Slashdot Mirror
Student Gets PC Confiscated For Distributing MP3s
MagicYoshi writes "Ziff Davis has this story about Oklahoma State University confiscating a student's PC after the RIAA complained that he was distributing copyrighted music and movies." This doesn't make any sense: why would you go after this kid? Shouldn't you sue the people who wrote his operating system and FTP server? *cough* *cough*.
He was prosecuted by the federal government under federal wire fraud statutes, but the case was dismissed because the judge found that copyright infringement cannot be prosecuted under the wire fraud statute.
I wonder if the DMCA has superseded this precedent (though the Massachusetts case may not apply in Oklahoma), which seemed to make FTP sites into "common carriers" in the eyes of the law. More information here.
He wasn't just some Warez d00d. He hardly had *any* studio material. His site consisted almost entirely of live/rare/acoustic stuff. I've known/been trading rare stuff with this guy for a long time now.
So, just add copying MP3's to the growing list of things that people like to do but are illegal. Things that can drain millions of dollars from the economy in legal fees, court cases, high prices from artificial scarcity, costs of creating pointless encryption schemes, pointless police busts.
Doesn't it make sense that the way to create value in our economy (ie, make money) is to see what people like to do, and then figure out a way to profit from it?
Not that I feel particularly sorry for this kid, but I wonder what the RIAA is going to accomplish in their grand scheme of things.
I think Taco was being facetious...
Woz
Is it civil disobedience when I drive 75 miles per hour on the highway? Nope, not in Colorado (speed limit is 75MPH :)
Seriously, I disagree that this is hypocracy. Like I've argued a bit already in other threads of this discussion, nobody's asking for a free ride. Well, okay, some probably are, but I'm not one of them. I don't want to steal from an artist. I also don't want to pile more money into middlemen who don't deserve any of it!
Who should get prosecuted? The technology or the individual? NEITHER! Nobody should be arrested for wanting to listen to music without shelling out money to pay for a manager, publicist, ad agency, and other such useless folk.
Something has to change -- it certainly isn't getting any better now.
Read my stuff.
What could realy make my day is publishing companies going after Public and University libraries and Xerox corporation.
In fact I think I'm going to go after them myself.
The fact that somewhere some unwashed graduate student is making copies of my scientific papers (my flesh and blood, so to speak) with the quality very close to the original and shares them with other unwashed graduated students (and may be, God forbid, reads those copies in the bathroom) and public and university libraries geting shitload of money on copy fees and Xerox corporation selling those godawfull machines make me loos my sleep and apetite.
I feel violated.
regards
- Back off man. I am a scientist
I think they kinda missed a couple of people. Like the other million college students which are distributing. I hope they go for the ones who are distributing the Backstreet Boys first. then I wouldn't argue
Get paid to code OSS
...and you break them - you're gonna get in trouble when you're caught.
Civil disobedience is one thing - but if you take it to far you may end up being a martyr for your cause.
BlackNova Traders
Once again, I'm quite sure Taco was being facetious...
Woz
What they don't tell in the article is that 99.9% of the mp3's this kid had were rare/live/acoustic songs. He had maybe 2 or 3 studio albums on his site that people have uploaded.
it was siezed. The student is facing criminal charges, so they siezed his computer so they could do forensic stuff to it. Much like a car might be siezed if they thought you killed someone.
/*
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/
Shouldn't you sue the people who wrote his operating system and FTP server?
The RIAA and MPAA wish to thank you for your insight. Indeed, we will very soon unleash our blood-thirsty lawyers on all persons who work or have worked on "Open-Source" network software, including their parent operating systems. Such software is not tolerable in a modern, free, capitalist world.
From now on, everybody is required to run Microsoft Windows(tm) software and pay a mandatory fee of $399/month as a provisional royalty payment for listening to sound and music.
Thank you.
/max
-- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
Compressing audio with the MP3 algorithm, storing such files, and playing them back is certainly not illegal.
If you don't have a license from Fraunhofer/Thomson, making, using, or selling MP3 files is patent infringement.
<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game!
Will I retire or break 10K?
No, quite honestly I'd prefer for the RIAA to go away, die completely, and let the actual content producers (read: "artists") take control of their own product back.
The content producers who own their own copyrights have spoken loud and clear about how they feel about sharing music.
I have no idea where the mistaken assumption comes from that artists are OK with their music being pirated. it's just one of those slashdot myths I guess.
Exactly! Nobody is above or immune from the law, not even the lawmakers. And the best way to get laws changed is to become a lawmaker!
-Citizens for the election of Andrew Dvorak to a seat in Congress representing the 1651213th Congressional District.
This doesn't make any sense: why would you go after this kid?
I know you all have some silly ideas, but there is this thing called holding people responsible for their actions. I know its been passe for the past 20 years or so, but it really isn't such a bad idea.
I for one would be incredibly entertained if they started going after individual Napster users for copyright violations...It would be great
Judge: Your defense, Mr. er, Eleet Haxor
Haxor: Information wants to be free! I'm stickin' it to the Man!
