Slashdot Mirror
KaZaA Collapses
MikeKD writes "according to SFGate, KaZaA has announced that it will fold due to the cost of defending itself against the RIAA & MPAA. The timing is notable since on Monday, Altnet (owned by Brillant Digital) announced plans for "sponsored listings in peer-to-peer search" on its "separate [and] secure P2P resource-sharing network"."
Being on the Internet does not make one immune to copyright laws!
I have been pwned because my
Aren't the dutch representatives (the ones beeing sued) not the owner of the software (and with it, the newtork) any longer? Well why should RIAA & Friends sue them any longer? Why didn't they already filed suit against Sherman Networks in OZ? Or does anyone know if they alleged them already for copyright infridgement (lol)?
The Web site and the software behind it are now owned by a privately held firm called Sharman Networks, based in Vanuatu, an island in the Pacific.
This promises to be an interesting legal battle, esp. for jurisdiction and enforcement of any rulings. The question is: Will the servers be moved to Vanuatu as well?
Line 9: Argument of type SIGNATURE expected.
Why would anyone wanna use Kazaa when you could use DirectConnect?
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
I haven't finished downloading Star Wars yet !!
"The collapse of Kazaa, however, is not expected to slow trading activity on the company's network, one of the most popular file-sharing sites in the world. Kazaa said it has sold the network to another firm that the music and film industry has not sued yet. " They sold off all their assets and now they're cashing out. Big deal.
"Kazaa said it has sold the network to another firm that the music and film industry has not sued yet."
:P
Just give them time, just give them a little time and they will have sued every one in the entire world
Sent from your iPad.
Forgive me for stating the obvious, but I'm gonna bet that I'm not the only one who is unhappy about the legality of it, but excited that KaZaa might crash and burn.
Long live Gnutella!
-Jeff
Property is theft.
...Spy Software companies and makers of other beneficial consumer products wholly unrelated to virus software announce that they expect a downturn in profits and expect to lay off 75% of personnel."
Seriously folks, is this really a bad thing?
P2P software is a nice idea, but I would be more interested in them if they were more user controllable. I'd much rather have a P2P network comprised solely of individuals that I trust than to be connected to a sea of people do not know eating my bandwidth searching for things I do not have and do not want.
Give me a P2P solution that allows me to selectively authorize requests to my system and communicate only with those other people that I wish to communicate with. A mini P2P between myself and my friends.
Once more unto the breach dear friends...
It never ceases to amaze me that the major record companies don't see *free advertising* when it's in front of their faces. Those folks who pirate content and don't end up buying that content wouldn't have purchased it in the first place, so there is no net loss. Those who would have purchased the content that they download can access a wider variety of content online, and will end up purchasing more. MP3 quality is a far cry from CD quality, afterall.
Just look at what videotapes did for the movie industry (and when VHS/Beta first came out, the movie industry feared that these would kill the movie industry). They took the technology that they feared, ran with it, and ended up making MORE $ from video sales than from the box office.
Right. No, your other right. No, the other other right.
Surely if they go down, then all the clients will have nowhere to connect and hence not be able to locate other people connected on it. Unlike Gnutella in which each user maintains a list of nodes and tries all of them until it finds one connected in which to pull off other nodes.
This would also explain why the need to "log on" to kazaa and why it's relativily (compaired to Gnutella) fast to find the nodes.
Or am I missing something?
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Kazaa no longer owns the client or the website. It sold them to a Vanuatan based company called Sharman Networks (originally thought to be based in Australia.)
So, basically, Kazaa BV sold the application to Sharman to sidestep the lawsuits. Action failes and Kazaa BV goes down anyway.
I spose they've just put Sharman on notice.
Janie took my gun...
If the people running this do decide to thumb their noses at everyone, move the servers to this island and continue to do what they'd like, they better not live in the US, because they are still liable and will be hauled into court.
So the owners better move with the equipment if this is the route they are planning on taking.
*no where in the article did it say these things, this is just a hypothetical situation*
...that "organizations" (they act more like companies like MS, don't they ?) like RIAA and MPAA are able to force other companies out of business simply by filing lawsuits until the company in question is running out of money.
