Germany's RIAA Sues Rapidshare - YouTube Next? 144
Hermel writes "The GEMA (Germany's RIAA) obtained a temporary injunction against 'one-click-hoster' Rapidshare.com. If their lawsuit is successful, the GEMA intends to use it as a beachhead against their next targets, including Youtube and MySpace. From the article: 'According to GEMA, the service ... has at times boasted of making some 15 million files available to its users. The operator had however failed to obtain from GEMA a license for making copyright protected files available ... Through its injunctions the District Court in Cologne had now made it clear to the company that the fact that it was the users and not the operator of the services that uploaded the content onto the sites did not, from a legal point of view, lessen the operator's liability for copyright infringements that occurred within the context of the services, the spokesman added.'"
Well... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Well... (Score:4, Insightful)
Hard to mod someone down when they make such great games.
Think about this though; I bought democracy after playing a demo version. That was a smart move on your part, making a playable demo.
However, I have done the same thing with companies that do not make demos available; I've grabbed a copy off of P2P to see if it was worth having, then bought the game if it was.
I do the exact same thing with Video & Music; If I can not find a place to hear a decent example of the music, there is no chance in hell I'll buy it; if a band is cool enough to release a free version, i'm almost certain to buy it even if I just sort of like it; I like to support people not being idiots with my $$$.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Sadly, most people aren't using rapidshare to
Re: (Score:2)
I won't disagree with that, so much as quibble with it.
I don't know how you can know which category most would fall into. I think both of us can only guess. My guess differs from yours, or perhaps not. I'd guess most downloaders just try the game briefly and delete it, and I'd guess most of them do wind up buying th
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Wrong (Score:4, Informative)
So, once again. The state of research on the effects of file-sharing. [slashdot.org]
Re:Well... (Score:4, Insightful)
Nor are they starving.
Perhaps we can all agree that infringement hurts content providers. But the so-called industry needs to face reality. 1) The Internet is a great distribution system. It's light years ahead of the old 'put it on plastic disks and distribute it by plane and truck' method. 2) No matter how many of these sites you shut down, others will pop up in accordance with the principle of supply and demand. (Shutting down Napster was an example of that.)
Perhaps GEMA needs to beat these sites at their own game by distributing the content themselves first and making their money by either pay-per-download or by selling advertising on content hosting sites.
Let's be real, the Internet is the best content distribution system ever. At some point there's going to be a realization that lawsuits are not the answer. All moral arguments aside, that's just a fact.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm convinced there's a better pricing scheme that would significantly reduce piracy, which is coincidently what I would pay for content. I already buy about 3 cds a week, but I base those purchases on both trusted reviewers as well as what I've downloaded and enjoyed; but let's be real, I'm less likely t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A "stream" *is* a download. It is a download plus.. It is a download plus the ability to start playing before the download is complete. It is a download where the file format is arranged in a way compatible with starting playing an incomplete download, a file potentially with some extra information added inside to assist in playing the incomplete download.
Technologically and physically, sending a stream is absolutely identical to sending a download. The only differen
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
GEMA even cashs up their own artists (Score:3, Insightful)
(Disclaimer: I'm German).
Re: (Score:2)
This means returns from CDs for the artists are tiny, except for big-name artists. Most small-time artists make money from live gigs - where music sharing will help the numbers.
*Some* piracy helps the mus
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
An
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen them remove illegal content, but sometimes it's on their servers for a long while...
Most services will take it down pretty quick, once asked. The problem from the *AA perspective is that it's a bitch to find all these things. They're hoping to push that task onto the service providers, and it sounds like it's working in this case.
The obvious problem is that the task is no less onerous for the service. The other obvious problem is that it winds up squelching fair use rights. Myspace is already b
Re: (Score:2)
That's how it should be. We don't go to businesses that pollute and tell them ok, go ahead and pollute and everytime we catch you we're going to tell you to stop doing it. No, we tell them don't pollute. When we catch them dumping their toxic shit in the river we fine them or jail them or some number of other things.
Posters here regularily point at a particular business model and say "welcome to the int
Re: (Score:2)
Why don't these service providers have to figure out a business model that abides by the law?