Judge: Interesting... (gavel slams) Guilty as Charged!
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
First,let me say that I am a student at OSU. Until recently, the campus has been pretty cool about mp3's, letting napster run rampant ( we havent had the problems of it sucking all the bandwidth). Now we find that they are gonna go after an mp3 pirate. OK fine, they are legally obligated to do so after they are informed that such a thing is taking place. My problem is the fact that cracking runs rampant on campus and there is little if any enoforcement on that. I have forwarded attack logs on several occasions (none of the attacks have been successful so far), and have heard nothing from them. Aren't they legally obligated to do something about that? Its attempted breaking and entering, which is a crime I'd consider more serious than copyright infringement. In my opinion, they need to stop wasting their time with this RIAA bs, and actually do something of service to the students, like maybe help stop the cracking on campus. Once they do that, then if they feel the need to be the RIAA's lapdog, thats their business. Do what the students and state government pay you to do, provide a safe and reasonably secure network. Then worry about the rest.
"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett
It is a known fact that the record companies charge artificially high prices for music, and the artist sees very very little of this money
And how many of this kids 40+ gigs do you suppose was filled with new, unappreciated, or otherwise struggling artists? Or do you suppose this was 40 gigs of Metallica, Madonna, Master P and similar high-profile artists, who have no trouble making money under the current system?
People who steal from the rich (record companies) and give to the poor (college students who enjoy music) are seen as modern day "Robin Hood"s and are considered heros, just like the legendary person.
First of all, Robin Hood, at least how you know him, is a work of pure fiction. If there ever was a real-life basis for Robin Hood (something that is debatable by historians), he likely was nothing more than a common thief. The fact that he happened to be stealing from an unpopular king is probably the only thing that made him famous.
Second, let's get a little perspective here, shall we? We're talking about the theft of music CD's via the MP3 file format: a luxury item. Let me repeat that: A Luxury Item. You can live without music. You can make your own music, or only listen to music created by those who don't try to sell it at exorbinate prices. Go downtown in an city of size on Friday or Saturday night, and you can hear a live bands all night for a few dollars cover. Attend local music festivals, and hear more music than you can probably listen to.
But please, do not point at a $15 Metallica CD, and cry to everone who will listen about how wrong it is to charge such a price, and how you must steal it to defeat the evil record companies. That's just pathetic.
I didn't mention Napster in my post at all. Napster wasn't mentioned in the story submission either. Any inferred connection between the two is a product of your imagination.
If anything, I should be guilty of -1: Offtopic instead of unwarranted linkage of the two.
do anything except claim that your desire to get music for free is some sort of noble cause.
I never claimed in my post that I want music for free; indeed, I have no such desire. For the past three years I have completely boycotted all North American record labels and music produced by such labels, but I spend plenty of money on CDs made outside of North America.
Free music is not a noble cause and is not worth the risk of civil disobedience. Free speech is.
>End the +50 karma cap!
Just curious, but why? I love it. Negates the whole "karma-whore" accusation syndrome. You get to 50, you have all the karma you'll ever need to be able to MM, Moderate and have +2 scores, why would you want to be able to get more?
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
"It starts becoming a major world issue when record and movie companies buy laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act which say that I cannot even listen to SDMI music or watch DVD movies except under their terms."
Don't buy the product if you don't like the licnese. It's morally wrong for you to tell others what they should do with thier own property.
The problem is that the license not to use DVDs on unlicensed players is created by enacting criminal legislation, rather than being negotiated at time of sale, and affects more than just people who buy DVDs.
If you think it's morally wrong to tell others what they should do with their property, you should certainly agree that it's morally wrong to pass a law preventing a person, who might not have ever purchased DVDs and therefore would not be subject to any agreement with the MPRAA, from distributing a program which they have a license from the author to distribute, merely because it is possible to use that program in a way that might break some third party's agreement with the MPAA.
"It's a major issue that even if I have the technical skills to circumvent their restrictions, I can't utilize or publicize those skills for fear of turning into a Jon Johansen"
Don't break the law, and you'll not have any problems. Simple.
But the law in question, by your own statement about the morality of telling others what to do with their property, is immoral. Distributing or creating a program that decrypts CSS-encrypted material violates no one's property rights. Even if it is possible to use it in such a way, that should not be grounds for its creation and distribution to be prohibited by law.
and it was dumb, they mentioned i was stealing from so and so, and i had 1 mp3 of them. they get all pissy about the maybe 50 major label ones i had, mostly covers, and a lot of the ones they got mad about, were legit, i had the cd sitting not 6 feet from me.
since then, i leave it just for access by my friends, and we try new things out, and then we go spend tons to expand our huge cd collections. and i havn't once gotten notice about that.
i still don't know what the music industry is complaining about. i don't watch mtv, or listen to the trash on the radio. mp3 is how i hear new things. it's not the new things they want me to hear i guess.
i've bought more cds from downloading the albums, or a couple of songs, than i have any other manner. i think i've bought 1 cd from the radio, about 50 because my friends showed the bands to me. and about 150 because i checked them out in mp3 beforehand, and i buy it as soon as i have the cash and can afford the cd.
but, i guess they'd rather me not buy anything at all if they won't let me hear it. so, maybe i will just stop buying for all the good it does me.
