Slashdot Mirror
Kazaa Is Legal, Dutch Appeals Court Rules
Killjoy_b writes "
First, the courts in the Netherlands rule against Kazaa, in a higher appeal, the courts rule in favour of Kazaa saying "The software itself doesn't commit any illegal acts, it's the users that could do that, therefore the software is legal" Read the Dutch article on Webwereld
I like the way this turned out :)" Another Dutch reader wrote with this: " The Judge ruled that even if the users violated copyright, Kazaa did not. Important in the ruling were the facts that Kazaa does not rely on a central server, and that it is not bound to music or video files alone.
According to Webwereld (in Dutch) Kazaa is pondering if they should sue back for lost damages. After the first court ruling against Kazaa, they were forced to sell part of their business, for supposedly a too low prize. " And despite the the fact that both Taco and I are from Holland, MI, no, neither of us can speak/read Dutch - so don't ask us to translate. Update: 03/28 14:39 GMT by M : Reuters has an English summary.
"The Judge ruled that even if the users violated copyright, Kazaa did not."
"Duh" added the Judge.
this is the Netherlands where they smile on drug use and prostitution. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
wohooow! Long live the Netherlands! first they legalize canabis and now this! *victory dance*
"The majority is always sane, Louis." -- Nessus
http://slashdot.jp
With the post about going after copyrights, yesterday about the privacy issue for websites and other related things going on, you'd allmost think that the users and normal people are starting to win a bit....... I can dream can't I? This is good news for them tho. But to bad MusicCity got knocked off, and they took down their linux clone. I have a feeling they won't last much longer like this. I only hope that Guntella finaly gets better (hasing files for downloading from more then one person at a time would be nice! c'mon LimeWire).
Can this ruling in a foreign court be used as a reference for cases here in the US/UK? More importantly, can Kazaa be brought to court in the US, or does this ruling afford it some type of protection?
I am wondering if the judge in this case was in some manner technically savy, since he noted Kazaa didn't depend on a central server and thus the user network is out of its control, thus Kazaa was just considered a software provider and did not directly break any laws.
We will have to see how this affects other court cases surrounding p2p in other countries.
"I'll just chip in a bit for RedHat: I actually have that installed on my university machine." - Linus, '95
I don't know much about US law makers (although I read a lot about them on /.) but from what I've gathered in the past, they are NOT going to be happy about this. It seems the US have placed themselves as superCop of the Internet, and if they say it's not OK, then you better beleive it is'nt, be that in Russia, Holland or Nigeria... can't wait to see what kind of loophole some highly placed american lawmakers are gonna come up with to counter this news...
how does one change his
Guns dont kill people..People kill people..
Kazaa does not make people violate copyright laws.. RIAA and MPAA and their cronies does.
Rapid Nirvana
"In a setback for efforts to halt copyright abuse, a Dutch appeals court on Thursday told a technology firm it could distribute a software program that is designed to let users share music and films on the Internet."
Nice spin. Yes, there wasn't anything else at stake other than "copyright abuse". Nothing at all. And the efforts to halt copyright abuse? That's all they're trying to do - just halt abuse.
Sure.
So this will be good news for anyone who writes software that gets round e-book encryption. After all, its the user that's instructing the software to do it, just like the user is instructing Kazaa to download the pirated music.
Also, it'll be good news for the writers of Back Orifice, who can now publish their software quite freely, or sell it in PC World, since it's the *user* that's doing something wrong.
Follow me
Zembla( look under "volgende week" ), will do a documentory on the people behind kazaa on friday (nederland 3, in dutch (duh)), it will feature interviews and is likely to have some comments on these developments.
It's a victory for efforts to halt copyright abuse.
Best Slashdot Co
If we can start racking up some reversals in the States, and get some damages against the RIAA and others, you can bet the lawsuits would start drying up and it might equate to the first chinks in the armor of the DMCA.
-"I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle." - Arthur Dent
I don't get it.. why would they sue to get back lost damages? Wouldn't they want to sue to get back lost earnings? *confused*
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
What part of responsibility or role do the hosting companies hold in this ? We provide an Acceptable Use Policy and I think if we had a Kazaa user as customer, trading MP3s, and we get a court order to cancel service, we'd have to.
Has anybody had such experiences/similar scenarios they'd share ? What are the implications of such a judgement on current AUPs legal documents in the hosting industry ?
Notepad specialist & FAT administrator, group training available
For that matter, they have seriously fucked up their network. The new Morpheus that uses Gnutella sucks, and the fast track network has lost a huge portion of its file base.
Kazaa has been nothing but trouble for p2p software, maybe they should be sued by morpheus for damages....
Admiralty law (law of the sea) cases are international. Courts in different countries cite each other's rulings frequently. But I think that is because of various treaties. Is there a treaty that both the US and the Netherlands have signed that would allow a US lawyer to cite the Dutch ruling?
Best Slashdot Co
FINALLY someone realises that hey, it's not the software that's doing the pirating. The software has actual legal (albeit underutilized) applications.
The users on the other hand, are the ones who take the tool and turn it to evil (insert diabolical music track here), depriving the MPAA of their hard-earned money. Except well, most of the 'bad users' buy a lot more music than the 'good users' anyway.. and the MPAA execs don't actually create the music they sell.. hrmm...
It'll be interesting to see what impact, if any, this will have on filesharing software in North America. Given the typical 'Our laws apply to you but yours don't apply to us' view of the US legal system, I'd say not much. Eh, at best it might give the software producers a safe haven in which to register their businesses. Go global village.
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo - H. G. Wells
>>Important in the ruling were the facts that Kazaa does not rely on a central server, and that it is not bound to music or video files alone. I *knew* those other options had to be there for a reason... legal cover! ;) Seriously though, i've tried document search, and if everyone would share their writing folders it would rule! i mean, you could search for "The Feebles" and find essays people had written on the topic... S'also good for finding cereal numbaz N such.
geeks are cats who dig a certain kind of cool
They have computers over there!!!
