtion. As long as a central server is up somewhere for a starting point then it will work. I do believe that it is almost impossible to take the gnutella network down.
      • Hum... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by dark-br ( 473115 )
        do believe that it is almost impossible to take the gnutella network down.

        Many problems have been identified with the legacy Gnutella network. For example there is ample research indicating that it cannot scale or that it uses too much overhead. But perhaps more importantly it lacks a clear set of network standards, which has led to a network of unequal clients and abusive behaviour, to the point that one client can consume 80% of the resources on the entire network!

      • Re:Weird (Score:5, Informative)

        by FuzzyBad-Mofo ( 184327 ) <fuzzybad.gmail@com> on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:18PM (#8465717)

        Kazaa does not use the Gnutella network, they use the FastTrack network. It is however similar to Gnutella, with no centralized server.

  • Face the music? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Baldorg ( 758327 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:38PM (#8465209)
    More like facing the Disk industry am I right?
    • The USA goverment could put a new tax to virgin CD's . This tax goes for the Music industry. As for MP3 players, they should work only in the way the IPOD does with licensed downloads. Cheers! Luck get a free knoppix CD at loadux.com
      • Europe (where the history comes from) already has a tax on blank CD's - it doesn't stop the labels and their trade associations from sueing people and putting pos drm on new CD's so that you can rip them in your computer but can't play them in your car.

        As for MP3 players: look at DVD players: Sony makes sleek units that are difficult/expensive to dezone. Meanwhile, whatever country is doing to the koreans what the koreans did to the japanese is exporting zillions of cheap units that you can dezone by holdi
      • The USA goverment could put a new tax to virgin CD's.

        There already is a kick-back going to music publishers on blank audio-only CDs. This does not and should not happen for all blank CDs because not every CD is used for music.

        The USA government should STFU in this case. Even with audio-only CDs, that audio can be music can be of my own creation, a recording of a college lecture, a freely-traded public performance, or any of a hundred other things that don't (or shouldn't) require payment to the music

  • Prediction (Score:4, Funny)

    by Espectr0 ( 577637 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:41PM (#8465259) Journal
    I predicted that kazaa would die in 2003, and though it didn't happen, we can be pretty sure that it will sooner or later.

    Perhaps we need a legitimate kazaa? An Itunes-alike that not only sells music, but also software?

    Sooner or later all file swapping will have to get around this
    • Re:Prediction (Score:3, Insightful)

      Perhaps we need a legitimate kazaa?

      Um, Kazaa is legitimate [pcworld.com]. I'm not aware of any jursidictions in which it has been ruled illegal, but it certainly has been ruled legal. And common sense would say that just because it can be, or even often is, used illegally doesn't mean it is inherently illegitimate. It does have legitimate legal uses.

    • For those of us who know what Kazaa is, this is how ridiculous your post sounded:

      " I predicted that the internet would die in 2003, and though it didn't happen, we can be pretty sure that it will sooner or later.

      Perhaps we need a legitimate internet? "

  • Kids (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kc0re ( 739168 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:41PM (#8465260) Journal
    I don't use Kazaa. I was one of the kids fined for downloading music off the internet, and guess what, I still am going to do it. In all seriousness.. I don't see how the RIAA can sue everyone, and besides for them to catch users of Kazaa, don't they have to use Kazaa themselves?
    • "I was one of the kids fined for downloading music off the internet, and guess what, I still am going to do it."

      Sure you were! ;)

  • Lindows and P2P (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mcx101 ( 724235 )

    Maybe the attitude of companies to P2P will change when they see the commercial advantages like Lindows have [lindows.com]

  • by DR SoB ( 749180 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:42PM (#8465272) Journal
    If the RIAA makes it up to 10 lawsuits against providers of free downloadable music, my bookie is going to be pissed, he gave me 10-1 odds that it won't happen and I put $100 on the line! GO RIAA GO!!! (Yeah I know, that sounds evil, that's why I like it!)
  • by GuyMannDude ( 574364 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:42PM (#8465281) Journal

    Federal Court Justice Murray Wilcox dismissed an application by the world's largest file sharing network to delay proceedings against it until a similar case in the United States was finalised.

    This has got to be kind of tough. So Kazaa has to defend themselves against two recording industry associations simultaneously? I wonder if there was any agreement between the RIAA and the Australian counterpart to hit Kazaa at the same time. Hopefully Kazaa can use some of the work for one case in the other but still that's not too much fun to have to fight a two-front war. That takes resources and I wonder if Kazaa has enough to hold their own.

    GMD

    • "This has got to be kind of tough. So Kazaa has to defend themselves against two recording industry associations simultaneously?"