-------
-------
"don't smoke, don't drink, don't fuck
at least i can fucking think"
Minor Threat
Some of those blue laws are still inforced. The 1986 Bowers v. Hardwick Supreem Court case upheld a Georgia anti-sodemy law. The Court ruled that there was nothing unconstitutional about regulating sexual interactions between consenting adults in private. I have two friends who got tickets in Austin for oral sex. This guy was getting a B.J. from his girlfriend in the front seat of his car while parked in a supermarket parking lot. A cop happened to walk by at just that time. He got two tickets, one for indecent exposure and one for oral sex. She got a ticket for oral sex. It is important to note that in the Bowers v. Hardwick case, all three branches had to agree for the charge to hold.
---------------------------------
Im not trolling I brought up sex because it best illustrates my point.
Was is civil disobedience when Thoreau refused to pay taxes, or was he just a punk trying to save himself some cash? He went to jail for it, and pointed out that anyone else should be prepared to do the same if they choose to protest a law they believe to be unjust by violating it.
Your claim that they don't care to pay for music doesn't pan out in light of the record profits posted by the music industry since the introduction of mp3 technology and Napster. Students are still buying music, they're just listening to mp3's as well. On the other hand, if music sharing is in part a form of protest against documented price fixing by the industry, or protest against what are perceived to be unjust copyright laws, then there is clearly an element of civil disobedience. Protesters, however, should be prepared to pay the price for their cause.
Having to borrow a friend's machine to play Unreal probably doesn't qualify this kid as a Martyr. If he were incarcerated for several months without a trial, then perhaps he would be, even without a cause. Ask Kevin Mitnick about it.
Oh yeah - and it wasn't just distributing anything/everything to random people. He allowed people who had rare/acoustic/live stuff to trade to upload to his site and in turn he'd give them access to his site. It created a *small* community of traders who loved acoustic/live music. I for one was very thankful to this individual because he allowed me to get many acoustic versions of songs that I likely would not have been able to find anywhere else.
This is all about the *RIGHT* way to go about protecting copyrights rather than the way the RIAA is persuing MP3.com and Napster, or the MPAA is persuing DeCSS.
--
Ben Kosse
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!
Why do you say it is legal for non-commercial purposes? Becuase of the AHRA, that states that 'use of a digital recoreding device by a consume rfor non-commercial purposes is not actionable?'... doesn't hold up; computer aren't covered. The AHRA states that using what it defines as an 'audio home recording device' is permissible. Digital devices under ahra must follow the SCMS (serial copy management system.. you know, those 'copyright' and 'original' bits in mp3 headers that nobody uses.
THe AHRA specifically does not apply to computers.
As for #2.. why condescend on me? It was simply a question, not a statement.
As for an ecnrypted HD.. siezing a computer and telling the jury 'look, i'ts encrypted' is a LOT different than telling them 'look, he has all these mp3s'
As for confiscation.. they would have confiscated it anyway. THe point is they would be able to do less with it once they got it.
Solved that problem: encrypt the disks.
--
And how was what this kid doing not illegal?
(+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
Honestly, though, I hope this guy fights back like a sunuvabitch and hits as hard as he can. Illegal or not, I absolutely can't stand some big nasty company (or gov't agency) strongarming someone just to "make an example" out of him/her.
This student was no different from the average w4r3z d00d. For the past few months Slashdotters have been saying the RIAA shouldn't go after Napster because they are providing a service, now the RIAA goes after a person who is distributing thousands of MP3s of copyrighted work and advertizing for his wares in chat rooms and the RIAA is still wrong?!?
What the fuck do you want? The RIAA shouldn't go after a service that is a haven for music piracy and they shouldn't go after music pirates? Maybe you'd like them simply to spend millions of dollars producing, promoting and distributing music then give away CDs just like AOL.
Frankly as a college student, who frequently sees network bandwidth eaten up by people like this kid who had 10000 songs on his hard drive then advertized for total strangers to come saturate his campus' network, I have no sympathy for him.
BTW, am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that state colleges have their own police force? I can see the practical need for policing a large group of people, but I see a real conflict of interest here, from the perspective of the surrounding community (college police are controlled by the college) and the students (police and professors, all working together...)
No, I'm much happier with a police force specifically for a campus than with a municipal police force. First off, think about how many potential crimes go on at a university. The police blotter at my school was always at least ten times as long per week as the municipal one. If I was a city cop, I wouldn't want to take part in that either. Secondly, campus police have, first and foremost, the protection of the student body in mind, not the protection of the city government (which I think is a bigger conflict of interest). Thus, you find that campus police are much more lenient on matters than their municipal counterparts. Finally, you don't have to deal with those nasty bureacratic funding deals. University cops get paid largely with university funds.
