Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Seeks Summary Judgement Against P2P Services
kanad writes: "RIAA seeks summary judgement against Musiccity , Kazaa and Grokster. In other words they want the above to be banned even before the trial. RIAA accuses them as Napster clones.
Read the
official statement here BTW does anybody knows of 'Leonard Kleinrock' described as "one of the original founders of the Internet" in the article and an expert witness ?" I wonder whether the mimeograph machine would survive if it was invented today.
Leonard Kleinrock.
/.'ed. Great way to use that Berman-Coble DOS self-help!
Unfortunately the RIAA page is
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
sue if you're not happy with something, and everybody's guilty until proven innocent. well, nobody's innocent anymore, are they?
:|
it is rather unfortunate that the RIAA's product is less talented than it's lawyers
word to ya motha
I don't know what it does, so I'll claim it's a napster clone...
It can be used to cut into our profits, stop it...
With this logic, PC's should be banned, as they can copy music, MSN and AOL should be shut down, since they provide access to the internet, which has illegal copies of music, and hell, XM radio should be shutdown as well, since it is hackable and can have music ripped off of it...
BLAH! Put the RIAA out of their missery, and MINE!
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
first post
In other words they want the above to be banned even before the trial
RIAA is slashdotted... but... from Alice...
"Sentence First. Verdict After!"
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
I wonder if the mass distribution of music for a profit would survive if Napster, Kazaa and Grokster would have been around during the 1920s.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
hmmm.. thats ok, Now i can just use my phone... BBC is reporting the arrival of phone based p2p networks for file sharing... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2253185.stm
Here's his home page where he does claim to have invented the Internet.
Going further, what's to stop IRC and a number of FTP servers? I still host a ton of content on my FTP server, and it is NOT anonymous (yeah-yeah, insecure blahblah). Or, I could burn info to a CD and send it wherever to whomever, or even just email a MP3 if its small enough...
ineffective at best, i say.
----rhad
Slashdot needs to interview Natalie Portman.
Just post a news article on /. every day and the load will crash the server... LEGAL DOS! :)
seriously thought, to try to shut them down before the trial is unconstitional... "innocent until proven guilty..."
-=Errors always defy logic.=-
I believe he was one of the engineers at BBN that helped on the development of the Net through a grant from DARPA. If you want more data, try Nerds 2.0.1 or Where Wizards Stay Up Late, both available from your favorite bookseller.
His home page:
http://www.lk.cs.ucla.edu/
The RIAA has seen what the people want, and refuse to offer them that service. Because of this, people are going to take an alternate method of getting what they want.
:)
All of this litigation is, frankly, nonsense.
If the goverment is for the people, (i know it really isnt) and the people want to be able to download mp3s. Then this should be reflected in the law of the land.
Maybe we could vote on it?
no
I know his page is mentioned above, but for the lazy, he did a bunch of research on packet switching back in the '60s, for the military I believe. One of the founders of modern networks, but I don't know that he's one of the founders of the Net. Seems to be a fundamental difference to me.
I do now knows who 'Leonard Kleinrock' is but a quick google search yields loe and behold his homepage:
http://www.lk.cs.ucla.edu/
I'm sure that kanad was just joking since Kleinrock's is declaring himself as the Inventor of the Internet Technology.
Yea, him and Quale.
Let's all say that goatse.cx is the inventor too while we're at it.
... and thier, um stuff, get's traded more heavily than the copywritten music on KaZaA.
Now what about all the porn being traded online. We're talking 200 MB files of people gettin it on. Has Vivid been suing?
Early work (circa 1960) on packet switching and routing.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Why is the inventor of basic packet switching an expert witness against P2P Networks? Maybe he'll claim every P2P that has uses packet switching is his IP. Hell, go after the whole internet, he "invented" it didn't he?
:)
He has a much stronger claim than Al Gore though
Why, o why must the sky fall when I've learned to fly?
I wonder whether the mimeograph machine would survive if it was invented today.
Idunno, but the fresh pages sure smelled good!
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
The RIAA just doesn't have a clue what reality is.
TheftThe act of stealing; specifically, the felonious taking and removing of personal property, with an intent to deprive the rightful owner of the same; larceny.
Note: To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief.
In order for something to be stolen, it must be taken AWAY from the possession of the owner. You can argue copyrights and such, but it isn't theft.
Copying is not theft. you havent removed anything. It may not be ethical to copy, but it isn't theft.
See the Pictures of the Flood of '08
To boot, I'd love to see these 'millions of dollars' that the P2P network admins are making, cuz the only revenue I see them making is piddling ad impressions that probably barely cover their costs.. Hell, they use Adware they are so desperate for revenue.
Yeah, he used to beat the crap out of me . Of course I was a lowly green belt in Shotokan Karate, and he was a mightly black belt.
Seriously, he is a professor at UCLA and describes himself as "the Inventor of the Internet Technology". Not the inventor of the Internet itself mind you. Maybe think of him as the Heinrich Hertz of the Internet, not the Marconi.
"dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"
"RIAA® members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States"
What the hell is a legitimate sound recording? Is the indie music I make and distribute illegitimate?
Man. These guys make me angrier and angrier.
My music wants to be free.
McCallum
http://mentalfloss.ca/sintheta
It seems that the majority of creators aren't getting the chance to make that decision. The RIAA with its arrogant presumption is making the decision for everyone by pursuing these services.
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn
Ok, I've said this before and I'll say it again:
1) there are laws about copyright infringement.
2) the RIAA,MPAA, PainInTheAA are encouraged to use them -- solet the bastards go forth and file suits against the people who are putting infringing materials on the NODES. If they are worried that their product isn't worth protecting at that level then that's simply a business decision. Technology is not a criminal.
It's a great way to short-circuit an expensive long trial .... if you win ...
IANAL etc
Points 10 guage shotgun at feet, /. pulls trigger...
Rosen asks "Why don't we have a leg to stand on?"
(RIAA = Distilled stupidity)
Damned moochers anyway.....
The RIAA accusses a shadowy hacker's organization, known only as "slashdot", of a massive distributed Denial of Service attack on its web site...
I'm waiting for publishing companies to seek an immediately injunction against Xerox and the rest of the copy machine companies pending trial. Copy machines and scanners definitely allow people to STEAL their property.
Next will come Kodak...how DARE you reproduce images without expressed written consent of all parties involved?!?!?
</sarcasm>
From the article:
:(
RIAA® members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States.
That might be FUD, but damn. I knew it was bad, but I had no idea it was THAT bad.
Triv
I wonder whether the mimeograph machine would survive if it was invented today.
No, but not for the reason you're thinking. It would be immediately banned as thousands upon thousands of school kids catch a buzz from sniffing the freshly printed sheets.
Karma: Professionally Doomed (mostly affected by inability to keep opinions to self)
This is the main problem that I see. Lets suppose they do get Kaaza etc... shut down. Well then myself (and probably others will build a new one.) And then if they shut that one down, someone will build another. The more they attack the more P2P users will defend. Their attacks make people hate the RIAA, which makes them want to use P2P networks more, which means RIAA will eventually lose. UNLESS, they come up with a better deal than the P2P networks currently offer. But this means RIAA has to change the way it's business model works.
An interesting quote from the man himself:
...Kleinrock built the crystal radio and was totally hooked when 'free' music came through the earphones...
illegitimii non ingravare
Do Kazaa, or the other people making the clients have *anything* to do with the actual network anymore? If say all of these companies were shut down, would the Kazaa/Morpheus/Kazaalite/whatever clients still talk to each other? Is it really as decentralized as it's touted to be?
Muahahaha! They can have my Kazaa when they pry it from my cold dead fingers... Sound familiar?
Perhaps we should ban handguns too cause...geez...after all people are using them for illegal purposes.
Most of these P2P networks are designed to be decentralized are they not? Though MusicCity with GNUTELLA is 100% while the FastTrack protocol has some sort of authentication method required to get onto the network. Which would make it easy to shutdown FasTrack as-is, unless of course they revert back to the old authentication method that they had where almost any client could connect to the network (think giFT). They may be able to stop MusicCity (maybe Kazaa if FastTrack get their act together) from distributing the clients but the network is something that they will have absolutely no control over and the clients will still be floating around out there. I don't see this as a major hassle to anyone who uses a truely 100% decentralized network.
*shrug*
For the 10,000th time...
This is just a summary judgement request. I've never been involved in a case (thankfully few) where both sides didn't file requests for summary judgement. Its just lawyer chest thumping. The lawyers says "My case is so strong there is no possible defense." Then the judge whips out his denied stamp, whacks both summary judegment requests and the case proceeds.
Now, if the judge grants this, then that would be newsworthy.
If a lawyer filing a summary judgement request is news, then you probably ought to cover every time they take a leak too.
Just stop trying! Don't try to shut down P2P, but embrase it as a reality. Napster had what, upwards of 50million users or so? It's impossible to go after them all, so they shut Napster down. Wrong move RIAA. Shutting down Napster just took a hammer and hit it on a block of ice, that huge user base shattered into a bunch of smaller user bases that are harder for them to shut down.
-=Errors always defy logic.=-
Said Mark Litvack, MPAA Vice President and Director of Legal Affairs: "This is Cybernetic shoplifting."
Gee, I guess all that time spent downloading music, movies and porn was tranforming geeks into something wonderful and new. Imagine it, we've all been enhanced in ways never thought possible!
Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
I'm not sure if Kleinrock invented the internet, but I do know that it was first created by the US army and known as the 'Arpanet' ...... whether or not Kleinrock was part of the team I do not know.
"With this logic, PC's should be banned as they can copy music"
They're already trying to do something like that, but instead of banning PCs and services, they want to turn them into devices that they can control. For example, check out Palladium. Last time I checked, both AMD and Intel had bought in to this.Does anybody here have those nude photos of Hilary Rosen I keep hearing about. I understand she's a real freak.
Putting aside the technical difficulty of shutting down a P2P network, some of this software may stand a chance in court. They are very much geared to 'file'-sharing rather than music sharing. That improves the chances that some court might see them as substantially non-infringing. Moreover, they are software programs, rather than centralized server, making the case for "the users are responsible for their own actions" stronger.
None of it matters in the end, though. There are three types of people out there: 1) There are those people who don't understand computer technology. 2) There are those people who understand it a little because they've used it. But they don't really understand it. They think that the icon is the program. They think of electronic mail as 'mail, but electronic.' And they have a fuzzy perception of information ownership. They think of people who alter the information on their computers in ways that were not intended as 'hackers' and slightly nefarious. 3) There are people who understand how computers work, and have a good idea what is happening with the 1's and 0's at any given time. Sure, they couldn't build their own OS, but they understand how it works to some degree. (Like someone who couldn't fix his car, but understands the basic concept of an internal combustion engine.)
Unfortunately, it is highly probable that the judge will belong to category 1 or 2.
is turning over in his grave ... er ... uhh ... hmmm ...
It wasn't much of a problem before. Most pirates wouldn't have paid the money for it anyway. But now they've drug the rest of us into it and now we are all criminals!
:-)
:-) and it sure isn't $20!
I've gotten so fed up with this crap. I really quit buying CDs now. I download the songs I wanna hear. Not because I want to steal them but because I don't want to give the RIAA any more money they can use to get me, or the rest of us, up our respective a$$es. I support my favorite artists by going to concerts (yeah I know the RIAA gets a cut but what can you do?) and buying merchandise like the concert T's. God, I can't wait to see Disturbed and Korn next month!