      This is a risk when you piss off two recording trade groups simultaneously.

      • Oh, please. This is a pretty easy thing to understand -- if you annoy a lot of people at once, expect them to jump on you at once.

        Remember when all the states were going after Microsoft at once to get their share of the anti-trust money?

        Remember when it seemed like all the lawsuits from moribund cancer sufferers were hitting Big Tobacco at once?

        Whether it's a "good guy" like Kazaa, a "bad guy" like Microsoft, or a -- well, I don't know what the collective Slashdot opinion is on the tobacco companies

  • by curtisk ( 191737 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:44PM (#8465298) Homepage Journal
    Man the summary here is just a few lines short of the original article! One day this WILL happen and everyone who posts really would have RTFA!
  • by finny ( 107762 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:44PM (#8465299)
    Every Simpson's watcher knows that the most extreme punishment Austraila can dole out is "just a little kick in the bum"!
  • Site slashdotted (Score:5, Informative)

    by Via_Patrino ( 702161 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:45PM (#8465317)
    Site already slashdotted, some other news about the same subject:
    Here [slyck.com] and here [technewsworld.com]

    PS: The second link is heavier and probably will go down soon.
  • As Pepsi put it... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by PeaceTank ( 758859 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @01:47PM (#8465342)
    Even if kazaa goes down, there is no way in the world that they are going to eliminate p2p. They live in a world of red tape and formalities. We just find ways to go around the system, and therefore, we're always a step ahead of them. Networks start blocking ports in schools and offices, we simply change the port we get it through (at least that's what we do at our school in our dorms) The RIAA starts tracking p2p transactions, we set up massive networks based on ant behavior (e.g. MUTE p2p). They take down one major p2p client, we'll set up 10 more. I think Pepsi and iTunes got it right in their commericial... "We're going to keep downloading music for free whether you like it or not..."
    • Pepsi are sure some a-holes.

      "The music industry are greedy jerks! Buy your songs from iTunes!"

      I hope RIAA members come up with an offer of a free six pack of coke for each CD purchased, or something. And air a commercial saying "We aren't going to drink that swill, whether you like it or not!"
    • Numbers (Score:2, Insightful)

      Its a bug numbers game and we win. They may have millions of dollars but they simply can not come after everybody and just as PeaceTank said it, they shut one down, we open 10 more. Warez networks have been up for years and they havn't all been shut down, music has many more users. Good luck but RIAA you are fighting a loosing battle, wake up, try something new.
    • by garcia ( 6573 ) *
      I think Pepsi and iTunes got it right in their commericial... "We're going to keep downloading music for free whether you like it or not..."

      Too bad that's not what they meant and everyone knows it. Yes, it is true that everyone will find different ways to get around the roadblocks setup. Yes, it is also true that P2P will continue to evolve at a pace where we will be lightyears ahead of the redtape...

      But, is it all worth it? Why not support FREE music? Artists that support the distribution of their s
      • But, is it all worth it? Why not support FREE music?

        In a sense, that is exactly what's happening. We're creating a market for bands that distribute their recordings for free and profit from performance. I'm tangentially involved with the local music scene and the ability to download major label music for free doesn't have the slightest impact on the cover charge for the local bar band. People still want to go out, have a drink, and see a performance.

        What HAS changed is the fact that this unsigned, unm

  • TRIPS (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Iplaw-dc ( 742360 )
    Does anyone know if Australia is referencing TRIPS (trade-related aspects of intellectual property) in their case?
  • by BorgDrone ( 64343 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:04PM (#8465543) Homepage
    "This represents a massive victory for the copyright owners," he said outside the court.

    And that's exactly the problem, the latest CD I bought says on the cover something like : Copyright(C) 2004 $RECORDLABEL instead of Copyright(C) 2004 $ARTIST.
    They are always babbling about the artist not getting paid bla bla, while their only concern is their own bank account.

    The fact is, tools like KaZaa have shown we don't need record companies anymore, and it has them scared shitless.
    Regarding the artists not getting paid and this whining about how it 'hurts' music: there is no need to pay them for download music, for several reasons.
    • Artists can earn money by performing (concerts and such), mp3's should be seen as advertising their trade. This happened all the time before the record companies stepped in, artists exchanged songs and travelled from city to city performing them in public, and getting paid for it.
    • If you're in it just for the money, I really don't want to hear your music anyway. Art should be created for the love of the art, not for monetary gain. Paying 'super stars' exorbitant amounts of money hasn't done their music any good. Look at the great artists from the past, Van Gogh didn't have a pot to piss in. What are rappers going to do ? Switch from music about 'the hood' and how hard life is on the street to singing about why it sucks to pay several million in income taxes ?
    • The only music that will die together with the record companies is 'produced' music. They won't be missed, really. My life would be just as complete without britney spears and the backstreet boys.
    • by shark72 ( 702619 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:46PM (#8466090)

      "If you're in it just for the money, I really don't want to hear your music anyway. Art should be created for the love of the art, not for monetary gain. Paying 'super stars' exorbitant amounts of money hasn't done their music any good. Look at the great artists from the past, Van Gogh didn't have a pot to piss in."