And besides, I guarantee you that those university cops aren't doing the forensic analysis of that kid's hard drive, unless of course, their analysis amounts to 'Quick, Jimbo, download all this kid's music before the Feds get their hands on it'.
Well I suppose that the university has reasons.. Good reasons as well. For one, Mp3's are still "illegal".. So someone having illegal stuff on university grounds Im sure is not a good thing. He is also taking their bandwidth correct? There's another strike against him. :) I don't think the university cares if you have some Mp3's.. BUT if you are running an FTP and openly distributing them.. I don't think they shine on that. So they were pretty justified.. Hell, it's their T3. ;-)
-TimmyC, Tech Guru
The fact that this guy was advertising in chat rooms for his wares (*cough*) makes me lose any sympathy. It's one thing to copy some movies and songs and share them with your friends on an ftp server, I do it and I'm sure many other slashdotters do the same. But the wholesale distribution to anonymous people is just plain silly. And I'm sure that the university's computer policy doesn't allow people to run ftp servers or distribute copyrighted material.
No sympathy at all.
"He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."
Computer equipment can and is seized when used in connection with a crime, and this isn't exactly the first time computers have been confiscated.
:-P
On a different note, the wording of the statement amused me slightly.
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Amount of substance? They make it sound like he was distributing drugs. Maybe they're checking the hard drive for traces of white powders
Hey Taco if the kid used Linux do you think you would have made such a biased, stupid comment like you did?
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there"
:)
So we can assume those movies refered to were Adult in nature can we? They're unlikely to want to review his Metallica collection after all
0daymeme.com: Great stuff.
"It's very simple," said an RIAA spokesman. "He was distributing MP3s and violating copyright. And, in line with our new `zero-tolerance' policy, we will be seizing the tools of copyright violation: in this case, the fingers he used to type with, and the eyes he used to confirm his crime with. The surgery is scheduled for next week."
The spokesman denied that this was too harsh a punishment. "Oh, give me a break. It's in the Bible, after all. And don't forget that this is a temporary seizure. We will be keeping the eyes and fingers in cryogenic storage, and after one year we will return them to the student. We even pick up the tab for the surgery. Pretty sweet, if you ask me."
Free Software Foundation guru Richard M. Stallman could not be reached for comment. A source close to him said that he was "frantically trying to uninstall his copy of Gnapster."
Carousel is a lie!
In college, many of my friends and I do transfer music online. However, when somebody sets up an FTP server with 10,000 MP3s, using campus bandwidth, and gets enough traffic for the RIAA to be able to find his site, he deserves to get busted.
In the process of building up his collection, this student was hogging bandwidth that could have been used for academic or less bandwidth-intensive personal applications. Every once in a while, the network at my campus slows to a crawl and I *know* it is because somebody planning a party has decided to download 50-100 MP3s within the span of a few hours.
I would be upset if the RIAA harassed a casual MP3 user with only a few hundred files occasionally shared over Napster. But, this was an "always-on" FTP server with an inordinate amount of bandwidth. When somebody is so blatantly disrespecting all parties involved, I have no sympathy.
ByteMyCode.com: A Web 2.0 code sharing community.
I happen to be a student at Oklahoma State University myself, and while I am aware of plenty of other students who have been in trouble for MP3 distribution, most of them just had their network access cut off. The article in the campus newspaper on this particular incident, which can be found here, mentions that unlike some other campuses, however, OSU's CIS department will *not* censor traffic and will *not* scan the network for "illegal" shares. To quote the assistant director - "We are not Big Brother, we are not a censor, but we won't turn a blind eye."
Incidentally, the dorm that this student lived in had just been wired with ethernet and was one of the last dorms on campus to have this done.
=================================
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...
Actually I've read the license on all my DVD's, and NONE of them restrict playback with DeCSS or require an "authorized" player. So I'm not violating any licenses or laws if I use DeCSS to view them.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
So let's see, the kid distributed someone else's property without their permission. He broke the law, and campus rules, and got slammed for it.
I can guarantee that if someone distributed Linux without proper permissions, violating the GPL or something, you'd all jump on his back.
I support the distribution of music over the Net wholheartedly. But, the music and movies do belong to someone, and taking it from them is stealing.
Defending people who are obviously guilty just because it deals with "the Internet" serves no more then to dilute the cause and make you look like fools.
NOTE: My apologies if there is another post here with the same subject - a minor misclick on my part.
My bad. On the other hand, all those midwestern states all look alike ;-)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I got busted back in 97 for running an FTP out of my dorm just like this kid. The coolest part was that the RIAA actually faxed my univeristy president about me! I was listed by name and IP address. I felt so special.
I first became worried when I noticed attempted logins from the Network Security Office at our school. I prompty booted them out and shut down the server. But alas, it was too late. 20 minutes later I noticed my connection was gone. And a week later I was in Judicial Affairs getting bitched at by some old woman with bad breath.