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
This reminds me of the saying, "Guns don't kill people; people kill people."
This ruling brings to mind a somewhat similar idea of, "Software doesn't violate copyrights, people violate copyrights."
Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
I am proud to live in the Netherlands, where laws are made on principles of justice, not on how much the industry is willing to pay. (Senator Hollings, best Senator money can buy!)
This is great news for the Dutch. I am wondering if rulings like this can help any cases in the US? Lawyers always cite case law, but do foreign decisions carry any weight in the US? You would think that a thorough logical analysis of a situation would be persuasive anywhere. I am assuming the laws of logic apply everywhere, kind of like the laws of physics. Or am I being naive?
Those damn Käse Kopf...
love is just extroverted narcissism
Wonder when we'll see napster.nl appear?
I'm glad to see that at least some courts havn't sold out yet...
Business News and Resources: www.usasource.net
Software doesnt steal IP content, people steal IP content
* Carthago Delenda Est *
- Do we charge gun manufacturers with murder?
- Do hold car manufacturers responsible for allowing people to operate their cars will intoxicated?
Yet for some reason people feel that those who provide the means to illegally copy software or music should be responsible for the actions of others.UNIX/Linux Consulting
How can you reconcile being pro-Kazaa, then? This is a legitimate query, especially considering the flood of support for Google on here when they decided to ban gun shops from advertising. Every crime is the fault of the criminal, so why should the instrument ever be banned, whether it's Kazaa, or paraphernelia, or guns? Can someone resolve this seeming contradiction?
This judge couldn't have said it better. The program by itself doesn't violate anything besides interface aesthetics. I'm glad to see that there's still some common sense left. The Dutch tend to be very 'nuchter' (down to earth would be appropriate translation) towards the grey area of law and order. This prevented our (yes, I'm Dutch myself) society from becoming corporate-driven and claim oriented like American society. Kazaa itself did nothing wrong, so you can't punish them.
And instead of refocussing on the users of Kazaa who do illegal things (almost all users) all that corporate power should be spent building a system where people can legally obtain music. If the downloads are fast, the available tracks are 'what the people want' and the quality is good there is some serious money to be made. And the musicbusiness can have their precious profits back.
And despite the the fact that both Taco and I are from Holland, MI, no, neither of us can speak/read Dutch - so don't ask us to translate.
Bluf maar..
It can also be found here:
t ernetnews&StoryID=753053
http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=in
I got out of bed and checked Slashdot. For some reason, I read the headline as "Karma illegal, Dutch Appeals Court Rules"..
At that point, I started wondering if I needed more sleep.
slashdot!=valid HTML
I am from the US so I don't know the court system over there. Can it be appealed again? If so how many more courts before it reaches the highest court?
Atto
I didn't use the preview button, so get over it!!!!
Mike
Thursday, 28 march 2002 - The music-exchange-service KaZaA is not responsible for violation of author-rights by the users of the program.
The Court of Amsterdam has decided so this morning. The court has broken the decision from judge R Oribio de Castro in the affair that Buma/Stemra had against KaZaA.
Following the Buma/Stemra, KaZaA make it easier with it's software to break author-rights. The software was mostly used for music-swapping, with the authors NOT being retributed.
Oribio de Castro decided that KaZaA should take measure to prevent the breaking of author-rights. If KaZaA didn't take there in account, should the company get a big fine. The people from KaZaA decided then to sell the software to the australian company Sharman.
As it can be seen now, thuis was not needed. The court of Amsterdam decided in het higher appeal that KaZaA was right agaisnt the ruling of Oribio de Castro and can not be held responsible for the breaking of author-rights of the users of the program. "As far as author rights are concerned, the infrigements are done by the users of the computer progam and not by KaZaA".
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm is happy with the ruling but find the whole way the affair went "a little [zuur---acid ?]". The CEO Niklas Zennström got the ruling with mitigated feelings too. "For KaZaA, the ruling came too late. I hope that music-organisations like Buma/Stemra will now be ready to come to speak instead of going to the court", said Zennström.
The court has seen the difference between Napster and KaZaA as said Alberdingk Thijm. "With Napster, there is a central server, with KaZaA, not. To go further, KaZaA is not only about sharing of music files".
"What must still be seen is the meaning of the arrest for KaZaA" said KaZaA in a press declaration. The sharing diesnt said that they were forced to end their worldwide company activity by the earlier court ruling and have thus sold the most important company-parts.
This was acknowledged by the court too [Sorry, can't translate this]
This means that Buma had applied a ruling that was not valid, said Alberdingk Thijm. "In theory, Buma is responsible for the selling at a value much lower than it would have been otherwise". It is still unknown if there will be step taken against the athor-rights organization.
Buma/Stemra was unavailable for comments.
When Dutch museums feature paintings - many of them showing lustful, drinking, music-playing, partying people - the tags on the wall most often explain how the painting was done to illustrate that people should not live that way! The way life is actually lived and appreciated by the Dutch has long been at odds with what they say about it. This positive use of hypocrisy, once used to lead happy lives while paying lip service to Christian injunctions against happy behavior, is now used to allow not just pot but storefronts throughout the country selling organic psychedelics, while claiming, "Oh yes, this is illegal, we are in keeping with the broader European norms on that!"
Now, how does this fit with file sharing? Well, here creative hypocrisy isn't even needed, since it's clearly within the letter of the law. It's American courts which are going beyond both law and common sense, embracing monopolistic behavior as an extension of the puritan self-constraint we too often perversely pleasure ourselves by.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
... and Sanity gets the puck, takes it across the blue line... passes to the Netherlands... he shoots HE SCORES!!! And in the first period the score is now Insanity 27, Sanity 1...