Really, this wouldn't be such an issue if they were not a$$ raping us $20 for a CD. We all know now, how much it really cost to burn one!
If they'd charge a reasonable price and quit a$$ raping their customers and a$$ raping the bands they are pretending to protect (what is it, most bands get $.50 - $1 per CD sold? more? less?), they wouldn't have this problem in the first place!
Ascalante: Your bride is over 3,000 years old.
Kull: She told me she was 19!
Music and Motion Picture Groups Move For Ruling In Case Against MusicCity and Others Music and Motion Picture Groups Move For Ruling In Copyright Infringement Case Against Kazaa, MusicCity and Grokster Three leading organizations representing the music publishers, and record and motion picture companies, today filed a motion in a Los Angeles federal court asking for an expedited ruling in their ongoing copyright infringement case against the online file sharing services Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity. After having gathered evidence for the last several months, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and National Music Publishers Association (NMPA), moved for summary judgment in United States District Court for the Central District of California. The three organizations charge that the massive "vicarious and contributory copyright infringement" facilitated by the Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity services is abundantly clear and an accelerated ruling on the merits of the case is warranted. The initial lawsuit was filed last October. In deference to the confidential evidence designated by defendants, the plaintiffs' summary judgment brief has been filed confidentially, under seal. The three organizations will seek to work out an appropriate process to unseal the briefs. In short, the motion claims that Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity: built their networks to emulate Napster in almost every respect. They succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Having begun with Napster technology and a Napster business model, they have marketed their service to Napster users and argued the same legal defenses as Napster; have built their networks into candy stores of infringement that allow a user to find the most popular music and movies of our time without paying any of the rights holders; are earning millions of dollars from the service; are acutely aware that the services are being used to facilitate copyright infringement on a massive scale for movies and music; built and controlled the networks in a way that they could easily prevent the copyright infringements from occurring. The defendants' principal defense that they have no ability to control the network is belied by a myriad of facts, including the fact that Kazaa demonstrated its ability to turn off the Morpheus system at whim; have been engaged in much more activity than merely distributing software as they claim. Rather, they were the genesis of and continue to be the sustainer of their networks. Said Mark Litvack, MPAA Vice President and Director of Legal Affairs: "This is Cybernetic shoplifting. The Defendants have used the Internet to enrich themselves and deprive creators and copyright holders of their right to be compensated for their works, thereby perpetuating the false mentality that stealing is an acceptable form of behavior." "The Defendants' business model is premised on legal theories that have been soundly rejected by both the Napster and Aimster courts." said Matt Oppenheim, Senior Vice President, Business and Legal Affairs. "This is a case about choice -- creators should not be forced to give away the results of their effort for free. They should have the choice of whether to give it away or sell it." "These services were designed with one overriding purpose -- to exploit the value in copyrighted music for their own profit without compensating the creators," said Edward P. Murphy, President & CEO of the National Music Publishers' Association. "That is the reality -- the defenses thrown up to disguise it cannot survive the cold light of day. We are confident that the court will protect the rights of the creators against such brazen predatory conduct." Also included in the filing is the testimony of several expert witnesses, including Leonard Kleinrock, widely regarded as one of the original founders of the Internet. Kleinrock describes how the defendant's file sharing system works and how they could easily control and prevent the massive copyright infringement from occurring. # # # # # About the National Music Publishers' Association: The National Music Publishers' Association, Inc., founded in 1917, works to protect and advance the interests of the music publishing industry. With over 900 members, the NMPA represents the most important and influential music publishing firms throughout the United States. The Recording Industry Association of America is the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. Its mission is to foster a business and legal climate that supports and promotes our members' creative and financial vitality. Its members are the record companies that comprise the most vibrant national music industry in the world. RIAA® members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States. In support of this mission, the RIAA works to protect intellectual property rights worldwide and the First Amendment rights of artists; conduct consumer industry and technical research; and monitor and review - - state and federal laws, regulations and policies. The RIAA® also certifies Gold®, Platinum®, Multi-Platinum(TM), and Diamond sales awards, Los Premios De Oro y Platino(TM), an award celebrating Latin music sales. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) serves as the voice and advocate of the American motion picture, home video and television industries from its offices in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. On its board of directors are the Chairmen and Presidents of the seven major producers and distributors of motion picture and television programs in the United States. These members include: Walt Disney Company; Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc.; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.;Universal Studios, Inc.; and Warner Bros. Redacted Version of Summary Judgment Motion
"If a quarter is two bits, then a dollar's a byte." -R Deric Miller
Yes, Al Gore DID say that he took the initiative to create the internet:
During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. on Wolf Blitzer's CNN "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999.
Even though the refrence above is from one of the apologist's sites, with the Snopes folks excusing it as "clumsy wording", it IS what Al Gore said and claimed.
I'm not a big fan of Gore by any stretch, but these kind comments are beyond stale.
From http://internet-history.org/memories/0055.html:
Al Gore has been one of my heroes for the last decade. I became aware of him around 1990 when he started being quoted a lot by the engineering types working on internetworking issues: He was the first legislator who actually appreciated what the internet was all about, and he helped guide the 'net through a very tricky transition.
When the 'net got started in the 1970's, every computer scientist who heard about it was jazzed, but only a very select clique could get to touch it: The hardware for the internet was these special computers called IMPs (I think that was short for Intelligent Message Processors) built by Honeywell, and outfitted with software and some minor hardware modifications by Bolt Beranek and Newman, and engineering company in Cambridge, Massachussetts. In order to get one of those, you had to be a research institution with contract funded research for the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the US Department of Defense. I think the rental for an IMP was something like $100,000 per year, which had to be paid out of the overhead on the research contracts, so small colleges need not apply!
Around 1980-82, the ARPAnet had grown to include major military posts, defense contracting companies and most universities that had any defense research contracts at all. It was now carrying several different classes of traffic:
- administrative traffic for the military
- administrative traffic between the military and its contractors
- and acting as a testbed for research experiments in protocol
development.
During this period, TCP was developed, and the network switched from the original NCP protocol to TCP/IP. Shortly after that, the network had grown so large that it had run out of numbers for the IMPs (the hardware allowed 8 bits for the IMP number) and it was split into two separate networks connected by some routers called "mail bridges":
- network number 10 - ARPAnet
- network number 26 - MILnet
This split also helped calm the fears of some military people who were worried about sharing a network with potentially subversive students. This fear is why the connection between the networks was called "mail bridges" implying that only the relatively safe e-mail could get across. Despite the name, however, those were really full-fledged routers, providing a completely seamless connection.
With IP installed, and the newly invented ethernet allowing for affordable campus networks, the major universities started attaching campus networks to the ARPAnet backbone, using VAX-11/780 mini-computers with the network-aware version of UNIX that ARPA had paid University of California at Berkeley to develop.
Many of the smaller universities wanted to participate, but did not have any military reaserch contracts to qualify them, so they banded together to build a compatible network running TCP/IP over X.25 (Telenet, Tymnet). This was known as CS-NET (for Computer Science network).
By 1989, the university-to-university traffic had dwarfed the military traffic, and the DoD wanted to divest itself of the overheads of running the network, so they asked the National Science Foundation to take over. Around this time, the NSF had started a program to build - I think it was 9 - national supercomputer centers, and needed to link them with the potential users at universities. They rented a bunch of 56 kbps lines - of the same kind that ARPAnet ran on - and installed a bunch of routers built out of inexpensive PDP-11/23 minicomputers, using a software package called FUZZBALL, developed by professor Dave Mills of University of Delaware. This created a second backbone, parallel to the DoD-sponsored ARPA backbone. Since NSFnet had no military funding, there was no longer a requirement for military contracts to be connected, but since it was paid for by tax dolllars earmarked for reasearch in the national interest, it was not available to businesses, except in support of government paid research.
It was at this point that Senator Gore stepped in, and basically brokered a deal where NSF stopped paying for the network, and instead gave the universities money to buy network services. This made it possible to start network companies to compete with NSFnet and its regional affiliates. Several of the NSF-funded affiliates re-invented tehmselves overnight into for-profit ventures. NYSERnet became PSI, for example.
Without this visionary plan, there would not have been a commercial Internet.
-------------------
He has NEVER CLAIMED to have single-handedly created the internet. And it sounds to me like we could do much worse than to have him take the stand on the RIAA issue.
LEXX
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
the birth of the Internet which occurred when his Host computer at UCLA became the first node of the Internet
Out of curiosity, what was the point of having the first host, as opposed to the first pair of hosts? "Hey, look at me! I'm networking with myself!"
In about thirty years I'll tell you how I was the first host on Internet 3. :)
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
You create an arbitrarily sized table of randomly placed 1's and 0's... Then what you trade is files that reference where in the table the bytes for your file located in sequence... Would this still be considered piracy or intellectual property?
What the people want is easy access to music, and the ability to sample.
P.Diddy has the ability to sample, and look where it got him.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The RIAA has asked the Department of Justice to investigate the site "Slashdot". Apparently a posting on that site caused the RIAA's webserver to crash and burn. Hilary Rosen, the president of the RIAA said, "Only the RIAA is allowed to overload servers. This is clearly an Evil Terrorist Content Pirate(tm) attempt to stop our efforts to bleed^H^H^H^H^Hhelp starving slaves^H^H^H^H^H^Hartists."
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
Wasn't Leonard Kleinrock a big time record label executive on the Flintstones? ;-)
I get music cds, dvds, computer games, books from my local library all the time. Does this mean an end to this form of sharing?
What special deal does a video store have that they are allowed to share their videos? They seem to be the same as the ones I get from the library?
Digital rights could be fun. Make an online libary that allows downloading with auto expiring content, or just a policy that the user agrees to have deleted the file at the end of the checkout period so it automatically becomes available for download again. One would need to check the rules, but I do believe a libary is allowed to copy or backup their materials against damage or theft. As the user has agreed to destroy the checked out copy, the library would automatically use the backup. Of course, this would be a full featured service with holds and everything.
Using technology to enforce this shouldn't be needed. The patrons agree and policing them should be the duty of law enforcement. (Once there was a quote along the lines of you might legally be allowed to backup something, but they didn't have to make it easy. (Used a lock door analogy) Well, would the inverse be patrons are assumed to follow the legal agreement, it's the police, not us who enforce the law. We trust people.)
If done as a non-profit, one could even offer tax breaks for each donated item. And the number of copies the libary has could increase.
Music and Motion Picture Groups Move For Ruling In Case Against MusicCity and Others
Music and Motion Picture Groups Move For Ruling In Copyright Infringement Case Against Kazaa, MusicCity and Grokster
Three leading organizations representing the music publishers, and record and motion picture companies, today filed a motion in a Los Angeles federal court asking for an expedited ruling in their ongoing copyright infringement case against the online file sharing services Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity.
After having gathered evidence for the last several months, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and National Music Publishers Association (NMPA), moved for summary judgment in United States District Court for the Central District of California. The three organizations charge that the massive "vicarious and contributory copyright infringement" facilitated by the Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity services is abundantly clear and an accelerated ruling on the merits of the case is warranted. The initial lawsuit was filed last October.