I lost my dorm connection for an entire year because of that. So now I no longer distribute MP3s, I just take them. I paid my dues dammit!
So anyway, my whole point is that the RIAA has been going after individual students for at least 3 years now. This is the first I've heard of a confiscated computer though.
-=God Hates Me=-
This is one of those times where ya wish ya had an encrypted filesystem on the non-partitioned space of the drive. They'd never find it :-)
Vidi, Vici, Veni
There were three different occasions of students setting up a "home business" pirating software at the University of Alberta in the past few years (that I know of). All underwent similar procedures. These are the same sort of measures that would be undertaken if you were suspected of serving out pornography. If you're suspected of serving illegal content, then they take your machine at the time of arrest to look for said content to use as evidence. This just got media attention because the media is keeping a lookout for mp3-related news.
- W. Blaine Dowler
http://www.bureau42.com
I don't think that there's much historical dispute that there *was* an Earl Robin of Loxley who didn't get alon with the king. But as to what he di, that's another matter :)
.:)
However, the "evil taxes" he fought were one of the best things that happened for the people anywhere in Europe for a couple of hundred years in either direction. These taxes were tto fund the King's courgts founded by Richard and John's father (whose name I forget. Another Richard?), which were the basis for teh little guy having at least *some* chance. Previously, all matters were heard in baronial courts--so you sue your evil overlord, and he gets to be the judge as well. The courts funded by that tax developed the Common Law of England, which ewe use today in almost all the english speaking countries.
While I'm at it, Richard (the "good" king in the tale) was one of England's worst, but he ameliorated this by being out o fthe country for almost all of his reign, while "evil" Prince (later King) John was probably one of the better ones--he also signed the Magna Carta, albeit at spear point. And Maid Marion? a fictional character from a french poem a centruy later, who somehow left that poem for the greener pastures of a legend about a nobleman turned brigand who stole the people's chances at justice . .
hawk
And yes because some money-hungry corporation gets a law passed then the already-thin police budgets now have to spend hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on a professional forensic analysis of some student's hard drive.
They probaly go for the "soft" targets in order to make it look as though they are doing some kind of decent job.
And for those of you that still go to the movies (not everyone is going to boycott completely), for every dollar to spend doing so, send a dollar to EFF. So if you go to 15 movies a year at $7 each, send an extra $105 (15x7) to EFF, above and beyond what you would otherwise give. That will allow them to fight back.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The thing that many people are complaining about is that current legislative process does not necessarily mean majority rules.
Indeed with the current situation you are very unlikly to get laws representing majority views
Professional lobbying and campaign donations have diluted the laws passed from being good for the nation to being good for one's supporters.
Some of the organisations doing this represent big business, but by no means all.
It is most certainly possible to buy votes, and that is the way our legislative system works now and will work for some time.
The fault is as much with the police and judiciary. A simple refusal to operate such laws would send a stronger message than any ammount of lobbying.
A better, though less likely solution would be the conviction, for High Treason, of any legislator who puts lobbiests before the state. (In the Case of the US the "state" is, or at least should be, the written constitution.)
OK, so they accused a student of illegally distributing copyrighted material. Fair enough. Did they have proof? Did they have proof that those downloaders were not withing fair-use rights (meaning, of course, that they had already purchased the material being download, and keep in mind that they are also innocent until proven guilty)? Or, failing that, did they have proof that this guy hadn't purchased the materials he was making available? Or, failing even that, did they have proof that he was intentionallymaking these available, as opposed to simply having lots of stuff on his machine, which was then 0wn3d by some l33t Skr1pt k1dd13 who set up a server without this guy even knowing (as I understand, it was a Windows box after all...)
If they could prove any of this, then I have no problem with what they did. In fact, I applaud them if they had proof of wrongdoing; this is how such cases should be handled. Punish the guilty ones, rather than just everyone.
If, on the other hand, they had no proof, and simply sent a baseless accusation, then this is nothing more than presumption of guilt, and I can't support that. It's unconstiutional, and even if it weren't it would still trample the rights of innocent people, now in danger of being arrested just because some fat-cat record execs think you might be stealing from them.
----------
Don't like a law, try to have it overturned. But, fighting by disobeying the police and judges is a very hard way to fight. Not impossible but you had BETTER *KNOW* you are right! Civil disobedience has failed far far far far far far far more often than it's succeeded in history. Are you THAT sure that stealing music is legal?
Whatever the failure rate of "civil disobedience" the ability of ordinary people to overturn laws (especially those backed up by a powerful lobbying group) is very, very, very limited, Regardless of how unjust they might be, regardless of what some written constitution might say.
Actually, no, the reason copyright laws exist is because the majority of elected representatives support them (or did support them at the time they were written).
Possibly a majority of those legislators who actually voted on the issue.
A small majority of American people actually vote, and those who do are usually voting against someone as opposed to for someone.