-"One machine can do the work of fifty ordinary men. No machine can do the work of one extraordinary man." -EH
(Note: my English legal vocabulary is limited... but you'll get the gist)
Court: exchange service KaZaA is legal
Thursday, March 28 2002 The music exchange server KaZaA is not responsible for the copyright violations of the users of the program.
This is the decision of the court in Amsterdam. The Court nullified the decision of Judge R. Oribio de Castro in the case that Buma/Stemra [the Dutch copyright and royalties collector organisation] had set up against KaZaA.
According to Buma/Stemra KaZaA encourages with its program copyright violations The software is mainly being used to exchange music, without paying any royalty fees.
Oribio de Castro therefor declared that KaZaA should take countermeasures to end these violations of copyright. If KaZaA failed to comply, it would face severe fines. The founders of KaZaA then decided to sell the software to the Australian based Sharman company.
A bitter pill
Eventually, that hadn't been necessary. The Amsterdam Court ruled in the appeals case that KaZaA had set up against the sentence of Oribio de Casta, that KaZaA can not be held responsible for the copyright violations of the users of the program. "As far as there are any copyright relevant actions, these actions are performed by the users of the program and not by KaZaA"
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm is very satisfied with the ruling, but still finds the complete proceedings 'a bitter pill'. CEO Niklas Zennström also says he received the ruling 'with mixed feelings'. "It's too late for KaZaA. I hope that music organisations like Buma/Stemra will, in the future, be prepared to make a deal instead of going to court", says Zennström.
Alberdingk Thijm thinks the Court has seen the differences between Napster and KaZaA very well. "Napster has a central server, which is not the case for KaZaA. Plus you could exchange more than just music."
The practice
"It remains to be seen what the practical implications of this ruling are for KaZaA", says KaZaA in a press statement. The exchange service claims that by the previous ruling they had to cease their activities worldwide, after which she sold her most important company assets.
This is, by the way, recognized by the Court: "It is reasonable to assume that she would not have taken these measures if she would have been able to comply in any other way with the president's ruling."
This means that Buma has enforced a sentece that is not valid, explains Alberdingk Thijm. "In theory, Buma is responsible for the sale against a lower price than would otherwise have been the case". It is still unclear if they are going to countersue the copyright organisation.
Buma/Stemra was unavailable for comment.
"Fix it? It has been disintegrated, by definition it cannot be fixed!" - Gru in Despicable Me.
While this is a happy moment for common sense, this is just going to play into the hands of the CBDTPA supporters. The arugment will be that, given that piracy is rampant, the economics of prosecuting each and every infringer is overwhelming. The more economically efficient solution is to impose a technological lock on hardware to block such economic losses
We still need to get the argument away from the question of copyright infringement and onto the subject of copyright itself - why it exists, who and what it is supposed to protect, etc. This is not easy, but the public policy debate is misdirected now and we have to get it changed. Otherwise, this is going to just make things easier for Hollings
Khalded and mIRC
Microsoft and Outlook Express (USENET binaries)
GetRight, Internet Explorer, CuteFTP (countless warez have been spread because of these programs)
And the list goes on....
Diskcopy.com allowed me to duplicate all my buddies' games (back in the day). A few years later, Subst.exe allowed me to run cd-based games off my hard drive, fooling the primitive cd protection schemes of the day.
Does that mean that MS-Dos was illegal software because it allowed me to pirate games ?
It's frightening to think that these lawyers have gone through university, yet are so incredibly short-sighted.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
I was watching a news clip on T.V. where a British judge said McDonalds isn't liable if there isn't a "Hot" label on coffee, and ruled against someone who wanted, I think around 1 million from McDonalds, and in American a Judge awarded some person money from Starbucks because the person didn't know the coffee was hot.My point is, I think Judges outside of America have more sense in cases like these including Kazaa because the answer is so obvious. Meaning of course it's not Kaza fault that users are sharing MP3's or whatever, Kazas could be used in anyway. It's the users who are shaping what Kazaa is.
Oh yeah?
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
An american judge is not going to buy Kazaa's defense if they merely say "we cant control what people do with our software". He/She's just not going to buy it. Kazaa is going to have to bring NUMEROUS ..and I mean as many as possible WINTESSES that claim they are swapping files that are not copyrighted. I recommend they get at least 100 people to testify they are using the software for legitimate purposes. The point that has to be stressed and proven in our courts is the fact that there is actually a large number of "legitimate" kazaa and p2p users.
You know, typing /Dread or SlashDread really isnt all that hard.
/Dread
Gr
This is a huge blow to the MPAA and the RIAA. Its about time that a judge (anywhere) decided that they(MPAA,RIAA) don't write the laws and that just because something can be used to brake the law doen't make it illegal. i.e. I can stab cowboyneal in the eye with a pencil doesn't make all pencils illegal.
Ahh.. The mind what a wonderful trap!
Now for the interesting part:
It is yet to be seen just what the implications will be for KazAa, kazaa states in a press release. The exchange service claims to have been forced to cease global expansion, resulting in the sale of the key parts of the company.
This is being confirmed by the court: 'It can be assumed that Kazaa would not have to sell if Kazaa had it in its power to persue another way of meeting the president's request'
In other words; BUMA (dutch riaa) has executed an invalid sentence, according to Alberdingk Thijm. In theory this means that Buma can be held accountable for the sale with a lower value then would be met otherwise.
It is not yet clear wether legal steps will be made against the BUMA.
--
Now this does raise some interesting questions. Apparantly, with enough legal backing and loopholes, setting up kazaa-like services can work as a good business-model.
I'm a little rusty, but here goes... the following is a rough, call it first draft translation of the WebWereld.NL article (c) I suppose on the original site. http://www.webwereld.nl
Courts: Exchange Service KaZaA is Legal
Thurs 28.03.2002 - The music exchange service KaZaA is not responsible for the copyright violations of users of its program.