They HAVE one. If providers are asked to take something down, they usually do it in short order (too short, IMHO, they don't have much room to say "Hey, that's parody/commentary/other fair use") The problem from the *AA's POV is that it's a pain in the ass to police. What they are doing, judging by TFA, is pushing THEIR responsibilites onto service providers. Which is especially silly, since they're going to use
Re: (Score:2)
Very true. But a completely stupid and inapplicable analogy. It wasn't enough to call call file sharers "thieves", "pedophiles" or "terrorists", now they're "toxic waste polluters" too.
Rapidshare should not be the exception... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We should require storage warehouse owners to personally search and scan every warehouse daily, looking inside all containers to be sure nothing illegal is in them.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It might be argued that there should be a provision that, should the service be notified and the c
Re: (Score:1)
German law does not have the Safe Harbor provision. It works a bit differently, pure access providers (like ISPs) are not responsible for the transported data. What is called Media Services by the law is responsible, if a copyright holder contacts them they have to take the data down. Now the problem is to decide what is an access provider and what a media service. The rules are, let's say strange. So depending on what the judge decides is the case with Rapidshare they have to take it down or not. I think t
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I've been wondering the same thing ever since the original Napster. "What the heck were they thinking? Did these guys really think that they weren't going to get sued into oblivion?"
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Rapidshare, unlike Napster, provides no indexing service. Anyone can upload files, but you have to be told, by the uploader, the URL to download. It's no different, except in scale, from any webspace provider, or for that matter, email service. Also Rapidshare does take down files almost immediately a complaint is received, an
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It usually stays on the server until reported. Similarly, an ISP usually keep a customer until he/she's reported.
New business model (Score:5, Insightful)
2) Upload my crappy copyrighted material to every website that allows anonymous posting
3) Sue every website uploaded to
4) Profit!
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
>2) Upload my crappy copyrighted material to every website that allows anonymous posting
>3) Sue every website uploaded to
>4) ???
>5) Profit!
fixed
Re: (Score:1)
Solution to copyright conundrum? (Score:2, Interesting)
Shutting down a who
Re: (Score:2)
Rapidshare are an obvious target (Score:4, Insightful)
Rapidshare can remove content on a whim, it's no use for anything thats really vital. Webspace is now trivially cheap, and so is bandwidth. If you need to share big binary files, setting up an ftp server or a website is trivial. The only real market for rapidshare that I can think of is illegal content, and it's no suprise to find so much of it there. Every software, movie and game site that is trading illegal software has dozens, if not hundreds or even thousands of rapidshare links.
This was inevitable.
Open letter to cliffski, mafiaa (Score:2)
Stop trying to prevent us being connected to each other. It's done.
Re: (Score:1)
Never been talking with people and wanted to toss a file online quickly for them to download?
Never wanted a medium-term host where you can stick a small file to link to?
I use this as a primary means of passing files around and storing non-critical stuff for time... frequently things I create.
It is the equivalent of the image hosts used to upload small creations or screenshots for use on forums that do not authorise uploads on themselves.
Forget *may* have some use. I and plen
Re: (Score:2)
You have a very weak stomach. I would advise that you save your outrage and shock for more important ills of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
On the Internet, people see what they are looking for. Then they base their conclusions.
I'm using Internet since '9
Re:Rapidshare are an obvious target (Score:5, Informative)
No, it is not. Most users get 30/Kbs upload rates. So, setting up web servers and ftp servers from the internet access is not practical. If you buy a website, it can cost about $200-$300/year for the most basic package.
Do you know long it would take to download a 700MB file from Rapidshare? There is a limitation of 100MB per file and 1 file per 90 minutes. It would take over 10 hours! With bitorrent you can get it in less than 30 minutes. It does not make sense for illegal content at all.
I used rapidshare to share music projects - since most musicians will try and e-mail everything to you. So exchanging rapidshare links was good and we didn't care if it died a few days later since we could have updated the song anyway.
To tell you truth, I thought only thing unauthorized that was posted on rapidshare was pr0n clips.
Where did you get that number? Oh yeah, you just made it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Living in a first world country are we? Please, speak for yourself, not for the whole world.