      A couple of issues here.

      First, I don't think anybody can say with certainty that 100% of the music they love was created by people who had absolutely no monetary motivation. There is an important difference between being a musician solely for the money, and the chance of wealth being one of the reasons why you've pursued that career.

      If you can look at the highlights of your music collection and truly say "all of this great music would still be in my hands if the record companies did not exist," I'd like to see your record collection!

      I am well aware of the fact that for four years now, we have heard "P2P has made the record labels obsolete" or "P2P will make the record labels obsolete pretty soon." Just as in indie film circles it was claimed that the Internet would eliminate all the problems that plague traditional indie film distribution. Today, there are excellent resources for indie filmmakers and musicians to use the Internet and low-cost technology to record, mix, produce, distribute, promote, market and sell their work -- and many do -- but the record labels still continue to sign new bands. There are a lot musicians out there who desparately want a recording contract, but can't get one. Completely separate from the issue of choosing the chance at wealth vs. relative poverty, there is the issue that many musicians simply don't want and don't have the skills to run their career as a business. They'd really rather just focus on playing their music, and let the bean counters and the marketing, engineering and sales geeks at the record companies take care of the rest.

      As an adjunct to that, it's also been predicted for several years now that there would be a mass exodus from the record labels as major acts opted not to re-up their contracts and instead moved to a solely Internet-based distribution mechanism, where they would rely on the honor system and concert revenues to pay their mortgages. While I've seen some bands release additional material via the web, as well as some bands who went this route after they were dropped by their label, the popular opinion from musicians still seems to be that if you have a record contract, it's in your best intrest to keep it.

      The other issue is that you mentioned Van Gogh as an artist who created some great work despite living in poverty. But Shakespeare, Da Vinci, Michaelangelo, Mozart, Chopin, Brahms and innumerable other greats of the last millennium became wealthy men from their work. Reading the biographies of many of people shows that, yes, they were motivated by money. Sadly, greed is not a concept that was invented in the 20th century.

    • If you're in it just for the money, I really don't want to hear your music anyway. Art should be created for the love of the art, not for monetary gain.

      If what you are saying were true, then we should shut down the entire entertainment industry and replace it with an organization on a subsistence government dole.

      Some art produced for profit is good, and some is not. Some art produced as a means to other ends is good, and some is not. Some art produced as an end in itself is good, and some is not.

      I'v

  • by oldosadmin ( 759103 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:08PM (#8465594) Homepage
    Kazaa fails to stall copyright case

    March 4, 2004 - 6:05PM

    Internet music company Kazaa has failed in its attempt to delay proceedings for alleged copyright breaches brought by the Australian record industry.

    Federal Court Justice Murray Wilcox dismissed an application by the world's largest file sharing network to delay proceedings against it until a similar case in the United States was finalised.

    Music Industry Piracy Investigation (MIPI), which is owned by Universal, Festival Mushroom Records, EMI Music, Sony Music, Warner Music Australia and BMG Australia, raided 12 premises on February 6 this year to collect evidence against Kazaa. MIPI general manager Michael Speck said the decision to allow proceedings to go ahead against Sharman Networks, Kazaa's owner in Australia, was a win for the record industry.

    "This represents a massive victory for the copyright owners," he said outside the court.

    "It's time for Kazaa to stop using delaying tactics and face the music."

    The matter was adjourned until March 23.
  • Wonder if I can download any bootleg court transcripts...
  • The Ballad of Kazaa (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Eberlin ( 570874 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:26PM (#8465822) Homepage
    A retelling of a story based on memory (which means some 'facts' may actually be wrong)

    Once there was a mighty napster whose technology allowed for swapping files. Due to poor insight, the technology also allowed users to be tracked -- Fanning be damned.

    Along came the peer to peer networks, with gnutella seeming to be the frontrunner. Then came the FastTrack network with Sharman in the back and the mighty Morpheus at the helm due to its ease of use and improved reliability.

    The Kazaa folks (Sharman) did not take kindly to Morpheus apparently not paying their bills or whatnot, and thus cut them off the network. Alarm bells should have immediately rung as anyone who has the power to cut clients off a network clearly cannot be "anonymously" peer-to-peer to begin with.