That was the decision of the Court today in Amsterdam. The Court reversed the decision of Judge R. Oribio de Castro in the matter de Buma/Stemra had raised against KaZaA.
According to de Buma/Stemra KaZaA's program facilitated copyright violation. The software was used primarily for exchanging music without the authors rights being considered.
Oribio De Castro judged therefore that KaZaA had to take measures to stop copyright violation. Failure to do so would result in a heavy fine. The founders of KaZaA then decided to sell the software on the Australian firm Sharman.
A Little Bitter
That seems not to have been necessary. The Amsterdam Court overruled the judgement of Oribio de Castro, deciding that KaZaA was not responsible for the copyright violations perpetrated by its users. "Inasmuch as authors rights are relevant the actions are taken by the users of the software and not by KaZaA".
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm is very satisfied with the judgement, but was a little bitter about how the whole thing had run its course. Also the CEO Niklas Zennstrom took the judgement "with mixed feelings". "For KaZaA this comes too late. I hope that music organisations [publishers?] like Buma/Stemra will be more amenable to making an agreement rather than just taking it to the courts" according to Zennstrom.
The court clearly distinguished between Napster and KaZaA, according to Alberdingk Thijm "Napster has a central server, which is not the case with KaZaA. Furthermore, fate played to our side in that not just music can be exchanged with KaZaA".
Practical Application
"It remains to be seen what the practical application of this ruling is for KaZaA", said KaZaA in a press release. The exchange service said that the previous judgement forced the shutdown of their world-wide operations, after which they sold their most important business components.
This was recognized by the court: "One may assume that they [KaZaA] would not have taken these measures had they had in their power any other way to obey the [previous] judgement"
This means that Buma forced a judgement to be executed that was not valid, explains Alberdingk Thijm. "In theory, Buma is therefore responsible for the fact that the sale was done at a price much lower than was otherwise the case". It is not yet clear whether steps will be taken against the copyright organisation.
Buma/Stemra could not be reached for comment.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - On March 28th, the RIAA filed suit in Federal court demanding an injunction against software giant Microsoft for alleged distribution of software which allows the copying of music and other protected recordings.
An unnamed RIAA source tells Reuters "Shockingly, the ability to copy these files is built right into their Windows(tm) operating system!"
Though Microsoft claims the "built-in" programs have legitimate uses, the RIAA has doubts. "Really, what other use could there possibly be for programs like 'copy' and 'xcopy'. I mean, the one has 'x' in the name! It must be designed purely for stealing our profits."
The recording industry contends that it's not simply the ability to copy and listen to music that makes this software dangerous, but the fact that it is so easy for any pirate to do. "They can just drag and drop the files onto a disk and give them to their friends. They even have software which allows people to listen to music. If they simply insert a CD they purchased into their CD-ROM drive, Windows will play it automatically. It does this without charging the user or providing us with any personal information."
Our source even claimed that the software in question allows sharing over a network or the Internet. "Another apparent 'feature' of this operating system is the ability to share files over a network. They even make software available that allows users to create and host Internet sites where files can be downloaded by anyone in the world. These 'ftp sites' and 'web sites' are clearly meant only to violate our copyrights."
Microsoft contends that they have no control over their user's actions. "We are very serious about piracy, and do all we can to protect ourselves against it. However, the RIAA is going about it all wrong. They should really consider product bundling - it's been quite sucessful in protecting and expanding our own monopoly, it would surely work for theirs."
... "Give me a woman who loves beer and I will conquer the w
Ask anyone in the media business -- the newsfeed that comes out of Reuters has steadily degenerated over the past several years.
They say they apply the spin that they do in order to maintain impartiality and retain access in less friendly countries around the world. A rather infamous quote from them, in response to criticism of their coverage of September 11: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
However, in the process they have become nothing more than a clearinghouse for press releases. They no longer engage in any real investigative journalism because such investigations must have some angle going in and will always piss someone off. Reuters would rather keep their access and not step on any toes.
Stick to the Associated Press.
I could get kazaa to transfer some Dutch women to me.
that would be nice
Leave it to the Dutch, the only people I know of who have sensible laws about marijuana (no worse than alcohol) and prostitution (consenting adults, who just happen to consent for commercial reasons rather than emotional/hormonal ones). That little sub-ocean level country is probably about as close to a libertarian country as we're likely to see. Well, on social issues anyway. Here's hoping the U.$. doesn't get all self-righteous on the Netherlands.
BlackGriffen
Not so fast.
Don't be too overjoyed about this ruling. For a second, pretend that the U.S. Supreme Court makes a similar in favor of Napster, ruling that the company is not responsible for individual copyright violations. So, take this to its logical conclusion: In such a world, whats to stop the RIAA, MPAA, etc. from forming a BSA-like organization to go after individual file traders? Ever lookup the cost of copyright violations? Heck, the legal fees alone could sink anyone. Using some sinister methods, targeted lawsuits could do a lot of damage. The EFF couldn't possibly afford to step in.
For the book says, "We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us."
I expect the RIAA will fall back and punt, suing the company in the US, claiming US juristiction because the software is available in the USA.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Can we get the US courts to hold Microsoft responsible if someone created a child pornography site with FrontPage? or writes a anti-semetic tract with MS Word? *ponder* Seems like the same sort of "provider" CYA situation to me. Way to go, Dutch courts!
You make this out as a simple issue of responsibility, when it transcends that (I'm not speaking particularly of the Kazaa case, but of the defense of p2p software in general.)
A key principle behind the support for p2p software authors is that information-- including software-- should be protected as speech. Many people actually find it distasteful to support this sort of thing, but they believe that the right to a free flow of information is worth protecting-- even if that information does some harm.