And it's a shame that no one stops those a******s at RIAA and MPAA. They both have far too much power at their hands and play us consumers for a sucker...
Their pricy hands even reach us here in Europe... scary thing.
Sig: What Happened To The Censorware Project (censorware.org)
My life is a joke... I spent the last few weeks writing a p2p program.
Just finished, at 5 a.m. Guess I don't want to get sued
It was fun while it lasted...
If I create a system which enables people to share files, how do I violate anyones copyright?
And if it does violate something, where is the magic line: why could not for example usenet news be considered as similar system then? It can be used as an organized tool for sharing copyrighted material. Should server admins start making sure that no copyrighted material is posted - and if yes, how do you make this possible? In my opinion, this Kazaa case is exactly similar.
They can keep running Kazaa and it's future breed into bankcruptcy, but it will not solve anything. They are just playing cat'n'mouse. Someday, they will notice that mice fuck much more, kill one, and you have a dozen new. Someday, they will realise that they have to affect something else, this something else is in "peoples mind" and is the reason why Kazaas are created.
I'm actually quite taken with Kazaa's strategy. It seems like they're just going to keep "selling" the name and technology to own of their own subsidiaries or spin-offs, then fold whatever part of the company is currently being sued.
Of course, it's a scam, and the [MP|RI]AA can just pursue the new owner... who can just sell on the name and technology, and fold. They'll have to actually go after the owners personally, which is a completely different proposition.
I'm not exactly enamoured with Kazaa (gnutella for me, thanks), but I think they've hit on the only possible defence to the "litagate them into submission" tactics that the [MP|RI]AA are increasingly turning to. However, it's yet another indicator that if you want to start an innovative business, don't do it inthe USA, or in anywhere with strong treaties with the USA. That part is very sad.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
And IMO it's not even about their experience with VHS time-shifting and video sales making them more money after they complained, as you correctly pointed out. (Of course, they also get a tax on blank media, still, for some reason...)
I think the real conflict is about control. Control of artists, users, and any possible bottlenecks between them are therefore a GOOD thing, to the RIAA, because that's control and they fear losing control even more than losing money -- even if it would lead to a better product for consumers (or better compensation-levels for musicians, who must also be controlled).
JMR
(My opinions only, nobody else wants 'em anyway.)
Try e-gold - (contact me). I'm NOT e-
Check out scumware.com and Parasiteware for more info on these. Another case for AdAware!
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Just because you're right doesn't mean that you aren't going to lose in court. See the McLibel case for a demonstration of this. If someone else has enough money and you don't, then you are almost definitely going to either lose the case, or are going to end up settling out of court because you can't afford to carry on. It's nothing to do with right or wrong.
I'm not claiming that Kazaa are right, but their moving to Vanuatu proves nothing.
CNet has a longer article with quotes from testimony, etc. @ Kazaa, Morpheus legal case collapsing.
this works for me:
mldokey open source edonkey client for most unix platforms.
hopey
>Ok, how about I create a website which allows people to submit houses that are worth breaking into and also lets other people
Yes, go ahead, I think you should have all the right to do it. Your system could be used to post anything, for example the best clip from your porn collection. It could be also used to post stolen credit card IDs, or a picture of you and your dog doing something kinky.
Still. THE SOFTWARE IS NOT TO BLAME. Software does NOT know whether the data posted there is criminal or not. The people who post it do know it. People are to blame, the people who break into houses, sell the goods, or other stolen information such as credit card data, or house key info.
Even how hard it is to catch these individuals, you cannot start blaming sunpoints for stealing you copyright.
Your argument is void.
Is this true? Regrettably, Gnutella doesn't seem to be as effective for P2P, so it would be good if Kazaa clients can continue. In particular, it is plagued by tar-pits, that is people setting themselves up as supernodes or for unlimited uploading without having adequte processing power or bandwidth.
