Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Kazaa Is Legal, Dutch Appeals Court Rules

Posted by Hemos on from the wish-i-could-read-dutch dept.

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.

2 of 390 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Makes no sense by dj28 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No, but in both cases just about every government in the world regulates them. Here in the US, people have to go through a background check. In some countries, it's very hard to obtain a gun. Also, every country that I can think of has safety regulations on cars. They have to have a crash resistant frame, seat belts, and a lot of other regulations. How does this apply to P2P? Well, by using your analogy, shouldn't the government regulate it like they regulate all those other markets to protect the consumer (in the case of P2P, the copyright holder) from being shafted? I sure think so.

  2. Reuters is a laughing stock by Silverhammer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.