Also remember that organised political lobbying groups typically have far more infuence over legislators than voters anyway.
Contents of the post are that the student used a DSL line at home to run an FTP server for his friends, not anonymous, that collected and shared rare acoustic music.
It's kind of hard to judge these comments in a vacuum. I wish that there were some more run of the mill comments on MoooKow's page. Something smells.
Under the Constitution, the information content of published music, movies, or other works is not the property of the publishers, but of the people. Copyright is an arrangement where the public temporarily restricts its own rights, to a limited extent, to provide an incentive for authors to create more works that will benefit the public. It is not a recognition of any "natural property right", and your term "their own property" thus goes against the Founders' intent for copyright, and 200+ years of law.
However in that 200 odd years the concept of copyright has been modified drastically. The original drafters would never accept the current length of copyrights, restrictions on "derived works", the ability of corporate entities to masqurade as people. Let alone just about any part of the DMCA.
Heh. That's quite a load of bullshit. There were a _lot_ of musicians during the middle ages. In fact, if you could memorize songs and stories, you could make quite a bit of money. There are stories about such musicians that wandered throughout Europe, welcome wherever they went.
But not much has survived because there really wasn't a method of musical notation yet (that was developed by monks and took a while to become widely used) nor recording music.
In the realm of art and literature much more has survived, and all of the works of the ages (including the vast majority that did not survive due to fires, need for construction materials, religious wars etc) were copyrightless. Copyrights didn't exist (at least not the kind you're thinking of) until the 17th century. Are you telling me that there were NO creative works until then?
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
According to this Wired News article, this isn't the first time something like this has happened in Oregon. This student could very possibly end up facing criminal charges as the one in the Wired news story did.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
You guys think this case is bad? This is nothing. I wish more people knew what is going on.
A family member of mine works in the Office of General Consul for the California State University system. The RIAA sends their requests for student information to this family member. The RIAA was told to go get a subpeona. So guess what? The RIAA got its friends in the California legislature to give them the power to issue their own subpoenas. I am not kidding. The RIAA has the power to issue subpoenas in the State of California.
Why not just get rid of karma all together? Virtually everyone whose been here longer than a couple months has over 25 karma, so they get the +1 and you can't see anyone elses karma anyway.
This makes karma worthless as a "reputation" system, which was the orginal idea anyway. Just give the +1 based on seniority.
Slashdot did not always have karma. There was a period when there was moderation and no karma. People got the positive reinforcement for posting something acceptable, but there weren't folks like waldoj and Shoeboy keeping score. IMO, the S/N ratio was much higher.
When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Generally, campus police do *not* answer to the university, at least not in a police function. In some states, they're actually local deputy sherriff's, in others, they're a branch of the state police.
ANd then there's University of Chicago, a private school with an actual police force--it was part of teh deal that kept it from moving west and merging with Stanford. The local constabulary was famously corrupt at that point, and UC demanded the separate force (paid for by the city and/or county, iirc) as a condition.
I've been reading slashdot for almost 3 years now (I think about that long... could be off, has been a while anyhoo :). I'm simply really not much of a poster though -- I usually don't have the time to post. I just like reading the articles and other people's takes on them mostly. I'm posting a lot on this article however because I happen to know some facts in the matter that havn't been brought to light by the article and I think have some relavance. PS. I'm a He :P
Everett Eaton, public safety director at OSU,
Thank GOODNESS that this threat to public safety has been removed. We all know that distributing MP3s can lead to date rape in fraternity houses, underage drinking, and alcohol poisoning.
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Oops! Sorry about that irony up there, Eaton. I didn't realize he was distributing illegal substances. My mistake - good thing you jumped in there!
BTW, am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that state colleges have their own police force? I can see the practical need for policing a large group of people, but I see a real conflict of interest here, from the perspective of the surrounding community (college police are controlled by the college) and the students (police and professors, all working together...)
It's not like campus police don't have anything better to do. How many rapes and muggings are there in a year?
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-
And yes because some money-hungry corporation gets a law passed then the already-thin police budgets now have to spend hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on a professional forensic analysis of some student's hard drive.
Is this what the founding fathers had in mind when they penned "no unreasonable search and seizure"? You know he won't see that hardware returned until it is no longer worth its weight in scrap metal.
What if some company passes a law that not tying your shoelaces is a crime? Are the police gonna start prosecuting that one?
This seems like a breakdown in separation of powers. How many blue laws are still on the books but wholly ignored by the police? Laws about sodomy come to mind, or spitting on the Sabbath. Sure, the legislative branch handed us this piece of crap we call the DMCA, but I blame the executive brance for becoming a private army at the beck and call of corporations. If I was a police chief and some company called to complain about a kid sharing music...I'd tell them to take a number and where to stick it.
Feh. Just my two cents.
Still, makes you want to go install Scram Disk as soon as possible.
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Well, I guess I can see that. I can kind of relate because I had all my karma taken away at one point for violating am unwritten rule, moderating down signal 11. I guess I judge how much my contribution to /. is by how much discussion my comments start.