In deference to the confidential evidence designated by defendants, the plaintiffs' summary judgment brief has been filed confidentially, under seal. The three organizations will seek to work out an appropriate process to unseal the briefs. In short, the motion claims that Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity:
built their networks to emulate Napster in almost every respect. They succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. Having begun with Napster technology and a Napster business model, they have marketed their service to Napster users and argued the same legal defenses as Napster;
have built their networks into candy stores of infringement that allow a user to find the most popular music and movies of our time without paying any of the rights holders;
are earning millions of dollars from the service;
are acutely aware that the services are being used to facilitate copyright infringement on a massive scale for movies and music;
built and controlled the networks in a way that they could easily prevent the copyright infringements from occurring. The defendants' principal defense that they have no ability to control the network is belied by a myriad of facts, including the fact that Kazaa demonstrated its ability to turn off the Morpheus system at whim;
have been engaged in much more activity than merely distributing software as they claim. Rather, they were the genesis of and continue to be the sustainer of their networks.
Said Mark Litvack, MPAA Vice President and Director of Legal Affairs: "This is Cybernetic shoplifting. The Defendants have used the Internet to enrich themselves and deprive creators and copyright holders of their right to be compensated for their works, thereby perpetuating the false mentality that stealing is an acceptable form of behavior." "The Defendants' business model is premised on legal theories that have been soundly rejected by both the Napster and Aimster courts." said Matt Oppenheim, Senior Vice President, Business and Legal Affairs. "This is a case about choice -- creators should not be forced to give away the results of their effort for free. They should have the choice of whether to give it away or sell it."
"These services were designed with one overriding purpose -- to exploit the value in copyrighted music for their own profit without compensating the creators," said Edward P. Murphy, President & CEO of the National Music Publishers' Association. "That is the reality -- the defenses thrown up to disguise it cannot survive the cold light of day. We are confident that the court will protect the rights of the creators against such brazen predatory conduct."
Also included in the filing is the testimony of several expert witnesses, including Leonard Kleinrock, widely regarded as one of the original founders of the Internet. Kleinrock describes how the defendant's file sharing system works and how they could easily control and prevent the massive copyright infringement from occurring.
# # # # #
About the National Music Publishers' Association: The National Music Publishers' Association, Inc., founded in 1917, works to protect and advance the interests of the music publishing industry. With over 900 members, the NMPA represents the most important and influential music publishing firms throughout the United States.
The Recording Industry Association of America is the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry. Its mission is to foster a business and legal climate that supports and promotes our members' creative and financial vitality. Its members are the record companies that comprise the most vibrant national music industry in the world. RIAA® members create, manufacture and/or distribute approximately 90% of all legitimate sound recordings produced and sold in the United States. In support of this mission, the RIAA works to protect intellectual property rights worldwide and the First Amendment rights of artists; conduct consumer industry and technical research; and monitor and review - - state and federal laws, regulations and policies. The RIAA® also certifies Gold®, Platinum®, Multi-Platinum(TM), and Diamond sales awards, Los Premios De Oro y Platino(TM), an award celebrating Latin music sales.
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) serves as the voice and advocate of the American motion picture, home video and television industries from its offices in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. On its board of directors are the Chairmen and Presidents of the seven major producers and distributors of motion picture and television programs in the United States. These members include: Walt Disney Company; Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc.; Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc.; Paramount Pictures Corporation; Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.;Universal Studios, Inc.; and Warner Bros.
Redacted Version of Summary Judgment Motion
"If a quarter is two bits, then a dollar's a byte." -R Deric Miller
The reason that Napster was extremely successful and these P2P apps have been somewhat successful is because they lowered the transaction costs for successfully downloading, i.e., for every CHOSEN file they made it quicker (searching), easier (less work to download), faster (downloading...more servers...higher probability of finding a fast server), and require far less technical ability (the users skill). If you force the users back to IRC, FTP, and such you're going to:
A) Cut out 95% of the users because they won't have the necessary skills to complete most of the downloads they desire.
B) Cut out most of the people that have (or acquire) the skills because finding the files, the sites, and acquiring the trust or the ratios (maybe not necessary in this system, but that is the status quo and human nature). The few that are willing to put up the effort likely are not RIAA's better customers anyways.
C) Reduce the # of downloads of said users, by virtue of the fact that each one simply takes them longer.
Very effective.
What he said was factually correct. Read my comment above. And I'm not apologizing for anyone, merely pointing out that you are wrong.
LEXX
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
I'm not for sure but wasn't the military using some crude kind of 'internet' while this guy was in diapers? I'm not an Internet history buff so I'm sorry if my info isn't correct.
Yea, I knew posting the proof would be ignored.
Nobody is saying that Gore claimed to have single handedly invent the internet. Read his own words and look at them for what they are worth.
Al Gore is a huckster that tried to BS Wolf Blitzer and the CNN viewers in 1999, plain and simple.
I _could_ download the Sopranos off the internet. I could have my friends tape it for me, or Replay it over to a VCD, but I don't, because HBO is easily available to me at a reasonable price.
Charge me $40-$60/month (which is more than i'm paying for CD every month these days), give me access to every song I want, and you'll make a killing.
Its a new era, you need a new billing scheme. Look at cable companies. Does anyone think that stealing cable is justified? They don't charge by the show, and conversely, nobody says "I'm not really stealing cable, because there's no way i'd watch 200 channels anyway." or "Yeah, i'll watch Showtime because I can, but if I couldn't get it for free, I wouldn't watch it."
It'll never happen though. They'll charge $18.99 for a highly restrictive format download of a shitty CD, then moan that nobody is buying it because of piracy.
Morpheus also asked for summary judgement, but they wanted all of the charges dismissed. Their argument is that there are too many uses for the service for it to be shut down because of the illegal users. This was reported on Monday on news.com.
You left out the second part of the definition from Webster's definition, Sparky:
b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property
Embezzlement is a *lot* closer to copyright infringement than the other definition suggests.
However, note that this is from a dictionary from 1913, where there is still a noun 'theft' that means a stolen property. Note that the m-w.com site labels it obsolete. And there is also a definition as of stealing a base (in baseball).
This should show you that language is not static, it is fluid. The fact that you don't think it should be called theft is your problem. 'Theft' is now used to indicate copyright infringement. Cope.
He's known as "the Father of Modern Data Networking." Says so right here on his site.
I don't see it mentioned in the text. I can't see the point of adding it either because it wouldn't fit the description. I'm under the impression Kazaa Lite is not a profitable enterprise. I could be wrong.
An accomplished blowhard, but a blowhard nonetheless. The personality he projects on his web page is just the type I'd expect to traitorously side with the RIAA in a case like this. He's probably being well-compensated, but I bet he'd even do it for free.
No ma'am, just you (RIAA members). Most of the offenders are buying concert tickets still, so they're still happy to pay for value added services it seems.
Interesting point. The historical answer is quite revealing. The invention in question is not the memeograph, but the printing press. The printing press so threatened those in control of information at the time (the Catholic church), that the entire reformation resulted. Let's just hope this go-round is not as bloody.
Here is what I want:
The ability to download a low quality version of a song to see if I like it. If i like it, i am given the option to buy that track at a reasonable cost (I'd pay ~$1 USD, but demand a bulk discount for a whole CD): I want this track that I buy to be available NOW, in many popular formats including a lossless format suitable for burning. I want the right to copy this track to kingdom come, from my car to my home and portable.
The record companies will say that then users will take this files and exchange them all over with their friends but think about this: I have money and my time is worth money -- it it technically "cheaper" for me to pay $1 for a high-quality song and have it NOW than to spend 5 hours finding a low-quality and corrupted copy off some P2P service. As an extension of this, those who can't afford to pay for digital music cannot afford to buy the CD anyway, so no one is loosing a sale anyway.
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
My claim: Yes, Al Gore DID say that he took the initiative to create the internet
My evidence: During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.
We both know that this is WRONG. He may have taken some initiative to enhance the internet, broaden it's reach, jack up our phone bills to have internet access in schools and then forgot to distribute the money (you forgot that one), etc. etc.
My statement is not wrong at all and btw, I am not the person you first responded to.
Preach it brother. I'll be glad to listen to your music and never pay for it!
RIAA seeks summary judgement against Musiccity , Kazaa and Grokster. In other words they want the above to be banned even before the trial.
Sensationalism aside, summary judgment is nothing special. All Musiccity, Kazaa and Grokster have to do to prevent it is to point to same facts that are in dispute that matter. If not everybody agrees on the important facts, then there can be a trial.
Now, preliminary injunction is another matter...
GYOGDLYMNO
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Would the RIAA actually take the time to seek out and destroy these companies if they didn't flaunt the ability to share and download files? I mean, there are a lot of services still around that, at least as of yet, the RIAA hasn't made any real action against. ICQ, IRC, Hotline(for those of you who know it). I suspect that because these boast ways to communicate quickly with, and meet other people, organizations like the RIAA forget or just don't care that they can transfer files. Now, if services like WinMX, Kaaza(or however it's spelled), etc hyped up their messaging services, and ways to connect people, while downplaying filesharing, would we still be where we are? I believe that it would be an interesting experiment. I mean, I know for sure I can get almost any MP3 I want from IRC if I find a channel where people listen to that music. Granted, the magnitude of the files on these networks is huge compared to the others I've mentioned, but if no one played up the fact that they were as they are, maybe they would be allowed to survive. I don't know, just my thoughts on the subject.
Try actually thinking for yourself. It's quite refreshing.
In my research on the evolution of the Internet during my college years I have never read nor heard Kleinrocks name mentioned anywhere!
I'm sure Vinton Cerf, the person most consider to be the "Father of the Internet" (next of course to DARPA) would be amused to hear that Kleinrock was the founder!
The sum of our knowledge today becomes the reference point of our ignorance tomorrow.
Ok It's sick and twisted and wrong... and Probably shouldn't even be said in jest like this is...
Why can't we get Bin-Laden to blow up the RIAA headquarters? Cant we please get some terrorists to at least just take them hostage for the next 15 years?
I guess that undermining the american public and financial system is a goal of terrorists, so the RIAA and Hillary are therefore frinds of the terrorists... and friends dont blow up friends...
Dammit...
What we need is an angry mob with pitchforks and torches to go and visit all the management at the RIAA... and possibly go stop by the MPAA for a cup o tea afterwards....
Dr. Leonard Kleinrock is known as the Inventor of the Internet Technology, having created the basic principles of packet switching, the technology underpinning the Internet, while a graduate student at MIT. This was a decade before the birth of the Internet which occurred when his Host computer at UCLA became the first node of the Internet in September 1969. He wrote the first paper and published the first book on the subject; he also directed the transmission of the first message ever to pass over the Internet.
http://www.lk.cs.ucla.edu/
I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
Actually it looks more like just bad phrasing. He certainly seems to have played a large role in helping create the modern commercial internet, on the political side, of course, not the technical.
good one, moron.
Quale indeed.
What he said was factually correct.
Who? What Al Gore said was factually correct? That he took the initiative to create the internet?
What you said above does not prove this at all and what Al Gore said was a bunch of crap!
And I'm not apologizing for anyone, merely pointing out that you are wrong.
You are pointing out that someone is wrong by proving them right? How does that work? Are you posting from some wacky California Philosophy Department terminal or something?
Some days, like today, when the firewall is scrolling rejected TCP/UDP port 1214 packets (Kazza default port) like a waterfall on the console I tend to think 'Fine, kill'em all off. Just get that damn traffic off my wires'.
Just a small detail....How do you propose artists, producers and promoters be remunerated for their efforts?