I for one dont think so. First of all Kazaa, Morpheus, Bearshare etc is one of a wast number of ways to get illegal content from the internet. FTP, Friends, IRC, SMB shares, Usenet, maillists with ftp addresess sent out etc. etc. The dont stand a chance to close down much. Especially since they havent got a fixed target. They try to get the biggest players down but there are quickly someone else there to fill the gap. How can you shut gnutella? Shut bearshare and then someone else sets up a hosts cache in tanzania, uzbekistan or perhaps write the ip with laser on the moon where noone have jurisdiction.
They are fitghting a loosing battle and hsould rather think about how they can make money on this. To shut filesharing down is probably not possible.
HTTP/1.1 400
Filesharing tools doesn't violate copyrights.
People violate copyrights.
Will work for bandwidth
Using your logic here are RIAA's next targets:
Every web server creator since they allow people to post listings of songs they have
Sue wc3 for their html that allowed you create the html used on the formentioned web server
Perhaps IEEE and IETF and whoever else is responsible for tcp/ip without which these web servers couldn't run so we must stop the use of tcp/ip
Come to think of it, the cable companies and phone companies and every ISP in the world for providing the physical transport for these evil p2p networks, yes I realize that some people actually use the internet for real work, sucks for them we have people stealing songs here people.
You have to go after the users, its the only way that anythign will be accomplished. YOu shut down one p2p network, 3 more will spring up.
--"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
How about P2P company ownership - i.e. an ownership token can be passed through the network. Each time legal action is instigated against an owner the token is passed on.
The cost of constantly instigating action against an "owner" would cripple potential action
-
Hmmm this could do more harm than good in the long run. I personally think there are to many people who don't want to take responsibility for their actions. Perhaps its time tht everyone took on the industries and knocked it through their thick heads that people are tired of being ripped off.
But hey I won't hold my breath and expect to see that sort of consumer action in my life time (if ever). We live in a flock (as in sheep) society - easy pickings for the wolves.
.
"Things that you own end up owning you" - Tyler Durden (via Diogenes of Sinope).
Ok, so after Napster, Morpheus/KaZaA, people will now use Direct Connect...
Or usenet, or message with FTP upload/downloads.
When will RIAA and co understand that there is NOTHING they can do about P2P and data exchange!
Unless they manage to somehow stop the internet as we know it, but I don't think they can get away with that kind of murder...
Black holes occur when God divides by zero.
Apparently they are going to start charging for search results on their p2p network. Here is a quote from the article about what they are rolling out.
"These technologies include TopSearch, a sponsored link engine that enables content owners to promote their content and receive preferred placement in P2P search results".
Sound familiar? Sounds to me like RealNames and we all know how successful that was.
fantastic. I'm glad they have a nice *program*. Now let's compare the number of actual users and files shared on the network. I'd bet kazaa wins that one no problem.
do not read this line twice.
Hasn't anyone here heard of AudioGalaxy? If I want pr0n or movies, then I'd have used Kazaa, but for music I always use AG Satellite... surprisingly their music dBase is a LOT bigger, plus they actually host indie artists whose music you are free to download without ANY copyright (ok, I might not be using the right term here so no post-whippings! :) )
Put it this way... if you want commercial stuff, look on Kazaa. If you want that, plus lesser-known, indie, underground, or even oldies, go AG.
You can always go old school too, since AG has a "backup plan" in case somebody goes after them for their sharing. They've been offering an FTP search database as well. I still remember that back in the day when it was called the Borg Music Search.
Mouse, Mice. Goose, Geese. Moose... Moose?
Then what about that site that listed the names and addresses of doctors that perform abortions?
I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
There's nothing that any Government as a whole would be more scared of than endagerment of the public. So the introduction of automobiles was delayed. Is P2P worldwide filesharing in the same predicament?
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
I normally bash open source hippie zealots.. but this is one case where an open protocol with some solid open clients is the only thing that will survive, because it doesn't present an easy target.
Any p2p type app based on a single company is going to fail
WinMX slaps the shit out of Kazaa any day of the week, for selection, for not discriminating against high-bit-rate MP3s, and for fitting on my screen in its entirety, without obnoxious lateral scrolling. Now that it has "swarm" downloading, I expect it will far surpass the old WinMX 2.6 in terms of DLer satisfaction.