Now, I heve never even heard of rapidshare, but I am grateful that there are places like the internet archive and ourmedia.org that will host my media
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
A service provided by your ISP is different. They know who you are. They can easily identify who it was who uploaded illegal content.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I'd rather than time was spent developing newer content.
By the time the IP holder spots it, requests takedown, and has it removed, hundreds of people already got it. The system just does not work.
I'm all for free online storgae services, just why the emphasis on m
Re: (Score:2)
You really think there are two separate 'classes' of people - The honest purchasers and the freeloaders? Most free-loaders would be purchasers if it became too difficult to freeload. Many purchasers will become freeloaders if freeloading is too easy. Rapidshare and services like it make the freeloading too easy.
You might
Re: (Score:1)
I like the way whether or not you win a lawsuit... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I like the way whether or not you win a lawsuit (Score:2)
I'm not sure what you mean. If the lawyers for GEMA say "Websites allowing users to upload copyrighted media can be sued for infringement, therefore we are suing sharing websites X, Y, and Z for letting users upload copyrighted material" before they say "Rapidshare is a website allowing users to upload copyrighted media, and
Re: (Score:2)
In logic, it may be optimal to prove X first because its easier, but it doesn't become more likely that Y is true is a result. Reordering merely changes the dif
Not exactly the German RIAA. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not exactly the German RIAA. (Score:5, Insightful)
Which essentially says that a few determine which 10% of the members get 70% of the bucks.
CC.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Now, of course the most popu
No more free German content? (Score:2)
How dare they!
Re: (Score:2)
Small correction... (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
the common carrier conundrum (Score:2)
So with the same logic, could they also sue the ISPs involved, and in fact any nodes in between?
Rapidshare and similar sites are set up as simply temporary holding places --- tubes, if you will --- that allow users to send files from one to another.
This real
GEMA != RIAA (Score:5, Informative)
the GEMA cannot be compared to the RIAA. While the RIAA is mostly an industry organisation, the GEMA is a representation of the artists. Not that it doesn't suffer the same delusions of grandeur the RIAA does, but at least the money paid to the GEMA really ends up in the pocket of the artists. And the fees the GEMA requests are pennys compared to the invoices the RIAA sends out.
Regards, Martin
Re: (Score:2)
Re:GEMA != RIAA (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
all the best,
drew
GEMA is not the German equivalent of the RIAA. (Score:5, Insightful)
Before I explain the difference, I should acknowledge that many Slashdotters have equal disdain for anybody in the music business who tries to assert their rights. For example, we normally state that we're in favor of the artists and that we think artists should have more rights, money, and respect, but when the BMI or ASCAP (US performing rights agencies run by and for artists and wholly unrelated to the RIAA) sue businesses for playing music without a royalty, Slashdotters bring out the hatred equal to that of the RIAA. So, if "RIAA" is shorthand for "anybody in the music industry who tries to interfere with the free (as in beer AND speech) distribution of music", then yeah, GEMA is like the RIAA, but it's still important to understand the difference.
Here's what GEMA is about [www.gema.de], in English. Like BMI and ASCAP, they're a society of composers, lyricists and music publishers.
I believe (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong) that the actual German equivalent of the RIAA -- that is, the trade group representing record companies -- is the IFPA.
With all the ire at GEMA's actions, I think the message here is clear: as covered above, we all respect the musicians, and we want them to have more money, rights, and respect. But only on our terms. If they take legal actions or otherwise demand more money, rights, or respect -- in other words, if they simply get too uppity -- then they're on equal moral grounds as the RIAA et al.
Re: (Score:2)
Run by artists?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Broadcast Music Inc. is run by radio execs, which means that ClearChannel likely has a large vote. It's probably as much like ROMS as like ASCAP. Many artist-composers sign up with them anyway, esp. if they are signed to the RIAA when they start publishing.
A strike by the ASCAP caused radio to found BMI. It appears that in the '40s and '50s, ASCAP w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Some may be that way, but not all.