I don't claim to know the answers. But one can at least say, however the market chooses to remunerate them. Look, technology was what enabled musicians to reproduce cheaply and for a mass market in a way that enabled them to make millions in the first place. Now, technology has made it so easy to reproduce stuff that there's no reasonable law that can be made to halt it being distributed freely. To me there's no normative conclusion to be drawn. It just is what it is. And I think it's not so bad.
So maybe we want him to be the expert here :-).
By the same token, do music copyright holders have the copyright to any technique that could produce air vibrations similar to the air vibrations that happened when the artist performed the song? And another thing, do they actually own the original vibrations, by which I mean, I'm not allowed to measure those vibrations and report to anyone else the results of my measurements, even if I make the measurements from a distance? They actually own the rights to what the air is doing?
What if I had a method to describe the complete pattern space of waveforms that the original music was not? That is, I have some sort of mathematical description of every possible wave form except the original music, I can't tell anyone what that is either, I suppose because that would allow you to derive the original. Even though I'm explicitly and rigourously not giving you the original.
Equine Mammals Are Considerably Smaller
Just follow the link "Personal History of the Internet".
Here are a couple of interesting thoughts.... 1) In one example in the dedacted version from the RIAA website, the document actually mentionsWindows Media Player. So, since that is so obviously being used to infringe upon copyrights, why are they not named in the suit? 2) According to the press release on the RIAA site, it sounds like I would be infringing copyrights if I rented/bought a movie and thn invited all my friends over to watch it, or worse yet, loaned it out to them, or geve them the movie after I watched it... Whew!! Time for a reality break..... At the rate things are going, the RIAA apparently won't be happy until you have to pay them each and every time you listen to a song (I am refering to one you purchased).
Ah, gotcha!
:-)
So I can say that I invented the Jeep after I throw a 4" lift under mine? Kewellness!
I was so down on myself before, but hell, I did not realize that i had taken the initiative to invent fire, the wheel, automobiles, computers, the world wide web and cutoff jeans
Thanks for turning my frown upside down.
I gave $1000 to the EFF last month.
What have you done?
My word processor was written by Stanford Professor Donald Knuth. Who wrote yours?
If Al Gore were president, Tipper Gore would be First Lady, and the RIAA would have to answer to her all over again, only this time, she would be a lot more powerful. I wish Tipper Gore was First Lady. The recording industry deserves her. She would get Al to veto any Pro RIAA crap coming out of Congress. It is a shame we let Bush enter the White House when he did not win the election.
How ya like dat?
Interesting...seems a substantial part of RIAA's propaganda against the peer to peer companies is predicated on the fact that they're making a profit.
I wonder if this means their case would be weaker against giFT.
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
You are talking about the PMRC Tipper Gore?
Yea, great solution, take ALL recorded works away unless the PMRC approves them.
Actually, since the First Lady has no regulatory authority in the slightest, haveing her in that position might be the best thing for Free Speech.
Correct, he did take the intiative in creating the internet.
If it wasn't for him, woul would have ARPAnet, MILnet, and CSnet, none of which would be available to the public.
This is like saying the founders of the Big Mac should take claim because there was hamburgers before there was Big Macs.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
But the catch is that all those millions of users and gazillions of downloads have made connoisseurs out of users who perhaps just a few years would have been happy to download even low bitrate or chopped up songs. Now most of those same millions have their own archives to trade. Kazaa is really quite inefficient and leads to high signal to noise ratio. If anything, I'd think the RIAA would be happy to leave well enough alone before we start seeing an escalation of small time trading of big time archives. Is it that hard to imagine people trading files like
Bertlesman_A-C.tar.gz 1,000,000M
or Warner_K_through_M.tar.gz 1,000,000M
People will do this as a form of protest if nothing else.
We know damn well the 320Gig plus drives are already being screwed together in Malasia. I don't think this takes much imagination to see things get a lot worse than Kazaa. There's a huge glut of bandwidth that needs to be used unless some very large infrastructure corporations are going to lay down and go bankrupt to protect these relatively puny though obnoxious and litigious copyright whores. So, if the bandwidth is there and storage is not looking to be the problem then this will probably come to pass. The pipe is hardly dripping now. If they keep twisting the nob, they're going to end up with a flood. There was going to be a flood either way, but if they keep fucking with the knob they're gonna get blamed when it happens.
The RIAA's folly is that they are actually losing money whenever I download an mp3, and correspondingly prevent myself from buying a CD. The fact is, I never intend to pay for music ever again THUS it is erroneous to suggest that a sale has been LOST... when it never existed in the first place. The music that they sell is not worth buying, and the music that I listen to is not sold in any stores.
If he invented the Net isn't all this P2P stuff his fault? Maybee the RIAA is actually going to go after him?
Mom and Pop video stores don't get a special deal. They're allowed to rent their videos because they own them (what a concept! the idea that private property could apply to anyone other than the *AAs!). The studios take full advantage of the rental stores' need to have movies out "on time" and often mark tapes up to $90 or $100 or more during the weeks when the video stores are buying them, but before the studios roll the tapes out to consumers in the stores.
Blockbuster probably has a different arrangement, where they share their video rental revenues with the studios, in return for getting large breaks on those $90 - $100 "rental period" prices.
NOTE: Record stores were forbidden to rent records and CDs many years ago, in a special restriction of the First Sale Doctrine. They can still legally sell used LPs and CDs.
He's going to be working hard this weekend.
Tournament Management Online &
Seems all legal decisions can be purchased by large companies.
Last time I checked, Bush got the most electorial votes. Therefore, he wins.
Anyway, yeh, having Tipper Gore as first lady wouldn't make her any more powerful, but we'd have to listen to her infinate moaning and complaining on CNN.
Interesting... nice to finally know the details of what so many have scoffed at.
On a related note:
My father was working for U of Md and NSF at the time, and I remember him talking about the transfer of the backbone from NSF. He was convinced it was going to destroy the universities' ability to use the internet, because (IIRC) the backbone providers were:
a)going to price universities out of the market
b) not be able to coordinate to enough an extent to actually keep the thing running.
I'd love to represent my dad (who is very farsighted) as prescient on this, but when it comes to the backbone, he seems to have been wrong. But he was quite foresighted in seeing the Internet as a commons that could easily be render much less useful.
But then again, all we could listen too would be Pat Boone and Patsy Cline records.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
"The three organizations charge that the massive "vicarious and contributory copyright infringement" facilitated by the Kazaa, Grokster and MusicCity services is abundantly clear and an accelerated ruling on the merits of the case is warranted."
Abundantly clear or not, the only issue before the court on summary judgment is whether "there is a genuine issue of material fact." The determination of whether there has been vicarious and contributory copyright infringement seems to be a classic question of fact, thereby precluding summary judgment. This seems to be a motion designed to grab headlines and appears to be close to a Rule 11 violation as not being presented in good faith.
The mimeograph and later xerograph did eventually prompt changes in copyright law (1976 Copyright Act)--the additional restrictions were balanced by the codifying of Fair Use. The critical differences today are that people have the ability to distribute (virtually) unlimited copies. And there is essentially no thought given to consumers' rights in new copyright legislation.
This copyright timeline highlights some of the big events. Unfortunately, it stops in 1996, pre-DMCA.
Actually, rentals and retail are priced differently even if they ship to the market simultaneously. Video Stores pay $100 for their copy because they are licensing it to rent, unlike the consumer who pays $10 and gets a license only for "private" viewing.
Trouble making decisions? Just flip for it.
how professional -
"candy stores of infringement"
why not burn casettes?
This space for rent.
When you say "MusicCity", I'm guessing your talking about Morpheus?
Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but Morpheus is on the Gnutella Network. The Gntuella Network is decentralized (no central server, *NOT* a Napster clone) (well, if you count GWebCache/Bootstraps as being decentralized). I doubt they could stop users on Morpheus. They could stop the vendor from distributing it's client, but not the network. Since Shareaza, Bearshare, Limewire, Gnucleus, Ares, and many many others use the Gnutella network as their network of choice for their P2P Clients.
Actually, it may be good for Morpheus to be dropped from the Gnutella circle. Morpheus is hurting the network by soaking up all the leaf nodes, and not supplying the network with any Ultrapeers (in v1.0). Before, Morpheus would allow ANY of it's nodes to become Ultrapeers, now it doesn't allow ANY of them to become Ultrapeers. Errr. There is now a major Ultrapeer shortage on Gnutella (takes a long time to connect, hard to retain a stable connection).
Before, they [Morpheus] wouldn't allow any of teir nodes to become ultrapeers, flooding the network with bad Ultrapeers (you have to be "elected" as an Ultrapeer with good details: Good OS (not Win 98/95), Good Connection (T1 and higher probably), and have a good uptime history. Morpheus ignored that, and just let anyone of their nodes become an Ultrapeer. Hurting the network.
Morpheus has proven unable to keep up with the times. They have yet to implament major Gnutella fundamentals into their system. Ultrapeers, Partial File Sharing, Upload Queue, Download Mesh... I've seen none of that.
So long Morpheus. Lets hope MusicCity doesn't bring down the rest of the network circle along with it...
The idea that Tipper Gore's PMRC was for censorship was RIAA fud. They opposed the recording industry's marketing of music wholly inappropriate for children directly to children. The RIAA blew it way out of proportion, trying to make it a free speech issue, and for the most part, the RIAA won. A twelve year old kid cannot go see an NC-17 rated movie, or even an R rated one without parent or guardian. Why should he or she be able to buy music full of the same material in those movies? The recording industry has been a bunch of gangsters from day one, and exists primarily to rip off children. As a previous poster said, they deserve Tipper Gore as First Lady. She probably could convince her husband to veto the bills that the RIAA and MPAA are trying to bribe Congress into making law.
That's Bigboo TAY! TAY!
Ok, we all know about the issue of royalties for internet radio:
0 2- 07-21-radio_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/20
Basically, the royalty owed is seven hundredths of a cent, per song, per listener.
When the RIAA argues losses on P2P, they calculate it based on the sales of CDs. Which is probably about 2 bucks per song transferred.
What is the distinction? They both use the same underlying technology. You can save an mp3 stream from a 'net radio' to a file without losing quality.
Why cant a *ster service just track and charge users seven hudredths of a cent per song? For a buck a week, you could get 14.3 tunes. 30 bucks a month would equate to an album a day.
Let publishers waive royalties if they wish.
Rather than a network of 'servers', classify it as a network of 'internet radio stations'. Or is it not one already?
I don't see this as a loophole, but a perfectly acceptable system. Probably 90% or higher of P2P users use it as an alternative to conventional radio.
If the copyright appeals board set a royalty of seven hundredths of a cent, how can the RIAA claim any more than that?
IANAL, someone who is please clarify the difference (between an MP3 only service and internet radio) for me.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
The RIAA is not afraid that we'll stop paying for their services, they are afraid we'll stop paying for their *crap* services.
Let's take a look at this. I used a P2P client to download movies. Yes, I do indeed. However, I download the "crap" movies. I really enjoy movies, so I tend to *not* download movies that look like they will be good. I go see them in the theatre because it's so much better on the huge screen, with comfortable seats and the great sound system.
With P2P systems out there, the "crappy" material they release will stop turning a profit.
Everything is so clear now. Microsoft sides with media giants. Media giants don't sue Microsoft next.
If only a solution to consumer enslavement could be that easy.