But as to the question of content available, I've always found the WinMX network to be comparable to, if not better than, Kazaa. Just my experience, but I'd suggest that it's worth a try.
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
Questions/points of interest:
1) If you buy a CD when did you get the right to distribute copies of the contents?
2) Granted, making a copy of a song for yourself or even a friend is one thing. But is it not something else to make the entire contents of a CD available for who knows how many people to download? The scale on which this happens changes the perspective. It may be a simple act to copy a song but that act does not exist in a vacuum.
3) Perhaps someone should copy your credit card number, SSN, name, birthday etc etc. After all, it's just a copy and you've lost nothing. So it doesn't hurt anyone if other people use that information too. Yes, this is an extreme example and not exactly the same thing. My point is that just having a copy of something is not always harmless. When you say no one loses anything when a song is copied it seems as though you forget what's lost is the artist's power to decide how their music should be distributed. If they don't want to give it away for free why do you get to decide that they should? (Keep in mind that format/space-shifting or a copy for a friend is not the same thing as en masse file-sharing.)
4) Copying a song and not watching TV ads aren't exactly the same thing either. The tv networks sell spots to advertisers. The advertisers only make their money back if the product is good and people buy it. I feel this has little to do with whether or not I see an ad on TV. It has more to do with the quality of the product. If it turns out to be something I need I'll buy it but it won't be due to some stupid ad. Conversely, I see lots of ads on TV for things I'll never buy. Am I still stealing the TV broadcast? Nope. The difference here is doing without. If I don't buy something adverstised on TV (whether I see the ad or not) I'm doing without the product. When someone copies a song and doesn't pay for it they get to enjoy the song without rewarding the creator.
5) What is so strange about this: Product exists. See/hear product. Pay money for product. Have product. That's been the basis of our economy for how long now?
6) It's worth repeating the radio stations pay by the bucketful to get to air songs for us to hear. That's how the RIAA justifies your ability to tape songs off the air. As well, blank cassettes cost what they do because some of that money goes back to the labels to make up for supposed lost sales due to copying. Your cassette recorder has a charge like this buried in its cost too. And, the quality of taping a song of the radio is nothing like buying a CD or even a cassette. Sound quality is low for radio broadcasts anyway, plus you have to listen to dumbass DJs talk over the songs.
7) How many people would use P2P file-sharing systems if they had always been on a few-cents-per-song-downloaded fee system?
Of course, I'll get ripped to shreds for "being on their side" even though I am not. I just think this is a sensitive issue. And because some people want to just download songs and not reward the artists the rest of us have to make up for it. The more people engage in what the RIAA feels is illegal behavior the less they will feel we have anything valid to say.
-r
Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
No, it's not at all the same thing. The things you mention are valueless in themselves but serve as keys to more worthwhile resources. A Brittany Spears song does not serve as a key to anything else. It is enjoyed (or not) but it is not an authentication system.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Napster, scour, kazaa... all it goes to show is that commerical p2p has its flaws. The problem from what I can see is that they try to retain some control of the network, at which point RIAA says "Hey, you can stop this at anytime, do it!" and they have to. However, I'd love to see them go after gnutella. With dozens of free (beer and/or speech) clients and a pretty much completely decentralitized network there really is nothing they can do about it. Unfortunately there isn't too much on gnutella (content wise, as compared to fastrack) but when they're the last game in town I'm sure it'll get better. I'm sure limewire (the commercial gnutella company and yes they give it away, but they still sell stuff) loves this. They easily have the best gnutella client (morpheous has some stuff to work out) which is multi-platform and would probably love to have kazaa's share of the population.
can't sleep slashdot will eat me
Holy crap I can't believe I forgot about that. You are so right. Damn those plastic companies.
--"Karma is justice without the satisfaction"
I'd extend this even further, to include ALL networking software right down to the home network level. After all, we can't have you listening to your sister's music over your home network, that would be piracy per the RIAA. Drag 'em off in chains!!