Karma shouldn't be an incentive to post, though. I see it more as an equalizer to keep people with something to say that the majority thinks should be heard from being drowned out by those who have nothing to add to the discussion.
There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.
"Shouldn't you sue the people who wrote his operating system and FTP server?" And if someone sells drugs from their car, should we not confiscate the car, but instead sue the car manufacturer??
Ah, but by going after the guys who wrote Napster, they're *essentially* going after "the people who wrote his FTP server".
If it's absurd to go after one, it's absurd to go after the other.
In related news, the student's body was stripped of electrons, after a schoolmate pointed out that it was theoretically possible that he was storing infinite numbers of MP3s in them.
"It was a real tragedy," admitted Everett Eaton, public safety director at OSU. "Fortunately, I was across town at the time, so I wasn't caught in the blast as the resultant plasma explosion wiped out half the campus, leaving the remainder a radioactive wreck that won't be fit for human habitation, let alone study, for about 50,000 years. The boy did not survive the procedure, of course, but do the crime, do the time, I always say."
I love the last line:
;)
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Sheesh, you'd think he was a crack dealer or something. What I wanna know is why the cops don't seize the servers of GPL violators, if they're so concerned about copyright violations
On another note, am I correct in recalling that the police in the US aren't allowed to seize a TV from a residence because it's the main method for obtaining public information? Would there be any chance of getting a ruling like that on PCs? (God knows I get a lot more information from my PC than I do from my TV...)
We're not talking about someone with a few dozen, or even a few hundred MP3s, from his personal collection.
The computer they confiscated allegedly had, even in this day, a large amount of storage (40 Gigs of content was shared, more than 100 Gigs installed). You don't buy 100 Gigs just to keep copies of Encarta available.
The student allegedly made regular requests to the users of his system to send any songs that he wasn't already offering. If he were making the request to fill in a few blanks, like "I haven't heard that new Smashing Pumpkins labelless vinyl, send me some," this wouldn't be seen as a piracy enterprise.
Though his school doesn't block Napster, the school does have a duty to check into allegations made about its students actions, if they're potentially legal. If they didn't, the school would be complicitous, or worse, an accomplice, to any actions proven to be illegal.
Remember, the word alleged means that a claim of guilt has been made, but not proven. That's why stuff gets confiscated in the investigation phase of a criminal case, to use as evidence in the case. If charges are pressed, then he'll face the courts, and that evidence is used against him. If he's found guilty, it will be the elected judge (and jury if selected) that sentences him. If he broke the laws, it was laws passed by elected legislators and executives.
[
Nope nope. The DMCA does not say that I am not allowed to USE a device that circumvents a measure restricting access to a copyrighted work. It says that I am not allowed to traffic in or distribute such a device. Big difference.
I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
http://www.kuci.org/~brianm/mp3.jpg
the grateful dead shows that I have are completely sanctioned by their owners. as long as I trade shows that I (or some other non-profit hobby taper) taped, there's absolutely nothing illegal about sharing these tapes as mp3's. this is merely one example (sufficient to show just 1 counter-example..) of how your above statement is wrong.
commercial recordings are another matter; distributing them is currently held to be illegal (or some level of badness; I have a problem with the word illegal used in such a harmless thing as trading past performances saved as files)
but when you record your own sound,music or when the owner of that sound,music declares the work 'public domain and not-for-profit', trading such mp3's is most certainly 100% legal.
--
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Just because something can be used illegally does not render that item illegal, particularly when that item can also be used to distribute "speech." It doesn't matter if there is a way to combat it effectively or not, Napster is not inherently illegal. You have admitted this already. Since Napster is not inherently illegal, nor is the use of Napster sufficient or necessary for you to be partaking in an illegal action, there is no reasonable standing to demand it be shut down.
--
Ben Kosse
--
Ben Kosse
Remember Ed Curry!
Within the next four months, a student or "other individual found downloading illegal MP3 tracks" will go to jail "as a clear signal that piracy will not be tolerated in the US."
So my question is, do American jails have enough room for 20 million pirates?
Matt
Fairtunes
Finally, the RIAA is acting within it's reasonable rights. What we need is more of this, and an end to fighting technology tooth and nail and demanding a zillion special hardware based locks.
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Geez, that quote makes him sound like he was running a meth lab or something.
--GnrcMan--
It starts becoming a major world issue when record and movie companies buy laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act which say that I cannot even listen to SDMI music or watch DVD movies except under their terms.
It's a major issue that even if I have the technical skills to circumvent their restrictions, I can't utilize or publicize those skills for fear of turning into a Jon Johansen.
It's really a major issue when a judge dictates to me that I can't even post a hyperlink to a file named decss.tar.gz (as in the Kaplan ruling), just because it might constitute contributory infringement.
I'd like to change the laws within the system if I could, but at this point our so-called democracy is so corrupt with corporate influence that frankly I don't have much chance of achieving anything legitimately.