That's exactly the thing about *all* of these P2P networks - there's always an obvious target. If you want to keep your collection of files online (for yourself, your friends, or whoever) serve it yourself.
And if you want to serve it over the web, you might take have a look at my software Andromeda which builds a complete streaming site from a collection of files. (PHP or ASP)
Works great alongside FTP.
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
...but every time litigation, news, or threats regarding P2P services and copyrighted material are posted, they are put under the category 'Your rights online'.
What, exactly, is our legal 'right' regarding copied copyrighted material and the internet? Defending P2P networks that claim that they cannot control what goes across their network misses the point.
If I create an underground network in 1935 whose stated purpose is 'to distribute manufactured goods', and the police make the discovery that 90% of its traffic is in illegal alcohol, I can't say 'Well, hey, I just run the network. It's not my problem what goes across it.' I as the maintainer of the subset distribution network am responsible for what happens on it.
The distribution network is shut down, because it is proved illegal actions run across it. In fact, the police do everything they can to pat themselves on the back; a successful bust against illegal liquor! Don't like it? Repeal prohibition.
Before the discussion even begins, this is not the same as 'The interstate system', which generically transports automobiles regardless of their destination or purpose (see also, the Internet). Musiccity has a stated narrower purpose, and it can be trivially proven that a significant amount of copyright violation occurs across its network, beyond a reasonable doubt.
Anyone remember 'corporate responsibility' from this year? It makes the premise that the CEO or officers of a company are aware and truthful about what goes on inside their business. This level of ignorance on the part of a corporate officer deserves the hardest slap the government can deliver.
If one wants to talk about one's 'rights online' regarding P2P traffic, what precisely is the framework?
1) That we have the right to copy music at will, irregardless of existing Berne copyright law?
2) That people who do infringe copyright unfairly prevent those who don't from using a P2P network legally?
3) That we're utterly unable to check what traffic goes across a small, managed network, or prosecute those who do?
If we're talking about the legality of P2P, let's make this easy. Ban file extensions that can or may contain music files. Toss people in jail who don't respect them.
Or, *gasp*, lobby to change the fundamental aspects of the copyright LAW, to allow P2P networks, *as they exist*, to run. Unlikely, but whining here doesn't change the fundamental situation. P2P networks carry substantial infringement traffic.
Whether they make the labels money or not is irrelevant. It is illegal. Change the law or convince the RIAA to stop prosecuting, then you can talk about whether it helps or hurts the labels on an even keel.
If my windos print server wasn't down (AGAIN!), or my damn printer would work in Linux(can't change the damn ink) or my mac(not supported), I would be printing out a copy of your post to put on my wall.
I guess it's a good thing that my damn print server is blue-screened. I wouldn't want to be prosecuted under future PPAA anti-free use laws or anything. I'm dismantleing my printer now. Can't be too safe!
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
(Note the press release's misuse the word "said." Public relations people are so arrogant they make up language as they go along.)
Wasn't that the original DivX player? Where you had to pay to watch a movie that you bought.
The Big Media companies are stupid.
Anyone who wants to legislate people into their archaic position should be asked to leave the planet. What is this? Europe?
e. Faust
Now this is ((Score:-1, Redundant)!
look! metahumor!
Balderdash. He did no such thing. Internet research was years old by the time this Johnny-Come-Lately appeared on the scene in a Congressman disguise.
What Gore said was indefensible and manifestly false. It's hilarious that anyone ever tries to defend it, or to explain it away. The much better tactic would be to admit that it was a stupid thing to say. The fact that Gore and many of his cultists cannot or will not do so says more about them than it does about the facts of the case.
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
"BTW does anybody knows of 'Leonard Kleinrock'"
I dont knows of him, do you knows of him?
fucking moron.
I believe these are PSAs by the ACLU. If you look around the web I think these are available as Quicktime files.
Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
I have no idea why they issued a press release on the and why a motion for summary judgment is newsworthy... EVERYBODY asks for summary judgment, no matter how unlikely it seems that it will be granted. It's a matter of course in litigation. It's rarely granted, but ya gotta try, just in case it is.
"BadTimes will make you fall in love with a penguin" - Laika
This is the same line the entertainment industry has been spouting for years. With the advent of VCRs they screamed that they would destroy the movie and TV industries. I remember the lawsuit which sought to outlaw them. Even with copying movies fairly common today, the movie/tv business seems to be having record profit years. In fact, copying probably helps business, though they will never admit that. Cassette tapes were freely copied and shared. You could even buy a player which had 2 drives to make coping easier. The music industry thrived. Xerox machines (copiers) have not put the publishers out of business and authors still write books.
This is all a rehash of the same stuff, but this time it seems they might suceed in pushing these silly laws through. Fair Use anyone? Get mad. Don't buy any hardware or software which includes DRM 'features.' Vote with your wallet and tell your less tech-savvy friends.
"At the age of 6, Leonard Kleinrock was reading a Superman comic at *HIS* apartment in Manhattan" (emphasis added)
I really doubt he had his own apartment at 6.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Not only does it have a Centralized server used as a Bootstrap (To find Supernodes), but it also has NETWORK SUPERNODES. Meaning, they are dedicated Supernodes on a server. They are always up, always fast, always avaliable. In addition, the Network has a central server for bootstrap porposes and so that they can regulate which clients connect to the network (they have a gateway system, that's how they turned off Morpheus). Network Peers and regular Supernodes (computer users) are involved as well.
The developers of FastTrack (names) have opened a new website called Joltid which has a model similar to what the RIAA said it was like. I'm guessing the website is for companies to purchase the technology, but the developers will no longer release clients for free to the public. This is obviously saying "Kazaa is gone, time to start up a new company."
Oh well. If FastTrack goes down (which it will), there are many, many, many alternatives.
All pussy smells. Guess you've never been there or else you mean that her's smells bad.
They stab it with their steely knives,
But they just can't kill the beast.
Here's a post from my site in which Kleinrock explains his role in packet switching. It ran on Slashdot about a year ago.
Slashdot story: Leonard Kleinrock On The Origins of Packet Switching
The Web page that story links to has since moved here.
Nope, P2P networks violate the laws of the RIAA, you will be jailed/fined without trial.
I'm sorry but in some ways I'm glad programs / "businesses" like this are under scrutinizing. They ("programs/businesses" who earn money from filesharing) will most definitely be shut down.. want to know why? They are making money via ads and other sources off of the music/movie/etc industries "hard work" without any compensation. That's a big no-no in a judge's eyes.
It will, however, be interesting to see how the RIAA takes down WINMX and other FREE networks. I haven't seen any ads and I am unsure if they are making any money what-so-ever. It can even be construed as a "hobby" in which I find it very hard a judge will shut down without a different type of reasoning..
I give P2P till 2005 before it's completely underground and back to ftp sites for a few days at a time.
--even a broken watch is correct twice a day.
If things are allowed to follow their natural course, the age of the middleman being able to get fat monopolizing the distribution channels are dying. The only way they can prevent this is from bamboolzing either: A) Congress or B) the Citizens.
Let me say, after their treatment of the actual artists over that last fifty years, "it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of assholes".
TechTV on Kleinrock
I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
I was thinking this myself the other day. I checked out PressPlay's program, and it seemed (to me) to be utter crap. $9.95 a month gives you unlimited downloads and streaming from *selected* labels. You have to listen to the music through their client software. If you like, you can set up a second client (maximum) at work, for example, and re-download everything to listen there. If you ever cancel the service, you lose access to all of the music you've downloaded.
:P If they cut out that $9.95 a month minimum BS, then I'd give them a whirl. Another fine example of recording companies bungling what could be something nice.
For a mere $17.95, you get unlimited streaming/downloads and 10 "Portable Downloads." The portable downloads are essentially MP3s--you get to keep them, burn them, whatever. If you don't go with a more expensive subscription, you can purchase the downloads on a 5/10/20-pack basis.
In the end, the portable downloads come out to around $1 each, give or take a bit, which seems pretty reasonable. However, I am not willing to pay extra overhead for a service I won't use, just for the priviledge of downloading their music
This is not the greatest sig in the world, no. This is just a tribute.
Isn't it ironic? The RIAA was fighting against the PMRC's censorship in the 1980s, and championing freedom of expression. Now, they are for censorship, asking the courts for prior restraint against file trading. This stifles freedom of expression by taking away one of the only forums unsigned artists have. They also will not sign anything but Britney Spears style teenybop crap to recording contracts. They are now stifling music more that Tipper and her bunch ever could have. Maybe the almighty dollar was all they ever cared about, and they never gave a damn about freedom of expression. Does the DMCA still allow us to express what we think of them? Boycott the recording industry.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
Dear Friends:
Thank you for missing the obvious effective and totally legal solution and continuing to buy our tasteless, mass-produced products. Without your generous donations, we would never be able to afford to purchase the politicians that come in so handy when we want to subvert your will.
Please keep those dollars coming and thank you.
The RIAA
"Using Your Money Against You and Laughing at You"
Worked with Vint Cert at UCLA in the 1960s, credited with idea of packet switching on networks.
where everyone opens up 5 or more copies of pages on the RIAA website, and sets the auto-refresh to every second. I'm doing it with Opera 6.05 right now, and it feels soooo goooood. Hey ma, I'm wasting the RIAA's bandwith!
Here are a couple of interesting thoughts.... 1) In one example in the dedacted version from the RIAA website, the document actually mentionsWindows Media Player. So, since that is so obviously being used to infringe upon copyrights, why are they not named in the suit? 2) According to the press release on the RIAA site, it sounds like I would be infringing copyrights if I rented/bought a movie and thn invited all my friends over to watch it, or worse yet, loaned it out to them, or geve them the movie after I watched it... Whew!! Time for a reality break..... At the rate things are going, the RIAA apparently won't be happy until you have to pay them each and every time you listen to a song (I am refering to one you purchased).
Not only will they charge you for every listening, they will charge for every person within earshot!
Hmmm...Kleinrock website claims Kleinrock invented packet switching... ...Not everyone agrees with that...
"Donald Davies FRS died on May 28 2000. He was aged 75. A great man in his own right, he led, inspired and befriended many others including both of us. He was an Editorial Consultant to Smart Card News from the first issue in 1992.
Through a long career in the Scientific Civil Service at the National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, and after "retirement", Donald made many outstanding contributions to the design and application of digital computers, data communications and computer network security.
Internationally he is best known for the 1965 invention of Packet Data Switching.
Within two years this self-routing method for messages was adopted by ARPA in the United States. ARPA's designers used it as the transport mechanism of the ARPANET. ARPANET has since evolved in to the Internet."
The full article is at:
http://216.239.53.100/search?q=cache:Y4rhKB1vHPQC: www.smartcard.co.uk/resources/articles/d-davies.ht ml+inventor+packet+switching&hl=en&ie=UTF- 8
Can someone help me locate the testimony in which Kleinrock describes how they could easily control and prevent massive copyright infringement?
I mean, I'm dying of curiosity. Every solution I can think of is either trivial to circumvent, or non-trivial to implement. Nothing falls in the classification of "easy".
Then again, I'm not Dr. Internet with a PhD from MIT.
that would force you to buy the crap that they churn out, you have nothing to worry about.
So why, when I rent a tape or a DVD at the local major-national-chain video store, does it contain the standard warning that this tape or disc is licensed solely for private home viewing, and that rental is prohibited?
Maybe it's different in America, but in Canada, all the tapes seem to be this way.