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Uh, that would be the Department of Defense.
IP is MIL-STD-1777 and TCP is MIL-STD-1778.
Somehow, I don't think that the RIAA want's to go up against guys with tanks...
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
It couldn't have happened to a nicer spyware distributor...
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
MP3 quality is a far cry from CD quality, afterall.
Not always. A specific preset in LAME 3.92 will provide transparent reproduction at an average data rate of 192 kbps. Read the "quality" section of r3mix.net to learn more.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Again, it would be wrong to prosecute the software companies that made the software that hosted that site, because the software doesn't know that the content was illegal: the person who posted it does.
How did you think that case was different?
-no broken link
Ok, how about I create a website which allows people to submit houses that are worth breaking into and also lets other people search for those houses in their area.
Your statement is biased and has no relation to file sharing, but I think you know that. How about this as a better example:
How about you create a website that lists all the libraries in different areas. Then, index a list of materials that are available at each location and toss in the location of the nearest photocopiers (often found in libraries) and Kinko locations.
Would this be illegal? Should it be? Would you sue Kinkos, libraries and the Library of Congress (who provide a great indexing system free for anyone to use)?
This is similar to the police targetting drug dealers instead of users.
This has got to be one of the dumbest statements I've seen today. Drug users in prison outnumber dealers over 10-1 in the United States. And remember that many states have laws that say carrying two joints makes you a dealer under the law.
Viv
Gmail invites for ip
Sites like this exist. They are not illegal. What's your point?
There are sites that list DRs and have notes by the ones that have been "taken out" and even encourage people to do the right thing...in that veiled sort of way that is easily interpreted to mean they are publishing this information in the hopes that someone will target and kill these DRs.
They are still legal.
Why? Because they are free to say they think those DRs should be killed. As sick as it may be to say that, they have the right to say it. If one of those DRs is killed, the killer is prosecuted, not the site listing their address.
I am still waiting for someone to explain to me why, a priori and "in a state of nature", getting a copy doesn't. I actually agree that people who produce music should derive benefit from it. That is why, for example, I have never downloaded a song without approval of the holder of the copyright. (I do visit mp3.com from time to time.) However, technologically, the mechanism by which they did -- the relative scarcity of their work and the difficulty of reproducing it -- has become obsolete. It will not survive, except through legislation.
The music industry arose not through some God-given right to make money on music. It arose through an accidental and, as we've seen, precarious set of technological coincidences. THe technology has changed -- the industry will have to change, too.
And here's the rub: To get the state to act on your behalf, you have to make the case that it also serves the needs of the people. I happen to hold to the traditional view of copyright: It is a bargain between the creator and the public, that the public safeguards a creative work because the natural tendency will be for it to spread. But in return, the public demands compensation for the loss of the public intellectual commons. Thus everything slides eventually into public domain -- theoretically in a shortish span of time -- and certain safe harbors -- fair use provisions -- are created.
If anything, it is the content providers who have been cheating on this relationship. They have demanded draconian legislation that "protects" fair use rights by excluding the exercise of fair use rights; they have proposed legislation that gives them total access to and control of any electronic device anywhere that can conceivably deal in digital data; they have used lawsuits and threats of lawsuits to muzzle those who've point out flaws. The Content Cartel has not played fair with us, and now we're expected to play nice with them? On their terms?
Nobody weeps for the buggy-whip makers.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
You have to go after the users, its the only way that anythign will be accomplished.
And this got a score of 4 for insightful?
Think about this for a moment, we had roughly what, 50, 60 million people worldwide using Napster at its height? At any given time, Kazaa has a couple million on, so we can assume their average daily user list is somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 - 30 million people. Morpheus/gnutella has good numbers, as do several other networks. Then we factor in IRC, usenet, etc.
So you, a large corporation, are going to begin suing some 20 - 60 million people? Ok, let's assume the RIAA and MPAA join up in some joint venture created specifically to pool all their resources for this.