Other people believe that the right to bear arms without burdensome regulation is an equally important right, which-- in the US-- they've been granted by the 2nd amendment. Therefore guns are commonly available to US citizens, and gun manufacturers remain in business despite the fact that their products also do harm.
These are two distinct exceptions to the normal rights that governments normally have to regulate their citizenry. Assuming that these rights are absolute, personal/corporate responsibility isn't as much of an issue. In the real world, however, people argue about the scope of these protections, however, and its in these areas that the controversy appears.
Once you leave these protected areas, personal/corporate responsibility becomes a whole lot less relevant. To make up a bizarre example, if an energy company wanted to sell toxic nuclear wastes on the open market, they would probably not be allowed to do so (nor protected from indemnity) because of the possibility that one of their customers might use the material for harmful purposes. This decision would probably meet no resistance from the courts, because few people recognizes a principle allowing for this sort of behavior.
Once you leave these protected areas, personal/corporate responsibility becomes a whole lot more relevant.
LET 'EM FRY!!!!
I fail to see a practical implication of this decision beyond the legal precedent. Kazaa BV, developer of Kazaa, sold the rights of the program to an obscure Australian company, Sharman Networks. This way, they could evade Dutch jurisdiction after the first trial. Niklas Zennstrom, original developer of Kazaa, seems to be the only one directly afected by the decision. Only if higher courts upheld the decision it would have a practical effect: Holland would turn into a haven for P2P companies and developers.
If you're going to live in the city atleast learn to speak the language. Damn forigners.
Only the stupid slashdotters are anti-gun. I.e. the ones who have been brainwashed by their governments into curtailing their right of self-defense. The ones who think that only the military, police, and criminals should have firearms.
and it's called "copyright law"...
This is one of those Yaeh!!! the good guys finally one one. But i wounder how are the MPAA & RIAA (I think Ill name them "AE" for access of Evil (along with M$) to save typing going to react to this?
... how can big money allow the internet not to be controlled by them. Can any one here imagine cable or TV not being controlled and allowing idividals to post content either not owned by or in opposition to BIG Money? ..... No .. this would be silly.
I think they will put some fire under their pet senators (Fritz Hollings D-Disney) for example to push even harder to shove the re-made SSSCA (what ever it is called now) down our throats.
And since M$ has a patent on DRM, it will be a double boon to the evil cabal because it will end this pesky monipoly business at the same time of giving total control to big media/software.
Just think about this
So, this Kazaa victory will end up as the battle cry of the "AE" to make sure they will take total control of this medium as have for all others
* Carthago Delenda Est *
I'm glad there's finally a judge that applies logic to this situation, intead of listening to the coprporations, but I agree the USA will not like this at all.
Maybe they will add us (Holland) to the ever-growing list of 'rogue-states', or create a new 'axis of piracy*' (Holland, Russia, SE-Asia)
Seeing the current state of US law (copyright and otherwise), that would almost seem like a Good Thing. Once again, I'm glad to live in Holland, with reasonably sane laws, government an people.
* Ofcourse, the Dutch stop piracy (men in boats robbing other boats and saying 'har, har') a few hundred years ago, these days we're just into copyright-infringemnt (sp?)
at Yahoo
and CNET
even USAToday
Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)
I've always liked Europe and the UK, but never thought much of living there.
But increasingly, it appears that the US can't get out of the political-corporate complex that is eating away at civil liberties.
And so Europe is looking more attractive every day as a place to emigrate to.
Now, I realize that Europe isn't without its own problems. But it seems much more free and reasonable than the US.
What the hell is it going to take before something is done about this weird codependency between the US government and corporations? It's scary when you think about IP law and corporate monopolies and the US government.
Consider all the legal cases at hand and the status of many of them: the MS trial, the many patent cases, the bill formerly known as the SSSCA, DMCA, the deCSS (?) trial, etc.
I'm frankly scared as hell. What will it take for the government to start saying no to corporations? I'm amazed that things like the SSSCA even get past a handshake, to say the least of committee hearings. I'm tired of feeling like me, the individual person, doesn't have the same clout as a corporation. I'm tired of feeling like I always have to be fighting against corporate interests trying to force me to give them money by legislation.
It's gotten so out of hand that I almost feel there has to be a constitutional amendment or something that establishes the fact that no corporation has any natural right to everyone's money.
It's a mess, a big mess, that is undermining our government, and the scary thing is that so many people seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that it's going on. It's as if people have this attitude "Well, it's not the government that's taking my money, so it's okay, right? The government is just protecting the individual rights of people to obtain their due." The problem is, these are not people, they're corporations, and these corporations have no inherent right to my money beyond the fact that I am freely willing to pay them for a service. The problem is that corporations support the government in a big way, and so the government feels obliged to support them. It's becoming the case that the government is "by the people who support us financially, and for the people who support us financially", and therefore, by extension "by the corporations and for the corporations". It's like this weird system where the government represents corporations and not individuals. It's as if the government is indirectly establishing tyranny by mandating policies that support the corporpations who support them. Individuals become seen as the means to support the corporations who support the government. Somewhere along the line, we forgot that it is the case that the government should be seen as the means of supporting individuals.
Recent campaign finance reform doesn't go far enough. I dare say that we need to eliminate all sources of private support for campaigning, and make campaigns entirely supported by public funds and support. FCC licences, for example, should mandate campaign coverage as part of licensing privledges. I just don't buy the argument that monetary donation is a form of free speech. It's not. That very premise is the thing that's eating away at our freedoms vis-a-vis corporate interests. The minute you suggest that any monetary donations by anyone is free speech, then monetary donations anywhere become free speech, which leads to corporate government because corporations have the most money.