--
Twoflower
Nope, no sig
He claims he invented key Internet technologies, mainly the concept of data packets and packet
switching.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill dyslexia
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Hotel California! Woot!
I've heard this sentiment before, but none of those people has signed up for pressplay, which is basically exactly what you just said you wanted to pay 40-60/month, except for 10-18/month.
No I don't work for presslay and I don't subscribe, but then again, I buy CD's...
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
From the RIAA website:
" are earning millions of dollars from the service;"
To this end, the obvious question I would ask is "How?"
To date, I have not heard of ANY popular P2P file sharing service demanding or soliciting payment for the facilities that it provides.
The exceptions to that rule seems to be a handful of barely-known private networks who offer their services for a monthly subscription fee, but the RIAA seems to have left them out of this mess (for now, at least).
How exactly is the RIAA drawing a line from alleged millions of dollars to a network that costs nothing for users to log on to or download files from? Did they take economics lessons from Enron?
OSS software ventures (such as Limewire) tend to welcome donations to benefit their programmers, but I have serious doubts that it is raising millions of dollars on anyone's behalf -- particularly since very few people among the general public actually have knowledge about this route of compensation to start with.
Maybe I'm missing something, but if not, isn't perjury a crime?
Any lawyer who didn't ask for a summary judgement against the other side is an idiot. You might get lucky, and at worst, you go to trial, just like you'd planned to do anyhow.
i could not have put this better myself
Founder, Americans Allied Against Alliteration
"Canadian" is a proper noun. Be proud and spell Canadian correctly. I am and I do.
More importantly, I did not say (nor did I imply) that "taking the initiative in creating" while in Congress is tantamount to saying "I invented it".
My assertion is that what he actually said is absurd: he cannot have taken "the initiative in creating" something that was already some years old by the time that he even got elected to Congress!
If algore had said something to the effect that he was a supporter of the Internet from its infancy, that would have been a far more plausible assertion. But that's not what he said.
What Gore said may have been a deliberate lie, to puff up the ol' resume on national TV. But even if it wasn't, the very best that can be said is that it was a laughably poor choice of words. And like I said, he and his cultists would be a lot better off just admitting that he misspoke. The fact that they defend this nonsense - as you are! - is just hilarious. Pathetically hilarious.
Please find something to defend that is more worthy of your energies than algore's verbal gaffes. You won't find me defending Dan Quayle's spelling of 'potato', and I should think that you would have better things to do with your time than defend algore's nonsensical claims about his role in the Internet's creation.
DFL
Never send a human to do a machine's job.
If they wanted someone famous as a witness, why didn't they choose Al Gore? After all, he is the man behind the internet.
I admire you both for boldly making false claims about Al Gore's innocence, and for the fact that you are apparently a powerful enough person on slashdot that no one will disagree with you unless they're posting as an AC. But I'm capped, so I'll repeat what the ACs have said with a +1 score. Maybe more people will see it:
What Al Gore actually said was: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." And that claim is patently false. There is no way to misconstrue it as "factually correct" unless you want to paint yourself as an Al Gore fanboi. Al Gore helped make beneficial infrastructure changes to the Internet, I'll grant him that. And he's a geek -- we're lucky to have him. But don't put him on a pedestal and start inflating his credentials. His credentials are fine as-is.
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &
"If you ever cancel the service, you lose access to all of the music you've downloaded."
That's the first dealbreaker, right there. Translated, this means that I'm not paying $9.99 a month to listen to music, I'm paying $9.99 * (infinity) to listen music because, assuming I cancel my service (either volentarily or involentarily), I loose everything.
This has philosophiclal problems, too, because they are trying to recast music from a saleable entity into a performance service -- you are licensing it's use, not buying it.
And yes, Portable downloads are essentially MP3s. But you have to use their player and the quality is.. lackluster, in my opinion (on par with 128kbps CBR mp3, from my tin-ear tests).
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
. . . but MTV ruined music in at least a couple other ways.
1) Control over what's popular. If you're going to sell a lot of CDs MTV needs to play your video a lot. Sad but true, a large extent of the population buying CDs has no idea there's music beyond what MTV plays. Simply by not selecting to play a video they can determine the outcome of struggling musicians' careers.
2) The cost of making videos is just astronomical. I once read an interview with Neil Finn where he talks about how they spent more money making one video than on recording the CD.
One of the reasons the record labels need the super-mega-ultra-stars is because the expend so much money. If they spent less, particularly on videos, they might find they need to earn less. They might find they could lower CD prices and with the lower prices they might find CD sales go up.
Of course, there are a lot of things the labels could do to make the music scene better. I could write an essay on that. However, rather than run off into those areas, I'll stick to the MTV is ruining music theme.
MTV, it's time for you to go. And we can throw out all the other video channels while we're at it. You have outlived your usefulness. All you do now is keep people from having a good go at making music and increase the costs of making music. The burdern of the latter being dropped squarely on the music fans.
You are disservice to people who actually like music.
-r
Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
Yea, but you only bought them for like 4 bucks and you got a few days to watch them unless you paid again. It was a rental system, you never really "bought" anything.
I thought it was Al Gore who invented the Internet!
P2P apps are being grafted into people's ears?
Little arms are being attached to people's lower backs to steal CDs while in Tower Records?!?
I gotta see this...
It's just that they only play it maybe 3 or 4 hours a day. Yet one more reason to pull them off the air.
-r
Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
I still don't understand why anyone would want to listen to the "one catchy song" of any group/singer, if everything else that group/singer puts out is crap. The CDs and tapes I bought generally have all good songs.
While this means I don't have any Britney Spears disks, I don't think I am missing anything by being discriminatory in this manner.
Guys, "innocent until proven guilty" only applies in criminal cases. This is civil litigation.
"A preliminary injunction is appropriate if the moving party demonstrates either (1) a probability of success on the merits and a possibility of irreparable injury, or (2) serious questions going to the merits and the balance of hardships tipping sharply in his favor." Chalk v. United States Dist. Ct., 840 F.2d 701, 704 (9th Cir. 1988)
The Constitution-derived protections for criminal matters (ex post facto being the most poignant, but 'innocent until proven guilty' being the most topical) simply don't apply in civil litigation.
IAM(y)AL. JD Candidate, Southwestern University School of Law
Guys, "innocent until proven guilty" only applies in criminal cases. This is civil litigation.
"A preliminary injunction is appropriate if the moving party demonstrates either (1) a probability of success on the merits and a possibility of irreparable injury, or (2) serious questions going to the merits and the balance of hardships tipping sharply in his favor." Chalk v. United States Dist. Ct., 840 F.2d 701, 704 (9th Cir. 1988)
The Constitution-derived protections for criminal matters (ex post facto being the most poignant, but 'innocent until proven guilty' being the most topical) simply don't apply in civil litigation.
IAM(y)AL. JD Candidate, Southwestern University School of Law
The RIAA apparently has used p2p company emails, message board correspondences, and executive interviews to show that KaZaA and the rest of the FastTrack Network clients (ok, Morpheus isn't FastTrack anymore but that's beside the point) worked to 'embrace and extend' (*ack*) the Napster program, which has been shown to be illegal in court.
A 62 page scanned PDF file. All you pre-law /. readers should have a ball with this one.
-- Are you an EFF member yet?
RIAA and MPAA declared war on us.
But they already lost that war.
Since Kazaa is in Australia, and likely to ignore any ruling of a US court, is this the same case where the **AA is trying to make AT&T and other ISP's block access to Kazaa? Could this move for summary judgment be an attempt to get fait accompli before those ISP's get a chance to explain why they should never be responsible for content filtering?
My own perception of that is that the **AA is saying to the courts that the current rules don't stop mass copyright infringement, so the court needs to make up some new rules. "Make the ISPs do what we want." I sure hope we can rely on the court to not like being told what to do, and to not like to make up new laws.
Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
There is no mention of Gnutella or any of the Gnutella developers in this suit... while Gnutella has had great difficulty advancing the protocol specification to the efficiency of other P2P networks, they are making progress. Advances in query by hash, query routing, network traversing searches, bandwidth shaping, and many more are being developed or incorporated now into newer clients.
With one of the only completely decentralized networks around a totally open specification, I am interested to see if the RIAA behemoth will ever attempt to 'take on' the task of legalizing Gnutella into oblivion.
When all the lawyers are finished, will Gnutella be the last left standing?
"I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
Look - I don't like it anymore than anyone else but it is obvious that they will win. Like Napster - none of these guys are making an attempt to help anyone but themselves. Can anyone show how many royalties they are paying out to the artists directly? I'm not talking about paying the RIAA or any other organization - just the artists. Or are they keeping all of the money for themselves. I'd root for them if they did pay - but I've never heard word one that they are doing so. Good idea - bad implementation. Could Redhat make it for very long if they didn't charge? No - they couldn't. Wouldn't it be nice if just 1% of whatever RedHat makes went back to the people who put their time and effort into this whole thing? Yes it would. Even if it only bought you a candy bar, soda pop, beer, or pizza. The same is for those people who put their hard work into making a song, movie, or whatever.
You know - at $3.00 for 24 cans of pop you are barely paying anything for each can. But you are still paying something. I agree that songs should be cheap. Real cheap. But free? Sorry. No such thing as a free meal. Even in the wild you have to hunt for it.
It is completely unconstitutional for a defendant to lose without being allowed to have a trial.
See the 7th Amendment
Summary judgement FOR the defendant does not pose a constitutional problem.
Of course, the civil court system ignores the Constitution and other laws of the land (such as the DMCA exemptions listed RIGHT IN the DMCA itself in the DeCSS case) on a daily basis. So if you are a defendant and lose via summary judgement, you're going down.
Even if you have good lawyers if you "threaten the system", you are very likely to lose and even be ordered to pay for your own persecution. Again, look at the DeCSS 2600 case.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
As always, security in strength, not obscurity :)
CRACK-SMOKING mods modded this as OVERRATED.. Isn't that to "fix" the score of posts that have ALREADY BEEN MODDED UP to 2 or more???
MODS - PLEASE READ MOD GUIDELINES AND FOLLOW THEM!
And thanks to any mods who mod this back up.
Just because you want a company to sell you a product in a particular form, doesn't obligate them to do so. How would you like it if random people took control of Linux from Linus and started dictating how it should be developed. Most slashdotters would be in an uproar. Yet they claim the right to dictate how the RIAA does business.
Vote for Pedro
A reply on the same thread: For geeks, you slashdot kids display an embarrassing lack of knowledge about a principal subject of geekdom. Kleinrock is indeed considered one of a handful of people who literally and truly invented the Internet. Others were Vint Cerf, Jon Postel, Bob Kahn, and Lawrence Roberts. The Internet didn't come from a vacuum: buy a book, take an hour, and learn about its history.
Yes, when your brother and his cronies fix the election for you in the one disputed state, you get more electoral votes. America sat idly by and allowed a coup. No wonder Bush, and "that general guy," Pervez Musharraf get along so well. They are both dictators.
How ya like dat?
I could explain why your comment is completely retarded, but why bother to teach a pig to sing?
...when they successfully eliminate all piracy and their mass-maunfactured pop-trash still isn't selling?
Who are they going to blame then? Are they going to start claiming that people are just listening to tracks on the radio and not buying anything - I can see it now: "RIAA seeks legislation to outlaw radio transmissions".
Who to blame when there's no one left to take it.