Look, if an artists signs up with a lot of these rights organisations, they will have to pay
Re: (Score:2)
Almost, but not quite. It basically boils down to us all wanting the artists to have more money, rights, etc - just as long as t
The debate continues... (Score:2)
The only trouble with both of these ideas is that they rely on a broken process or standard. When paper based products and other media that could not be easily created at home were the carriers of such copyrighted content, these arguments made sense. They no longer make sense. In one way or another, both lead to prepostero
Re: (Score:2)
Not for long. Many of the files at Rapidshare are encypted RAR files. Without knowing the passwords, they're just so much random data. If finger printing became common, methods like this would become universal.
Re: (Score:2)
But isn't this even more reason for them not to be held liable for those files being infringing? I mean, if they have no way to find out if they are, how can you sue them for it? How can you know that they are?
all the best,
drew
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. But the obvious response of the *AA types will be that nothing can be hosted anywhere anaonymously, and encryption is an indication of guilt. That wouldn't hold up under any current laws, but the chillng effect of legal harassment could make it the de facto rule.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Without the password, it can't be inspected.
We already trust people with security, and keeping a log of the files that you have purchased a right to use is not such a big deal. Its like a box of receipts kept in your possession and somewhere other than your possession.
So for every file I have I must keep a "receipt". And if I transform a file in a way to lose that receip
Back to reality (Score:3, Insightful)
What if I'm in a hardware store, and I use a chainsaw to cut someone in half. Am I guilty of murder, or is the hardware store guilty of allowing me to misuse its goods and services ?
What if I'm on some website, and I use its resources to commit criminal acts. Am I guilty of said act, or is the website guilty of allowing its resources ?
I don't give a flying toaster about how lawyers will try to bend the facts... it seems pretty obvious to me. Does Lexus get named in lawsuits involving drug busts ? Because their cars seem to be quite loved by high-end coke runners, and it could be argued that having a vehicle facilitates the couriering of illicit substances, just like a file backup web site facilitates the couriering of illicit data.
Hell, sue the post office while you're at it. Last I heard, you could buy weed online and have it shipped across the continent right to your mailbox. What the hell?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Artists' Decision? (Score:3, Interesting)
Musicians can get a loan and have a high-quality studio recording made of their music. With the internet, they can attempt to market it, and with the new music sites and the ubiquity of the internet, they might even get noticed. But noticed by who? Venues like to see you draw a crowd. How do you become a megastar without radio airplay, music videos, etc? I suppose you can get on the radio by popular opinion (enough calls to the radio stations by your fans), but getting airplay on MTV (do they still play videos?) is a bit more challenging without the RIAA paying for the time.
I guess it takes money to make money, and the RIAA makes that "easier" if not simply "possible" for the artist by saying, "Give us your act, and we'll make you famous." It just seems like the time is coming for artists to dodge the RIAA and publish themselves. Hell yes, it takes effort, but you're artists! You're supposed to starve.
web 2.0 = lawsuits - not a stupid Profit! joke (Score:1)
step 1: web 2.0 = websites with content from users
step 2: users add crap to the websites
step 3: the websites publish and distribute the crap
step 4: some of the uploaded crap is copyrighted material
step 5: copyright protected material generates lawsuits between [insert RIAA or GEMA or whatever] and website owners
we can eliminate steps 4 & 5 by inserting:
step 1.5: strong check of the users identity using [SSN or fingerprint or whatever] before they have upload rights to the website
OR
step 2.5: the
Not quite (Score:2)
maybe someone who stop me whenever I leave my house to be sure I am not wearing a shirt with an unauthorized coyrite material on it?
What we are seeing is a result of the change of copyright for all practical matters.
Digital distribution has ended copyright as we no it. The industry can either line copyright with what the people want, or loose it completely.
In the US, it's the will of the people that allows for copyright, and the will o
Re: (Score:2)
Step 1.6: Users move to website in a different country.
well, this just proves that ... (Score:1)
I seriously hope (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Bring it on "Helmut",we'll whoop yer sorry krauten arsen.
Precedent (Score:1)
News Item! (Score:1)
German superstar of the Sinatra variety.
You'll get a bang out of this fellow.
Re: (Score:1)
Gilda:oh,.........never mind.
GEMA != German RIAA (Score:2)
In Germany... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Hmmmm... (Score:5, Funny)
Except that it's Germany's version of Nazis.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Germany's RIAA!? (Score:1, Funny)