I guess I'm just afraid that soon I won't have any recourse but to vote with my airline ticket to move to a different country. Maybe I don't know what's going on, though, and maybe this is a problem everywhere. But it's a major problem, and one I don't think people fully appreciate.
http://www.atlanet.org/cjfacts/other/mcdonald.ht
Thanks to memepool for this one.
Note that I'm NOT saying that I disagree with the Kazaa decision. I just thought that it was an interesting read. I'll be modded down for OT, I suppose. Oh well.
To suggest that their interpretation of justice is somehow wrong just because you don't like their (equally valid, perhaps/perhaps not more enlightened) solution to an entirely different problem is flawed logic, if not entirely reactionary.
They may or may not be wrong on their method of control drug problems, but the importance of their decision, whatever import it may have, is no less valid because of that.
Of course one could argue that P2P software and networks are a similar struggle - of freedom to compute versus the tyrannical licensing of megacorps. But it's only true if the individual user is using P2P to trade in OSS or freeware. It doesn't hold water if you're using it to fill up your 120GB drive with mp3s you don't have albums for or to grab an image of the corporate edition of Windows XP Professional.
Now if you're serving up ISOs of Mandrake 8.2, distributing your band's songs, grabbing artist-released films, or sharing your amateur pr0n photo shoot, more power to you.
The court hit the nail on the head there. I can hear the MPAA and MIAA screaming all the way from the Netherlands.
What about irc clients and ftp servers used to download copyrighted stuff? Should they not outlaw them AS well?
Actually, dutch prostitution laws have a dark side as well. The reason is that prostution is now a legal business, which forces the owners to pay taxes, provide healthcare, have labor agreements, pay attention to municipal hygiene rules etc. Sounds nice doesn't it?
The reality is that prices for `legal' prostitution are going up, due to the legalization, and illegal immigrants (from outside of the EC) are taking over the market. Needless to say, these immigrants are often extorted, traded, threatened, abused and sometimes even murdered by their criminal pimps.
Sometimes, it's better not to legalize morally murky matters, such as prostitution. FWIW, marijuana is still illegal. Coffeeshops (where it is sold) have to buy it illegally, while they can sell it legally.
Han-Wen Nienhuys -- LilyPond
Do we hold the auto manufacturers responsible for people speeding? Do we hold the gun manufacturers responsible for shootings? Or how about liquor manufactures? Do we hold them responsible for stupid, drunk people?
So, why would we hold KaZaa responsible for copyright infringment? Lucky for us -- the Dutch seem to have a very balanced view regarding this issue. Maybe the yo-yo's in the USA could learn a few things from this.
Looks like one more freedome the Netherlands have that we dont.
Well, usually, the US tend to try to EXPORT their rules, not import them.
This ruling happened in Holland, meaning I could use in the EU to defend myself.
I'm quite sure an US court will be delighted, when you try to use a foreign precedent...
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
Well, let's just take everyone to court that creates a tool capable of misuse. I killed someone by drowning them in my kitchen sink, so i believe that the manufacturer of the sink should be brought to court. Why not? I did something with something THEY created - of course it's not MY fault. What's that? Oh right, let's keep making those guns but make sure we bring down those dirty, horrid music/culture/art-sharing-computer-using-life-ruin ing-homeless-person-creating-bomb-dropping-innocen t-victim-shooting Kazaa/Napter/Gnutella users.
My Relevant Comment:
Atleast we have people who know nothing about computers trying to make the rules in the computer world. I think I'll start making some new rules for Olympic Curling. Sure i know nothing about it but I don't like the idea of what could happen with that sport!
[/sarcasm]
The death penalty is not a 'US' law. This law is at the state level, some states have the death penalty, some do not. rick
Making something out of nothing : MD5 ("") = d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e
In effect, the dutch court displayed uncommon intelligence, rarely seen in in the Spin before, during and after passing legislation which strangles citizens in the US, and forces US courts to side with venal 'entertainment interests'.
The Hollywood Way:
Here's a new offering, enjoy!
How DARE you enjoy in a manner not in keeping with our wishes!
Here's a law we bought which does one or more of the following: Makes you a criminal, Makes you pay more, Makes it impossible to enjoy our offerings
Oh, and by the way, since the US always knows what's best for the world, we'll have the federal government employ economic and diplomatic pressure (extortion) to make other countries accept our way, too.
Have a nice day!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
This suprises me, as Hemos is generally good with grammar and spelling. The word used in the title of this story, "appeals," is a verb and a noun; the word he was looking for is "appellate."
Also appropriate would have been "court of appeals."
I would argue that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to ensure that citizens have a means to resist an oppressive government and take up arms against it.
I would argue that this argument is a load of crap. Personal firearms are not enougn to resist an oppressive government, if that government is the United States. Were this really the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, I could argue that it's within my constitutional rights to own fighter aircraft, high explosives, armored vehicles and artillery. Granted, I don't have the capital to afford this kind of hardware, but many corporations in this country just might. Micro$oft comes to mind.
Defecation occurs.
According to the Diverse Slashdot Anti-Gun Minority's logic, should making fists be illegal? After all, the only reason anyone ever makes a fist is to cause violence. Things like martial arts, of course, should be ignored, since they are merely making the fist-makers better at the violence they will commit when they do legitimately make fists. And self-defense, is of course a non-issue, since once making fists is illegal, not even criminals will dare to make them for fear of getting caught.
Perhaps a form of face-recognition technology could be adapted to recognize when people make fists in public, and alert the police on the spot.
Yes, and crack dealers don't do crack, they just sell it.
Nuclear weapons traffickers don't drop bombs, they just sell 'em.
Somewhere you have to decide when someone is an accomplice to crime, however serious, though I admit, I don't know where that line should be drawn.