While I definitely would disagree with a decision shutting down these services, I must admit that I'd be somewhat pleased to see them shut down. Presumably, this would cause thousands of new users to migrate to other services - Gnutella, for one. From my self-centered perspective, I'd like to have more people using (and therefore more files being shared on) a network that I too can use (in Linux).
The first ever Ultimate Frisbee video game: here (now
Y.H.B.T.
Like this?
They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
No.
Yours, for instance, is overrated even at -7.
Grasp this concept:
"What I want" != "require conformation"
It's simple -- if a company doesn't give me what I want, I don't buy it from them. So I don't.
Of course, this was a troll, and it's pretty obvious because A) I didn't even mention RIAA, B) I didn't even mention Linux, and C) you are making points based on non-existent contexts ("Yet they claim the right to dictate how the RIAA does business") in a effort to cause controversy over something that, in fact, was never said.
Consider yourself debunked.
** drumroll **
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
He's a clueless boob who has made himself look even worse by coming out last year several times and uttering lies about foreign and domestic issues (I guess the shame that he failed to overthrow an election had worn off).
Before, when he was much more in the public eye, he was like Zelig. He went around taking credit for everything, from the Internet to Love Canal to Love Story. Even when it got personal, he made it up: his children's lullaby was a union thug song not written until he was grown up, and he made up something about a relative as part of his argument for destroying health care.
Hero? No. Almost lifelike? Sometimes. He'd be better off saying "Danger Will Robinson" than "I created the Internet".
Al Gore must be very pissed to hear that he did not, in fact, invent the internet as he has clamed a few times. ^__^
"My heart is in the work." - Andrew Carnegie
Actually, rentals and retail are priced differently even if they ship to the market simultaneously. Video Stores pay $100 for their copy because they are licensing it to rent, unlike the consumer who pays $10 and gets a license only for "private" viewing.
Well... close but not exactly. Most of the VHS tapes I buy are "Rental Priced" that use to mean retail prices at $89 to $100 each. My wholesale discount would be 35% or so depending on my deal with the distributor. Since DVDs have come out the price of tapes has dropped a lot. The big chains pay almost nothing for their tapes since most have a lease agreement with the studios for a part of the rental fee, but even that is coming to an end because of DVDs. The right I have to rent out the tape or DVD is called "First sale", I bought it I can rent it to some one else to watch. The tapes are the same as you would buy for $19.95 the video stores just get them a few weeks early they call this the "Rental Window". BTW there is an execption in the law for music CDs and computer games. These can't be rented out unless you have permission from the copyright holder.
In the Biz Since 1987
5000+ videotapes
650+ Anime
And the best Damn pizzas around!
Now if I just had some more customers I'd be set.
"The Amendment has for its primary purpose the preservation of ''the common law distinction between the province of the court and that of the jury, whereby, in the absence of express or implied consent to the contrary, issues of law are resolved by the court and issues of fact are to be determined by the jury under appropriate instructions by the court.' "
built and controlled the networks in a way that they could easily prevent the copyright infringements from occurring. The defendants' principal defense that they have no ability to control the network is belied by a myriad of facts, including the fact that Kazaa demonstrated its ability to turn off the Morpheus system at whim
This is the most damning point of the summary. This is what really killed Napster. If it can be proved that the content can somehow be controlled on these P2P networks, they will probably be stopped in the end.
But I am wondering... Is pulling the plug equal to controlling what is done with a particular device or network? It seems to me that there is a big difference here. Blocking copyrighted songs on the network is one thing, but killing it because you have knowledge that someone might be abusing it goes too far.
Why does this sig rock so hard?
Do you even know what those words mean young man?
Are you serious?
Sure, the 7th Amendment gives a right to trial by jury. But juries don't decide questions of law, only questions of fact. If there aren't any questions of fact, do you really want 12 of your peers sitting around twiddling their thumbs? Why do you want them to sit there if it's totally clear that they can't reasonably find the facts to be different then those stipulated by the parties or determined by the judge?
Or do you want all questions of fact decided by juries, no matter how obvious?
Summary judgment increases the efficiency of the system, minimizing citizens' thumb-twiddling. It's a Good Thing. If you lose on summary judgment, you would have lost anyway.
Does this guy work for Micro$oft?
Well technically, "decide in our favor before trial" would be (more or less) an injunction (interim = fixed time period; interlocutory = until trial, whenever that might be).
(even more technically, an injunction is just doing stuff in your favor, not deciding in your favor but I don't want to get carried away here)
Summary judgment would be "decide in our favor and skip the trial altogether".
Summary judgment is great if you can get it.
Someone mod the parent up... It certainly doesn't deserve a 0. Sure it was harsh, but he does have a good point. Oh I wish I had not alrady posted so I could do it myself.
Because a singing pig would be worth a buttload of money.
1. I've always advocated boycotting the RIAA as a means of protesting their practices. So we are in agreement there. 2. I use the RIAA as an example because the own the copyrights to over 90% of music people listen to, so therefore, if you want to buy music online, you probably want to buy it from them. 3. I use Linux to privide an analogy. You have heard of the concept, haven't you? 4. You mentioned that people's solution when told they can't buy online is to share illegally online. Whether you are merely stating this or espousing it I do not know. In either case, this is not an acceptable form of protest to force music providers to sell online music since it is illegal. See point 1 for an acceptable practice. Therefore you are using illegal tactics to go from "what I want" -> "force conformation". Whether or not you understood what you wrote, I understood what I read and applied appropriately.
Vote for Pedro
Sorry for confusing you by using a rational arguement.
Vote for Pedro
Ever wonder why so many broadband companies use the space shuttle lifting off in their commercials? Because they can. For free - no royalties, just ask. Our government online is still the one place where content is made by the people, for the people. When mob mentalities like the RIAA edge ever closer to stifling what the people want to suit their own needs, you have to wonder what kind of ripple effect will result. If (when?) the day comes that this public domain privilege will no longer exist, it will truly send a shudder through those who believe in the right of fair use.
I challenge you to back up that assertion with something that *doesn't* come from this century, preferrably from around the time the US was founded.
I, and many others, assert that juries are de facto arbiters of both law and fact, and that BOTH must pass a jury before conviction. By short-circuiting this protection and installing "Judges" in the place of juries, our massively over-centralized federal government has eroded yet another of our civil liberties in the name of "efficiency". Shooting suspects on sight is the most "efficient" means of dealing with crime, isn't it?
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
btw, why do geeks always think that poetry is easy, and they can do it because they're so god-damned smart? It's a bit like the way yanks always think they can do a British accent, and yet it 20 years of living in the colonies, I have yet to hear a decent British accent by an American.
Nota bene: Geeks! Do not try to write poetry. You only make a fool of yourself and make your brethren look lime morons in the eyes of people who can really write.
Stick to your 10011011!!!!
If you know how her pussy smells, maybe you have those naked pictures of her I keep hearing about. Does she really take it in both holes? If you have them, please post them!!!
If by "IP" you mean "Intelectual Property", then no. If you mean "Internet Protocol"...
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
2) According to the press release on the RIAA site, it sounds like I would be infringing copyrights if I rented/bought a movie and thn invited all my friends over to watch it, or worse yet, loaned it out to them, or geve them the movie after I watched it
Well, I do on a DVD that has a disclaimer saying that it is intended for home viewing and that watching it out of my family circle is an infringement of some sort. What the fuck they ever gonna do about it I don't know, though...
Karma: Could be worse (could be raining)
With all the taxes and fees included I end up paying Time-Warner Cable (NYC) about $60 per month for broadband access (plus another $40 bucks for D-TV). Sixty dollars is roughly equivalent to buying four CDs a month or 48 per year. While I steal all my music nowdays instead of buying CDs, I end up spending more money on broadband than I ever did on music; moreover, whenever possible I tried to buy used CDs, and the RIAA made no money off those purchases. My primary motivation for getting broadband a few years back was to run Napster.
The end result is that while other media giants may have lost some revenue due to my file-sharing, AOL-Time Warner has gotten $60 per month for three years (over $2000).
Could it be that p2p music piracy is already generating revenue for huge media conglomerates? Could it be that merely looking at the trend in CD sales overlooks the larger economic picture?
If the NMPA et al are so interested in outside exposure, why do they seal their submissions?
Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks: temporary loans from the Public Domain, not real property ("intellectual" or otherwise)
I STILL don't understand what the difference was between Napster and Google. Using both services, I just typed in the name of the song I wanted, clicked a few times, and then downloaded the MP3.
Both Napster and Google kept almost identical information on their servers: an index of the search items, each mapped to its target machine(s). (Well not quite -- Google also keeps a cache of the actual content, which Napster never did.)
I don't think I could explain how the two services are essentially different, except for a few trivial technical details.
So why isn't RIAA/MPAA suing Google?
Sure, it's a bitch when you see yourself as the victim of an injustice, but if you were the one bringing the suit (for legitimate reasons) you'd want it to work the way it does.
IANAL
The truly frightening part is that once they push this hard enough, you won't be able to turn off the TV, because you're stealing by not watching.
This isn't meant to be funny. The thought of the RIAA/MPAA controlling our lives frightens me. And it's coming, I fear.
"If there's hope, it lies in the proles..."
Some of us are working on finding hosting so that collections of old user group software can be made available via p2p methods, since that is more economical than funding large servers. This includes things like the old DECUS SIG tapes (RSX, VMS, Unix, RT11...much of the material usable on modern platforms if recompiled since it's all source code), non assembler pieces from CPMUG, etc. I have a complete set of the Amiga Fish disks also. P2P is a wonderful way to make that kind of material available without having to own a huge server and a thick pipe to it. This of course has nothing to do with music files (though the Amiga material includes a few classics, things like Bach fugues for Sonix...). It is of course ridiculous for RIAA to claim that the technology has no uses that are legal. This use is very much in the public interest, retrieving some history. Also of interest is that in many cases prior art for patents may be found in some of these older collections, which date back to the early 1970s in some cases.
OK, I thought I understood how this worked, but you've baffled me again. If "First Sale" gives the right to rent, then why is a rental store owner's purchase different from Joe Consumer's in that the former can rent and the latter cannot? Is that warning at the beginning of the videos a load of lawyer chest-thumping in that if I paid for it, I can rent it out?
Dr. Kleinrock isn't the only expert witness, he's the one with serious name recognition. All of the expert witnesses, besides "lk" and there are a more than a few of them, have been analyzing whether or not the file peer-to-peer systems can be controlled and whether they could have had more control over the content being shared. Clearly the answer is yes if there are servers involved (or supernodes, for that matter.)
Will there be summary judgement? Probably not. Remains to be seen.
Did the RIAA and MPAA make good faith efforts to identify protected content and assist the filtering? Doesn't sound like they did. Do they have a "shoot them all, let God sort them out" attitude with litigation? Yup, sure looks like it.
Does money talk and bullshit walk? Yeah, it does. MPAA and RIAA have money and vested interests. Can they afford an intelligent team of expert witnesses? You betcha!
If you really want to do something useful, contribute to a PAC that is out to protect fair-use rights.
Otherwise, quit yer whining!
I propose a new standard
everyones homepage/webserver, should have mp3.xml
or mp3index.html as the shared mp3 default file list.
That way google can cache/catalogue them all, and we can just use normal http to serve the files.
Done.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Let's all be geeks and write lots of stuff on the Internet about the RIAA.
Or we could organize and occupy the RIAA offices in Washington. Let me tell you, I know from former RIAA employees that they wouldn't like this one bit.