Lawyers needed? Somewhere between 40 - 100 million. Assuming they'll work for a sum of $75/hr (a bargain) on average, that brings us to an approxamate cost of $5,250,000,000/hr. (yes, that's billion with a B) The newest star wars installment made about $130million on the first weekend, and that would cover your legal fees for about 9 minutes. So then you say, "well, silly, they wouldn't sue them all at once, they'd spread it out!" What a great idea. Assuming 70,000,000 lawsuits at 100 lawsuits filed each month, you would spend the next 58,000+ years prosecuting people. Now, I'm no doctor, but I don't think people live that long. In any event, the cost in legal fees for suing even 1% of the users is so astonomical that not even Bill Gates could fathom doing it in his wildest dreams. But there's more.
Two problems relating to one another: 1) Consumer backlash, 2) government backlash.
Now, when you and about half your friends are being sued by a major corporation, I don't think you'll be jumping to buy their product. The roughly 70 million people (a good 40 - 50 million are US citizens) that you're suing are going to be pretty pissed, and will start organizing to fight you. This brings us to our next problem. If I were running for office, (let's say... President?), I could get myself somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 million votes simply by taking a strong stance against "the evil corporate empires" of the entertainment industry. And if I were going for re-election, I'd start issuing EO's (executive orders) like they were candy effectively putting an end to major media companies. But just in case you thought that might not do it, next we move to Congress. Same thing, they all want re-election, and with millions being sued, this becomes a major issue. Now, do you go to your district and tell people that it's all their fault and they shouldn't have been stealing content? Well sure, if you don't like your job. What will really happen? They'll take a firm stance against the media companies and legislation will be passed 10 times faster than the laws passed following Sept 11. The entertainment industry will be so incredibly screwed by the new laws that they won't be in business for long. No amount of money talks to a congressman when their constituents are up in arms about something.
So where does this leave the entertainment industry? At an impasse. They have a few options here: 1) continue suing P2P networks, which after a while they'll start losing the cases, but no matter what, it will never end file sharing. 2) Come up with better digital rights management technology, which will cost millions in research and be broken by a 15 year old kid. 3) Sue ISPs, server owners, etc, whose legal teams in many cases match those of the RIAA and MPAA. 4) Lobby for legislation, which is getting less and less likely to work, seeing as tech savvy folks are now mainstream for the most part, and will fight things like the SSSCA whenever they come around. 5) Relinquish all rights to copyrighted works and go into immediate Chapter 13 liquidation, (just kidding). 6) Change their business models to use the internet for their benefit.
I'd like to take option 6 a little further for a moment. Assume this, the entertainment companies offer reasonable licensing terms to webcasters, somewhere around the middle between CARP's recommendations and what the webcasters asked for. They then set up internet sites with both streaming and downloadable music and movies, offering them in secured formats, but giving the OSS community access to the information about the formats required to build players and ask for their help in building secured players for Linux/*nix's. Offer these movies and music at either pay-per-use prices or as a straight download price. Say a dollar per song downloaded and $3 or $4 per movie downloaded, with the streaming PPV costs being mere fractions of that. Offer a complete linup of music, starting with the most popular and adding music as quickly as possible with easy to use searchs for song names, artists, and lyrics. Do something similar for movies, allowing searchs for movie titles, stars/co-stars, producers, etc. Offer the movie for download before it's even out on DVD, thus steering many people towards the internet service. Offer a simple web interface similar to P2P apps currently out, and use a simple account management system allowing for an easy download/stream of content. (ie. you point, click, watch) You'd instantly see a drop in piracy to the tune of probably 70% or better for music and movies. At the same time, the amount of money coming in would be incredible, and lawsuits against P2P networks etc could be dropped, thereby lowering legal costs. Easy to get, readily available, reasonably priced content is the way to stamp out piracy. Who the hell would search for 20 minutes to find the right version of a song they want to download when it's just $1 to get it from the music company, giving you a legitamate, high quality copy of the music? Who would spend 10 hours downloading a lousy copy of a movie when they can find and get what the want for $4, not have to worry about poor quality, and have it download much faster? Just an idea, but I think it's one that would make billions for the entertainment industry, and would silence most of their P2P-using critics.