That said, I think (and the obviously the Dutch court thinks) KaZaa is not such an accomplice.
siglite
Much better would be to look at the Sony v. Betamax case. In that case, the judge said that VCR (known as VTRs then) manufacturers should be allowed to produce VCRs since the new technology had, "substantial non-infringing uses". Translation: Just because the technology can allow copyright violations, that doesn't mean that it should be outlawed. (copying machines, tape recorders, etc).
Case: Sony v. Betamax
Stick to recording technologies when making intellectual property copying arguements, not guns.
If things got that bad in this country, you can bet your ass that the military would split up eight ways to Sunday, in which case you would have access to the hardware you can only use today in Counterstrike and TFC matches. Same thing happened in the civil war in the 1860s.
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
I think your argument that the government should regulate P2P because / in the same way that they regulate guns and cars is fallacial.
First of all, a gun is a product. If you regulate guns, you regulate them on the production end (what guns you are allowed to sell) or the retail end (what guns you are allowed to buy). The same thing happens with cars, the government says "you can't produce a car without these safety features".
Now, let's talk about the nebulous "P2P". First, you suggest in your post that P2P is a product; instead, P2P is a storefront through which content (the product) is delivered to the consumer. P2P is equivalent to a gun store or a car lot.
Also, realize that most government controls on markets is to make sure the consumer doesn't get screwed by the producer, not the other way around. Indeed, it is a BAD IDEA to controls on the retail side; the only example of these kinds of controls I can think of is in the gun shop analogy. You don't have to show paperwork to prove you're a responsible lamp-buyer to buy a lamp from Wal-Mart. You shouldn't have to show paperwork (i.e. DRM) to prove you're a responsible music-buyer before you buy a CD from Wal-Mart or download an mp3 from a P2P service.
If you want to impose regulation on a market, first ask who you are protecting and ask yourself if they need your protection. The recording industry doesn't need protection from music downloaders.
-inq
P.S. I downloaded a pile of Opeth tunes the other day. Now I have the irrational urge to buy a pile of Opeth CDs. Am I going to go to piracy hell?
Maybe it would be nothing against a tank, but you have to remember that the 2nd amendment was written way back in the 18th century. All they had were rifles, and anybody could get one. They had to have weapons back then because of the Brits. I would say that you still need one not necessarily because of the government, but because of terrorists and murderers.(if you lived in my neighborhood, you'd feel the same way.) You lock them up, hoping you never have to see them again, but you know that they are there if your worst nightmares are realized.
Plus, they can be used to save a life. Like that time when 50+ cops with guns drawn ran to house across the street and arrested a guy that lived there. They didn't have to fire. And they may have prevented him from killing a bunch of people. Also, people get guns just to collect them sometimes. It's interesting to see a rifle that may have been used in the Civil war, or a similar reproduction.
I would say its more or less designed to 'kill' in general (of course there is a recreation side, just like everything [targets/whatnot]). But its also basicly a compact cannon, and dont tell me they hunted cows with those things ;P i dont think you would end up with much meat left over, and what was left would taste awful.
the only fact is that everything is an opinion
Usually you wouldn't get a court order, you'd get a DMCA threat. If it's a court order, you'll have to cancel the service. But if it's a DMCA violation notice, you can give the customer a chance to file a counternotice, saying they didn't do anything illegal - if they file one, you don't have to do anything.
uhh, like afghaninistan couldn't resist the soviet union in the 80s?
ABC, CNN, NY Times, etc....
I really dont see how you can get worse news
than the bias american media. Reuters is really more or less the same.
The quote you use is dead on, so I really dont see your point. Terrorism is all a question of whose side youre on. The Israelis terrorists of the 40-50's who killed British diplomats later on became political leaders, just like Arafat did.
The US regularly arms and trains terrorists groups when they suit their needs. Of course,theyre not called terrorrists then.
The US sends in regularly personnel into other countries or even bombs other countries (with full justification) yet if some country was to do the same, lots of people in north america wouldnt agree with it. Surprise, surprise...people have different point of view. Just like native people dont share the white mans view on the discovery of these people, southerners dont have the same view of the Civil War (but its taboo to talk about) and so on.
The Taliban's origins are very well known, so is Al-Quaeda's. And dont forget that our buddy Bin Laden was in Bosnia (where he got a passport from the US' puppet government there in the mid-90's)
with his muhajeddins side by side with the US forces.
The US has armed, trained the Albanian KLA even though the CIA's own 1998 report called them "The largest and best armed terrorrist group in the world". US secretary of states were having cafe au lait with terrorists wanted by Interpol...so yes..the quote is right on.
If it offends your CNN view of the world, too bad.
Ask the Macedonians who cornered a few hundred Albanian terrorists (who killed over a dozen soldiers and police officers) in a village last summer what they think of US support for terrorists. The US flew helicopters into Albania, plucked the terrorists and their american 'observers' back to the safety of their launch pad: Kosovo.
z
Whats the slashdot reader login for the new york times? I forgot
thats one small step for man...
one giant leap for mankind...
...or not
the only fact is that everything is an opinion
Criminals will always use guns. Period. Whether they are illegal or not.
I, for one, will defend myself if they try to kill me. You do what you want. I, however, know what restrictive laws do to my safety:
If gun makers reduce the supply of firearms sold to suburban dealers, the market price of guns will rise. Consumers with the most "elastic" demand -- those who are most sensitive to price changes -- will reduce or eliminate their purchases. And the evidence is clear: Price-sensitive consumers tend to be law-abiding citizens. By contrast, criminals' demand for firearms is highly "inelastic": Crooks are willing to pay inflated black-market prices for their guns. Perversely, by restricting the legal supply of guns and raising their price, plaintiffs would put more weapons in criminals' hands and fewer in the hands of honest citizens. -(Cato Institute Report)
El Karma: excelente(principalmente la suma de moderación hecha a los comentarios de los usuarios)
("Different outcome" as in 'theoretical' not as in 'real' -- I still think that even if the verdict was that Kazaa was a stinking pile of dung which should be outlawed, there really isn't much that anyone might do because of Kazaa's 'decentralized' nature).