P2P is a search engine. They have no control over what people trade person to person. If they are actually serious about this, then they had better shut down every real search engine that finds sites with warez, mp3 archives, serials, etc... Which is every single one of them. There is no difference and it just makes it all the more obvious that the people behind the RIAA are hypocritical dumbasses. Thank you.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Along the same lines here... shouldn't they also go one step further and make digital cable and satelite television illegal? After all they transmit very easily captured/recorded music and movies...
Ammon Lauritzen http://simud.org/
I have an unfortunate feeling that you may be altogether too close to the mark. After all, wasn't there already a suit against Kinko's, using the presumption that the ONLY thing a photocopier was good for was copyright infringement?
I don't recall the details (maybe someone who does can jump in) but the practical upshot was that their clerks weren't allowed to photocopy any material that bears a copyright notice. (Consequently I once had to argue with a Kinko's clerk to get a copy made of my OWN manuscript.)
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
by the same token you won't ever pay for a movie, but you will pay to see it being made?
on behalf of all of us who have ever attempted to work at being a musician, your dedication to helping the musician remain a musician is touching. truly.
what do you say to those in the world who are composers? for whom live performance may not be an option? for an extreme example take the guy from I think it was XTC who developed stage fright to such an extent that one of their tours was conducted in radio station studios.
there are a large number of musicians for whom performing is not the primary reason for creating music. Their primary focus is (gasp)to create the music! not re-create it over and over and over again. perhaps your concept of a musician is a band on a stage, jamming for hours, in a club not beholden to ticket master, but that need not be everyone's. the difficulty with a number of the arguments is that as much money that goes to the RIAA with every purchase, there is at least a little bit (not much) that goes back to the musician. I agree whole heartedly that the RIAA does not deserve the percentage of the cost of a recording that they currently get, and even less (or none) should go to them if a reasonable alternative distribution method comes up that will get some remuneration back to the musician.
it is a very depressing thing to be an artist, of any sort, without a method of distribution. It is just as, if not more, depressing to be an artist who cannot afford to spend every waking moment creating that which gives your life meaning.
lastly, and I know this may be hard sell in parts of this community, but as it has been noted over the last couple or so years, it is apparently somewhat difficult to run a successful business based on a product that is inherently free. And unlike software, musicians can not make money on support contracts.
Also bear in mind that bands, especially in small clubs, stand to make about half the gate if they are the headliner, less if there is an opening band. minus transportation costs, roadies, tips, beer, (or something stronger.) Historically, the idea of the tour is TO PROMOTE THE RECORD, not the other way around. especially indie bands on small labels, who are not necessarily beholden to the RIAA or the large labels for distribution yet, and consequently make a bigger fraction of the (somewhat lower) price.
cheers
if I didn't care about the money, I would have just sat in my bedroom with a four-track and sent tapes to my mother...--Bob Dylan (paraphrased)
-- it's ridiculous how many people misspell ridiculous... (damn, damn, damn...)
Congratulations! You're the first person I've seen on /. to misplace an apostrophe in "hers"!
He is considered the father of the internet because he invented the concept of packet switching (as opposed to circuit switching, which is how phone networks work) in his 1962 PHD dissertation while at MIT. The concept of packet switching is THE fundamental difference between computer networks and other types of networks. Later he implemented his ideas while at UCLA.
I must admit that I have not been keeping up with the RIAA cases as of late, however, I was curious if anyone has ever considered or attempted some type of a class-action lawsuit against RIAA (and other related parties) for price-fixing and industry manipulation?
I was also curious if anyone has done any prototyping for a demand-based dynamic pricing system (clearly with some caps) for digital music or books? Perhaps that could clean up both of the industries by putting bad musicians and poor writers out of business.
Biggy
...any recommendations for a replacement? Honestly, I hardly use it for music (soulseek better serves my musical tastes), but it's good for video files of tv episodes, home movie-type stuff, and well, pr0n.
"Nor does it mean that just becasue there aren't any profits, music will just go away forever. "
In other words the only incentive that actually exist for an artist to produce is "love of their art". With that reasoning then there's NO reason for an artist to release ANYTHING, for one can love something without sharing it with others.
Unfortunately that would make for a pretty insular world. Also "love" doesn't pay the bills, and last I checked the only (legitimate) way to make money in a capitalistic society was to sell an good, or service to another willing individual. Now ask ourselves worse case what happens to a segment that can't sell anything because it can be gotten free elsewere? Does the word athropy mean anything to you? The problem with most of the arguments flashing around "/." is that they're no better that what the RIAA,M-whatever, propose because they've taken the complete opposite side of the debate, and that's no better than the other. There's a middle ground though. Recognize that everything has an "intrinsic" value, gifted it by the act of creation. Recognize that no one can take that value away. Recognize at it's purest form, one can ony exchange "intrinsic" value for "intrinsic" value. Recognize the twin goals of maximum benifit, at minimum pain for both sides
Discourage anything that reduces "intrinsic" worth..
"It all began with a comic book! At the age of 6, Leonard Kleinrock was reading a Superman comic at his apartment in Manhattan, when, in the centerfold, he found plans for building a crystal radio. To do so, he needed his father's used razor blade, a piece of pencil lead, an empty toilet paper roll, and some wire, all of which he had no trouble obtaining. In addition, he needed an earphone which he promptly appropriated from a public telephone booth. The one remaining part was something called a "variable capacitor". For this, he convinced his mother to take him on the subway down to Canal Street, the center for radio electronics. Upon arrival to one of the shops, he boldly walked up to the clerk and proudly asked to purchase a variable capacitor, whereupon the clerk replied with, "what size do you want?". This blew his cover, and he confessed that he not only had no idea what size, but he also had no idea what the part was for in the first place. After explaining why he wanted one, the clerk sold him just what he needed. Kleinrock built the crystal radio and was totally hooked when "free" music came through the earphones - no batteries, no power, all free! An engineer was born."
I wonder what he has to say about free music now?
Oops..forgot the URL:l
http://www.lk.cs.ucla.edu/LK/Inet/birth.htm
Boycotting the RIAA is going to do shit compared to an all-out protest against their business practices.
The RIAA uses their voice, and we hide... The RIAA yells louder, and we hide...
Most of you, though, seem to have glued your asses to that chair in front of your computer. You whine and protest here, but apparently lose your voice when you press the "Power" button.
Don't boycott... Organize... Gather together in that blue globe called "the real world", and go to Washington.
Imagine, according to the RIAA's numbers, the amount of people that would march on the capital.
"Fuck Saddam, Mr. President. We've got an army of angry geeks at twelve o'clock!"
Seriously, though... You think whining on Slashdot is going to change anything? And do you really believe that boycotting will do anything? Wake up, people.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
It's true! Al Gore not only invented the Internet, he also spearheaded the invention of computer science as we know it! Why else do you think it is called an "AlGorithm?"
Six sick
or i'll tell everyone what you did last summer.
I love how the only defense to this is basically, "No, Gore didn't really claim to invent the Internet, he used weasel language! He only appeared to be claiming to invent it, but he carefully chose his words so you can't quite prove him wrong!"
Oh, well, OK then, that's fine ;) What a great guy :) Where can I cast a spoiled ballot for him?
It was the first host to connect to the first switch on what would become ARPANET
Joe Consumer can rent his movies, You can't make copies and trade, rent or sell them. My rights are the same as anybody elses. Before the Betamax court case the studios said that you couldn't rent videotapes. I even have a few Disney tapes that have "Not For Rental" printed on them because they were made before the case was decided. I also have some forigen tapes that say "Not for Hire". The FBI warining isn't all BS but it dosen't apply unless you copy the tape for non-fair use reasons. I hope that made it a little clearer.
In other words they want the above to be banned even before the trial.
NO - summary judgement simply means that the RIAA believes those other entities have violated existing statutory law by merit of the facts of the case and that no trial is necessary.
Now, whether or not that is true is another story.
I'm a 2000 man.
"[B]anned before trial" isn't the best way to phrase the summary judgment standard. The Federal Rule governing the granting of summary judgment states the standard as: "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." This rule is largely designed to prevent frivolous claims or to resolve before trial claims that are clearly erroneous in a legal sense.
Who the hell are these founding fathers that everyone keeps talking about? Is it a rock group, some kind of sect or what?
As I seem to be the Snopes Whore as of late...
No, Al did NOT claim to have invented the internet.
-D
The parent post is a stock troll, cribbed from a story on Kuro5hin, and sprinkled with inflammatory allusions to, "bearded Linux hippies [living] in their parents' basement." It is also signed with the moniker HYBTT, which stands for, "Have You Been Trolled Today?"
It is also a dangerously deceptive re-casting of Jefferson's words into an entirely misleading light. Jefferson strenuously opposed copyrights, as they are a form of monopoly. Jefferson opposed monopolies in all forms, as they inevitably lead to abuses. An example of an abusive monopoly contemporary to Jefferson was the East India Company, whose record of abuse was well-documented.
What Jefferson was really saying in the famous quote cited above was, "Look, information leaks no matter what you do to contain it. No natural law sustains the notion of copyright. So save yourself the ulcer and don't bother trying."
Jefferson eventually agreed to establishment of copyright, but it was not in the form he wanted, and he still feared the abuses it might bring -- fears which, 200 years later, appear to have been borne out.
A more complete, balanced, troll-free discussion of Jefferson's and Madison's thoughts concerning copyright may be found here, also on Kuro5hin.
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
This guy just made an inteligent and correct post, how is he a troll?
First posts are never redundant and I for one think they should be given an automatic +5 mod.
I would pay for a movie because you get to go the theatre for it (a live peformance) that is fun. I won't pay for you're shit music because I can download it. I can even take my girlfriend the movie and feel her up, its a good chance. So the point is I will not pay for music ever again, and I hope you starve to death because of it.
Al Gore remixes Vanilla Ice!! - Funky!
Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark.
And in a related story, the newly-acquired Napster officially was renamed to Jackster.
"PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
Why didn't they get Al Gore?
No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
I'm not a big fan of Gore by any stretch, but these kind comments are beyond stale.
Then stop posting them you crackpot!
The NY Times had a good article on this last year.
RE: (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/08/technology/cirBut, don't skip what the counterpoint from those in the know said, printed a few weeks later in the Letters section to the Times.
(http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/22/technology/cirgift.sourceforge.net has it!
clients for win32 linux and mac..
---> gift.sourceforge.net has it!----
clients for win32 linux and mac..
dump gnutella and save your bandwidth!!
Nope, didn't get me. Not even a really good attempt at it. You didn't get a bill passed to make lifts owned by a government organization available to private citizens. Also he said "create" not "invent". If create means invent then every d*mn politician in this country has claimed to invent employment.
There is only one way to win this thing. The artists ally with a record company with a p2p based business model. Such a company starts small, signs normally unsigned bands with a superior profit cut from p2p subscriptions and advertising. Downside, nobody gets mega-huge or mega-rich, and the business model is unproven and would require substantial start-up capital. The artists have to be made comfortable with the technology and the geeks have to work with the businessmen and the artists. Tall order, but it's the way to wipe the RIAA off the face of the earth. [-)
What would Richard Feynman do, if he were here right now? He'd do some math and he'd follow through!
P2P networks are more like UPS. If I ship a pound of dope and send it via UPS, the feds might show up and make a bust at delivery, but they wouldn't shut down UPS.