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
Somehow, I don't think that the RIAA want's to go up against guys with tanks...
I dunno. In a battle between Lawyers and Tanks I wouldn't be supprized to see the tanks come crawling home crying "Mommy!"
The military may have a bigger budget, but when it comes to congress, the military walks in saying "please". When The MPAA/RIAA/Lawyers walk into congress they come in saying "Who's your daddy!"
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Of course they're going to blame their failure on the RIAA or whatever. It sounds reasonable to most people, and therefore is a great face-saving excuse. "We had this brilliant idea, and it would have all been great except for THOSE GUYS!" Gimme a break. Do you really think they'd ever admit their business just plain failed, especially with such a handy excuse being available? I'd take this one with a big grain of salt.
6) Change their business models to use the internet for their benefit.
I agree with almost all of what you said, but I would like to comment on one point...
reasonable licensing terms to webcasters, somewhere around the middle between CARP's recommendations and what the webcasters asked for.
You fell into an RIAA trap here. Webcasters just want similar rules at traditional radio-casters. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. Guess what? They are *already* paying the same fees radio-casters do.
When someone asks for something insane you tell them to go to hell. Meeting them "half-way" is not a reasonable compromise. Same goes for the CBDTPA - don't ever let anyone think "half-way" is reasonable. Hell, even if "they" compromised 90% of the way on the CBDTPA and we compromised 10% of the way, it would still be unreasonable.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
The utter idiocy of the "designers" of the software is evident if you've ever watched your firewall deny KaZaa SYN packets for sometimes hours, all from the same source IP's, as they mindlessly try to connect to a KaZaa host that's no longer on the IP you've just inherited.
Although it's hard to imagine, KaZaa is 'way worse that Yahoo! chat hosts trying to connect to a chat host that's long gone.
Idiots...
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
After what Kazaa did to MusicCity Morphius (eg. forced them off their joint P2P network without warning), it serves them right! In a market that is based entirely on appeal (generally from reputation) and customer satisfaction, how can any P2P service try to play "hardball" with its "competition" and expect to come out ahead? I'm all for the Napster-esque services, open source, and variety, but I can't see how any P2P services can survive an RIAA onslaught without a glowing reputation, a strong userbase, and the respect of the P2P community. Kazaa, obviously, did not have all of that.
This is why its important to support open P2P protocols such as GNUtella. Several great GNUtella clients make using the network a snap. I recommend either Gnucleus or Xolox. Both connect to the same distributed GNUtella network and both are free to download and easy to use.
So you're saying that "legitimate artists" shouldn't be allowed to distribute their own copyrighted work in the way they see appropriate? Well, I'm glad that you at least acknolwedged that there are "legitimate" artists outside of the RIAA!
P2P is just a way of transporting data. It shouldn't be banned anymore than HTTP, IRC, FTP, TCP, or the telephone system.
I don't think you're a troll! ;-)
P2P can do more than just share music--it can share any type of file. It also can be used for real time chatting and group messaging. Think Usenet, the WWW, and IRC/IM all in one decentralized (meaning you're not dependant upon crappy unstable ISP's or spyware companies' servers) package. I imagine P2P technology could also make it possible to create citywide intranets that aren't reliant on any ISP or servers. Just think: plug in a wireless network card and some software and go. No need to find an ISP--you can play games, send messages/files without intervention or assistance from any specific organization--just like the internet used to be.
Back to the bastards: The entertainment cartel mostly seems to go after third parties instead of the people who are doing the copyright infringement. Like universities who were merely providing internet access for their students--they didn't tell the students to use Napster--they didn't even say anything about Napster--the students found and used that program on their own, yet universities where named in the lawsuit!!! That's like suing a telephone company because someone had played music through a long distance phone line. How could the telco be responsible for that? The universities?
Their whole plan appears to attempt to maintain their monopolistic position and control the internet rather than stop copyright infringement! Copyright infringement was around long before it was viable on the internet. Ever hear of anyone taping off the radio? How about copying audio/video tapes of copyrighted material and giving them to friends? Just because it is possible for a device to do something illegal, and some people do it, it doesn't mean that device should be banned. There are thousands of illegal things that could be done with a hammer or a car or a cat or a peice of wood. Why not ban those too?