    Morpheus ran to the gnutella networks, gathering up Gnucleus code and branding it. By branding, of course, I mean the trend in p2p software of installing various products, some of which amount to adware and/or spyware.

    Kazaa touts itself the survivor, gathering up more Morpheus users than either bearshare or limewire or [insert gnutella client here].

    Kazaa seen as the filesharing client for the masses and now holds major scrutiny by the recording industry. More p2p networks pop up promising better anonymity.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    If would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

    The music industry is still using the Luddite network distribution of redundant labor. They still put music on archaic plastic disks and hire guys to truck them out to music stores, and then expect consumers to drive out to these stores, pay 15 bucks, then drive home only to find there's only one song they like on the whole CD.

    When this business model fails, they start suing everyone.

    But there is something each and every one of us can do today to stop this : U
  • by polyp2000 ( 444682 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:37PM (#8465974) Homepage Journal
    Speaking from a musicians point of view, I cannot understand why the record companies havent used file-sharing , and other internet technologies. Every single illegally downloaded mp3, could be turned into a marketing advantage.
    Plus, it would give record companies a lot more control over content than they have now.

    MP3's should be treated like radio broadcasts, one should have to get a license in order to share the files. Its up to companies to find out how to generate the revenue streams, either charge for downloads, or provide other subscription based benefits that traditional P2P systems dont currently provide. All that is needed is a better product, and by that I dont mean better artists (but that wouldnt be a bad idea) I mean that they should provide a service that pisses all over everything else.

    My personal belief is that these days the way to make real money is through real physical products, not through arbitrary file formats such as ogg or mp3. Through not just CD sales, but from the T-Shirts, the posters, the ticket sales for gigs, subscriptions to fanzines etc.

    I am truly surprised that the record companies have not yet realised that instead of turning every 12yr old, boy-band lovin' girl downloading the latest cheesy pop number into a criminal. They should try concentrating on selling more Merchandise.

    Record companies should also realise that its the "Proper" bands, who write their own tunes, who innovate and create their own boundaries, that are the ones that are going to be more than a novelty or fad. They are also the ones who will sell more tickets for gigs, and at those gigs people will buy merchandise.

    Yep, and it wouldnt be a bad idea not to screw the real artists over when it comes to royalties either. And while im ranting, for gods sake, lets see the end of these dreadful "Pop-Idol" TV shows !

    On that note , If you want some free, legal MP3's from an original band.. Please click my sig and download at will, and please god! try not to slashdot my humble computer :)

    Nick ...
  • by tkarr ( 459657 ) <tkarr@iaNETBSDstate.edu minus bsd> on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:51PM (#8466159) Homepage
    So, if Kazaa loses this... do you really think the music industry is going to get more CD buyers? Probably not. It seems to me that the reason most people even download music from Kazaa is because they want to see what other music is on a CD before they buy it. At least there are a few more alternatives now such as Apple's iTunes [apple.com] or some other internet sites. Maybe if the rest of the music industry would wake up and smell the modern age, there wouldn't have to be things like Kazaa to cause them to panic.
  • by superpulpsicle ( 533373 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @02:57PM (#8466253)
    I am really tired of people trying to bring down Kazaa P2P since it allows people to download free music.

    I have NEVER heard people trying to bring down any P2P due to distributing too much porn.

    Why don't people come out of the closet to protect the porn industry.
  • by Iplaw-dc ( 742360 ) on Thursday March 04, 2004 @03:01PM (#8466326) Homepage Journal
    On 8 February 2004, in Washington D.C., Trade Minister Mark Vaile concluded an agreed text for the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement with his US counterpart, Trade Representative Bob Zoellick. These means Australia will take on IP standards much like the US.
  • I don't get it. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Devi0s ( 759123 )
    Kazza provided a utility for sharing files. Some users chose to use the provided tool illegally. If Kazza designed a tool that could only be used to conduct illegal activities, or if Kazza designed the tool specifically to conduct illegal activities, I would understand. Should we make web browsers and servers illegal because I could host a webpage that provides hyperlinks to illegal content that gives a user with a web browser the ability to download copyrighted materials illegally? This seems like a co
    • kazaa is not a 'team-player' they take our nicely balenced system and throw it into chaos. If you dare mess with american corporations you will get everything thats coming to you. If you impeade Americas right to make as much profit as possible you will be delt with. Don't mess with corporate America because quite frankly they are the law. Oh and never put America down, a true patriot turns their head the other way and just does their 9 to 5 like a good citizen.

Systems programmers are the high priests of a low cult. -- R.S. Barton

Working...