Yah, but those have been around for a bit (particularly long 'nuff to reminice 'bout how nice /. was in the Good Old Days) have a better appreciation for the community's standards.
But then again, as user 652 (and I waited a bit before getting an account), maybe that's just self-interest speaking...
Several thoughts come to mind.
1) Well, it IS illegal.. and he WAS doing it... so what's the big deal?
2) Campus police.. are they 'real' police? Can they sieze things? (I honestly have no idea.. someone fill me in?)
3) For all our wonderful 'technology', the stuff we use to do MP3, the stuff we think is 'revolutionary' and should be used.... we all too often overlook encryption. 2 things could perhaps help this guy. If his HD was encrypted (or at least the relevant portions), he would be in better shape. Strongdisk, for instance, has a nice feature where you can set up ghosted emergency filesystems such that if you supply one password, you get the real one, if you supply the 'emergency' password, you get the fake one, destroy the original, etc. This idea could be expanded on greatly..
3) Encrypted/authenticated sessions. You know what? Look at big warez sites these days. THe passwords don't get just 'handed out' all over. IPs are filtered, connections are proxied, and you don't get it unless you are part of a group, or 'know' somebody. WHy? Because what they are doing is illegal. Sharing mp3 should follow similar rules.
4) Hmm. What if 3 friends and I all get together and decide to have a 'shared' music collection online, that only we four have access to, so we pool all our stuff together.. is this illegal also? Should it be? I mean, if we all lived together, we could share a CD collection...
5) Secure comm protocol. We need a way to archive, database, and share files in a secure manner. Authenticate that the person who grabbed them had a right to do so; that traffic should be encrypted. IT also needs to employ some sort of.. damn. I forget the word. Deniability? No.... that feature of cryptographic communications that would prevent a third party from proving that a transaction ever took place? We need that.
~~~~~~ WANTED ~~~~~~~
= -=-=-=-=-=-=-
The evil, dreaded BARD ARTURUS OF RHODES.
For the crime of singing the song "Oops, ye didth it again" in the Olde Tavern of Havernook on the morn of the fifth day of the eleventh month, without remittance of expected royalties to His High Lord the Duke of Media.
Offered reward of 1000 gold pieces.
Known to be travelling in the company of Robin of Locksley (a.k.a. Robin of the Hood). Reward for incidental capture of Locksley shall be an additional one hundred pence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't laugh, if RIAA develops time travel this is how the story will go. And Disney will make an animated feature about it where Bard Arturus is hung and all the kingdom rejoices.
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
You could build a more basic system based on the concept -- just build a really basic, thin electromagnet and tape it to the drive itself. When the Gestapo comes to your door, just press a button to zap the drive. Or, you could include a battery and have it rigged to zap the drive if the case is improperly removed, or whatever.
Probably are legal ramifications to this, what with destroying evidence and all. Still, remember that Mitnik is only loose now because the cops couldn't read his hard drive ("No, your honor, it's not erased -- it's just very heavily encrypted").
This is still only a band-aide. The megacorps have become the modern tyrants, and we're moving towards a world where we won't have any wiggle room to protest -- government and corporations working in together to keep you as a slave. They'll control what you see, hear, learn in school and (thanks to the first three) what you think.
Solutions? There's only one -- if government can't protect us (which is what governments are supposed to be doing in the first place), perhaps it's time to strike back in the same way that people have always struck against those who would control them, the tyrants. Protest as all of those who would be oppressed have finally been forced to, and force the hand of your master -- by any means necessary.
Not that I'd advocate violence -- government and the TV say it's bad, so it must be. So, don't think in that direction. Go about your day, smile about your $20k in stock options and your car and your existance. Don't care if your kids are being raised with corporations controlling their schools, or if all your news comes from the same parent company. Ignore the fact that money is speech, and politicians are bought and sold. At least you can barbeque on the weekends and buy expensive little scooters for your 1.5 children.
Apathy is just so conveniant.
----
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
I claim no property rights on the content of a DVD disc, but I assert full property rights on the material the disc is made of. If I have the technical skill to play back the material with my own computer (not copy, just play back), this act should not be illegal, as it currently is.
To illegalize this act amounts to the record company telling me what I can and can not do with my computer and my plastic disc, which is exactly the thing that you decry as morally wrong.
Don't break the law, and you'll not have any problems. It's a slippery slope once you have situational morals.
Slippery slopes are dangerous but sometimes you have to take the risk. With enough skill, you can keep yourself from falling down.
Unquestioning obedience to an unjust law is just as bad for society as blind disregard for just laws. Our segregation laws would not have improved if Rosa Parks hadn't broken one. Voting alone wouldn't have done it: minorities are always outvoted by a majority.
I actually agree with the original poster--free music is not on a par with civil rights. However, the issue that matters to me is free speech, and free speech is.
Then you should have no problem with this. The RIAA doesn't want you to take it's stuff. In an anarchy, they're practicly EXPECTED to do stuff like this.
Later Erik Z
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.