It's the entertainment cartel's fault that P2P is mostly used for "pirating" because they're the ones that were screaming that P2P was only intended for "stealing" their music, and so people heard that and thought: "I can get free music if I run this P2P thingy? Cool!" P2P could do so much more. However stupid people like you and stupid people that believe you have amplified these misconceptions about P2P systems--thereby causing them to be mostly used for such purposes.
Yeah, at least that's what my roommate told me (he uses Kaazza) From what he said it doesn't sound too useful as you could only talk to someone who owns a specific file.
However, there are P2P systems that have IRC like chat channels and Usenet like messaging. The Circle is one.
You're complaining that it's only good for pop music, but at the same time complaining that you're having problems finding MOVIE SOUNDTRACKS?
Now excuse me while I go download my pop music such as A Silver Mt. Zion, Godspeed You Black Emperor!, Autechre, Merzbow...
By the way... search for Indiana Jones...
Entire "Temple of Doom Soundtrack", 128Kbps though, on a T3 (i tried it, connection maxed out my DSL Line), and 320Kbps of the entire "Raiders of the Lost Ark" soundtrack on Cable, plus assorted stuff from "The Last Crusade", along with a few video files of each, and apparently some ROMS of Indiana Jones NES games...
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
In my book blowing WTC and Wall Street was OK, after all Wall Street didn't hesitate to destroy our childrens' careers by creating the tech bubble and Enron debacle.
You're either the worst troll or the stupidest person I've met.
Sadly, I'm placing my money on Door #2.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I would love to take your sheltered American world view of "aaaah my golden retriever is so cute", but some of us live in the real world and see real genocide. My friend served as a Doctor on a ship that goes around Africa and provides medical assistance. They stopped at Sierra Leone during the rebel attacks. 5,000 people with severed hands tried to get on for treatment (see CNN archives). Obviously they don't have the funding or time to reattach severed limbs, and in hot countries the severed limb degrades quickly. They gave the minimum care, they ran out of painkiller and anaesthetic within a few minutes. All they could do is treat the stub by cauterising it with a flame, VERY painful without anaesthetic but it sure beats bleeding to death. When the rebels advanced because of their brutal tactics an American cruiser was on standby but was ordered not to violate territorial waters and create an incident. Without this protection the medical ship had to get the treated and semi-treated people off the ship, leave 2000 people untreated and withdraw. I doubt many of those people survived. All the big bad kick ass American cruiser had to do was bend the rules like in the movies and provide an escort and ground perimeter for the medical ship, but they just sat there 30 miles from the shore worried about the small print on their report to their Admirals, they just sat there while thousands of people were slughtered. And this was before Bush's isolationist policies came into effect.
Grow up America, elsewhere in the world events happen all the time where tens of thousands of people die. Only 2000 die and 2 buildings collapse and you whine so badly. Should Britain follow this precedent and bomb the hell out of Ireland?
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
Grow up America, elsewhere in the world events happen all the time where tens of thousands of people die. Only 2000 die and 2 buildings collapse and you whine so badly.
I think I speak for all Americans when I tell you to go fuck yourself.
Thanks, and HAND.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
As for what I said, here's some clarification:
Q: Do I believe WTC attack was good?
A: No, of course not
Q: Do I believe binLaden could have waited until Saddam sold him 10 nukes so that he could nuke NY, Chicago, Washington, LA, etc. simultaneously? Do I believe such an attack is possible?
A: binLaden could've waited and gotten nukes, then 10 US cities would be flattened cinders and 10% of the US population would be dead, instead of just WTC
Q: So was the WTC attack a preferable situation to 10 nukes after a couple of years?
A: Now how can I say "Yes" without saying I was in favour of the WTC attacks? Hmmmmm...
Find a flaw in my logic and I'll listen. Otherwise you're just living in self-denial (Neo you should have taken the red pill not the blue one).
A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?