Court Urged to Hear File-Sharing Case 12
gollum123 writes "AP reports that: A disparate group made up of dozens of state attorneys general, labor unions, retailers, professional sports leagues and others urged the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to hear a claim brought by the recording and film industries against two Internet file-sharing firms. In legal briefs filed with the court, the petitioners stressed the justices should take the entertainment companies' case and finally resolve conflicting lower court rulings on file-sharing, said Steven Marks, general counsel for the Recording Industry Association of America."
Briefs and lists of amici on EFF's website... (Score:5, Informative)
From http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/ [eff.org]
Non-superstars hurt? Is this a joke? (Score:5, Insightful)
Is this some kind of joke? Almost all of the filesharing that occurs is of "superstars," with the primary loss of money being that of the RIAA. Lesser known artists, the ones who the music groups won't advertise for, actually get their music out there and are able to have people come to their concerts. How exactly does this hurt them?
This crap of trying to get us to symphatize with the poor, unknown artist or set worker with five kids is worse than "think of the children." The people screwing those workers and unknown artists over is the RIAA, not the people going to their concerts.
"In all, 41 state attorneys general also submitted briefs. They argued file-sharing programs pose risks to consumers, such as identity theft and being unwittingly exposed to spyware and child pornography, Marks said."
This crap also makes me sick...why don't they just ban the whole damned internet, along with e-mail and web browsing?
Re:Non-superstars hurt? Is this a joke? (Score:2, Funny)
One thing at a time, my friend.
Re:Non-superstars hurt? Is this a joke? (Score:2)
Ahh yes when you can't copme up with a convicing argument you can always pull out the "child pornography" card.
In other news, (Score:1)
But that ruling applies only to the states under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.
What's up with that...Federal court ruling should apply to the e
As Long As... (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe the Court would find in favor of Grokster and StreamCast - that creating / developing / selling / distributing a product that may be used to commit a crime is legal AS LONG AS the person / company is not actively conding the crime.
Similar to the Betamax decision, but bring it into the digital age and put it to rest.
Re:As Long As... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:As Long As... (Score:2, Informative)
sure, it's illegal to download copyrighted media
but the entertainment industry, and now the states aren't making a clear distinction between illegal downloading and vanilla peer to peer networks
copyright law alone should be enough to protect the artists, the industries infatuation with tacking on a "on the internet" to every law and patent has got to stop
Re:As Long As... (Score:2)
Money talks and... (Score:1)
Logic, statistics and proof to the contrary, look for the 0wn3d c0uRt to decide in favor of the monied interests.
Whatever happened to... (Score:1)