To quote the Constitution of the United States of America - Article 3 section 2: The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;-- between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects
Note that it seems to say that the laws of the United States (and not other countries) govern the courts in this country -- even though disputes might involve 'foreign states'.
Sandman935 quoted "I would argue that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to ensure that citizens have a means to resist an oppressive government and take up arms against it. "
Sandman935 responded "I would argue that this argument is a load of crap. Personal firearms are not enougn to resist an oppressive government, if that government is the United States. "
So by his reasoning, he must believe we should repeal the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, because it is not effective anymore. You can't fight the government, just give in to it. So we should also stop worrying about the DMCA, and the new one whose acronym escapes me, (CDBDTA???? Make it difficult, and no one can fight it. I can't even remember it.) We should repeal the First Amendment, since we can't fight the government.
Hell, let's just repeal the whole Constitution, and have the current government rule for life, with no limits to their power. We obviously can't change the system.
Talk about a load of crap. Your agrument is that and more. And who ever said fighter aircraft and armored vehicles were illegal? Many people own WWII planes. Ever go to an airshow? You should, and get an education about reality. And how could an armored vehicle itself be illegal. "Sorry, sir, but your vehicle doesn't meet California's 'Non-armor' requirement, and must be confiscated." That's just silly of you.
Besides, just because there are laws passed limiting gun possession, especially automatic rifles, and limiting high-explosives or artillery, many groups consider those laws to be unconstitutional, and own those things regardless. The fact the the ATF and FBI don't like it is not one of their concerns.
Afganistan had help.
Defecation occurs.
You're off on a nice tangent. I stated that the argument was flawed, not that the 2nd Amendment should be repealed.
But what the hell... go ahead and argue my side of the discussion along with your own. I won't stand in the way of your fun.
Defecation occurs.
Is how quickly the appeals court heard the case and rendered a verdict. Napster's case is now years old and they haven't even HELD the trial yet!
despised even by other Arab nations Afganistan is not an Arab nation. No, it depends on whether you're trying to stay in the good graces of the PLO and the other Arab nations that support it. With a combined GDP of ~100 Billion US $, all the Arab companies are nothing in comparison to the US economy. Do you really believe Reuters is trying to get into their good graces? The number of Palestinians killed is three times that of Isrealis. Why do you only see things form the perspective you're used to being fed by CNN? ...And then when a company decides not to put it's slant on a story, they're the bad guys!!!!
Next you'll be trying to tell us "Guns don't kill people. People kill people."!!!
From the very beginning, the Reuters article reads "In a setback for efforts to halt copyright abuse..."
Even while we see a success in our favor, the press is already spinning it in the media conglomerates' favor.
All together now: How Dare They!!
Steve Magruder, Metro Foodist
Holland is not the paradise you think it is. In such a crowdy country, I don't even have adsl cable or simular. My 64Kb ISDN line alone costs me more than 150 euro a month. Not speaking of the monthly internet fee, hosting etc... Holland is far to liberal, anti-social. The goverment is just watching the states to much. The are all a bunch of actors. Pim fortuyn is a kojak look alike who is thinking that a couple of multi nationals can run a country. The really need very good spin doctors, they can 't fool me.
Anyone know when Hollings/Disney will introduce a bill to declare war on Holland?
... the people firing them do.
Now fulfill my constitutional right to nuke Buckingham Palace, damnit!
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
What are you doing so far from MacNN?
Also what does a P2P thingy have to do with a 25 Euro blowjob and having a smoke in a coffee shop?
Funny, if you READ the entire article, the MIAA and RIAA used the prior dutch court decision as part of their argument here in the US. Shoe's on the other foot so to speak now, and I'm sure KaZaA's lawyers are saying.. "If it was good enough for their side when it agreed with them, it's good enough for us when it agrees with us!"
David
People Talking in Movie shows.. people smoking in bed.. people voting republican.. GIVE THEM A BOOT TO THE HEAD!
Way back in like the 80s was there not a case about a BBS owner (or FTP owner I forget) that was taken to court. The ruling was that the owner is not responsible for the content that users upload. This is why I always wondered how Napster lost its case since Napster did not actually pirate music. Napster did less than a BBS to help piracy (it did not actually host the content). I suppose though the running conspiracy is that Music and Movie companies are buying rulings and legislation. Ohhh well there is always UseNet I suppose.
Just as an aside, a foreigner working in the Netherlands with a skill that's in short supply gets the top 30% of their salary tax-free! Just keep this in mind before you start calculating income tax rates.
I believe it was Sam Colt that made them equal.
;)
(posting anonymously to duck flames and preserve karma
The Senate today declared war on the Netherlands with the Hon. Fritz Hollings leading the charge. He summed it up like this "It is now clear that the Netherlands has become a haven for pirates, just as the Barbary coast was over 200 years ago when we sent the Marines in to learn 'em a lesson. They have now joined the Axis of Evil since pirates are terrorists, and will pay the ultimate price for their terrorism."
Sen. Hollings was later admitted to the hospital complaining of back pain after attempting to lift a giant sack of money that mysteriously appeared in front of his office door during the vote.
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
now this court rule will prevail for all the European Union countries
And I think the dutch Calvinism is much more a thing of history, a thing of the past than the American brand of Puritanism.
Don't get me wrong I love many aspects of Americans and America but I came to find above to be true especially in rural areas, which altogether are much bigger than the cities.
Marcus
Saying 'shoot' instead of 'shit' doesn't make you a better person.
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
:P What a novel concept.
Finally. Somebody in a position of power speaks to personal responsibility.
micro$oft (ie bill gates) own 30% (in stocks) of a naval construction company that specializes in nuclear ships/subs.