Slashdot Mirror


Report From RIAA v. Verizon Case

LawGeek writes "Adam Kessel has provided Greplaw with exclusive coverage of today's RIAA v. Verizon hearing, in which the RIAA is attempting to force Verizon to produce information about a user who allegedly shared files using P2P technology. It sounds as though the judge had a good grasp of the technology, and has promised to rule quickly. Slashdot has previously covered Verizon's stance on this and other P2P issues."

151 comments

  1. Best line in the Greplaw Article by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 5, Funny

    Judge permitted amicus Motion Picture Association of America to make a brief argument which for the most part said that the Motion Picture Industry had a large financial stake in DMCA enforcement

    Or in other words... DUH!

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    1. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by sconeu · · Score: 5, Insightful
      There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit.


      -- Heinlein, "Life Line".
      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    2. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by Apreche · · Score: 1

      I've seen that quote posted around a zillion times. But it kicks just as much as the last time I saw it. Why is it that congress can't understand this? I would assume they have to be reasonable intelligent people in order to become elected officials. And certaintly they aren't corrupt! ;-)

      --
      The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
    3. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 0, Troll

      "Can I get modded up too by quoting other people and not including an original thought?" --Me

    4. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by God!+Awful · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Fill in the blanks for your own personal broad, sweeping statement:

      There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man has been alive for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of preventing others from killing him, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary personal or economic interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by natural selection, physics, or any other law of nature. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that warmongering be stopped, or antagonists be jailed, for their private benefit.

      -a
    5. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by Dalcius · · Score: 2

      Dear Karmaless in Cancun:

      Moderation is there to bring up the level of good posts so that all will notice them, and in part to rub the backs of those who post these good bits of info or ideas.

      My advice to you is to quit worrying about karma and enjoy the good post.

      =)

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    6. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by Sgt+York · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying the desire to make money is equivilent to one's right to live?

      --

      There is a reason for everything. Sometimes that reason just sucks.

    7. Re:Best line in the Greplaw Article by Steve+B · · Score: 2
      That would be a good analogy if someone were claiming that elderly people have an exclusive right to protection against homicide, and that all others are fair game.

      Since nobody is, in fact, arguing that, it is instead a worthless straw man.

      --
      /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
  2. Which side would the people at 2600 choose? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    As you may know, the RIAA has sued 2600 magazine, and those at 2600 aren't big fans of Verizon, as they had a problem with the domain name verizonsucks.com because of copyright restrictions. Maybe they are hoping that both sides will do some real damage to each other.

    1. Re:Which side would the people at 2600 choose? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is that offtopic you fucking script kiddie?

    2. Re:Which side would the people at 2600 choose? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope that both entities just sue themselves to death. Verizon slammed us last month changing our long distance and local phone service back to them. When we spoke to our long distance and local carrier (sprint) they said that Verizon just does that occasionally and we need to take it up with them.

    3. Re:Which side would the people at 2600 choose? by DutchSter · · Score: 2

      Yep, this is like those football games between two of your rivals - you just kind of hope that the blimp falls into the stadium.

      But seriously speaking, I think that the best thing 2600 can hope for is the increased publicity surrounding these issues. A case like this is a zero-sum - someone wins, someone loses. Now damn...where can I find a blimp......

  3. This sounds... by prisonernumber7 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... so ambituous. A big company such as Verizon protecting the 'little' man. Joe Schmoe is glad that Verizon will protect him should they be coming after him.

    This seriously sounds much like a marketing plot. Yet, if it helps the cause, I am all in favour of Verizon.

    So where do I buy Verizon fan articles?

    --
    && aemula C. ab stirpe interiit
    1. Re:This sounds... by Artifex · · Score: 5, Informative

      Of course we all know that they're really just protecting their own interests. They don't want to become the enforcers, because it will cost them money to do so. And remember, Verizon's complaint isn't that the RIAA wants the customer's records... it's that they want them without the formality of a court proceeding. They'll easily give that information out once they get a proper subpoena, so that the court order protects them from the subscriber suing them later.

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
  4. I agree with the editors by L.+VeGas · · Score: 5, Funny

    He does seem to have a very good grasp on the underlying issues and the technology

    Based on what I read in the article I would have to agree. Particularly this sentence towards the end that says, "It sounds as though the judge had a good grasp of the technology."

    1. Re:I agree with the editors by Alkaiser · · Score: 2, Funny

      That was pretty much the line that sealed the deal for me too. Once I read that, I knew I could be confident that this guy had a pretty good grasp of the technology.

      --
      Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
  5. Maybe by zoomshorts · · Score: 1, Funny

    Maybe we will get a ground breaking decision FOR P2P technology...naw, I better go back to my dream.

    1. Re:Maybe by surprise_audit · · Score: 1
      The real ground-breaking decision is going to be when RIAA/MPAA get a judge to rule any and all P2P software illegal.

      Think about it for a minute - what else is out there apart from napster, gnutella, KaZaa, and so on? NFS? Windows file sharing? Yep, those would be illegal too. Suddenly anyone with any kind of network connected computer is breaking the law - including the RIAA/MPAA, Sony, Disney, AOL, Microsoft, US Government/Army/Navy/Air Force, etc .

      Technically, ftp/ftpd constitute a file sharing mechanism as well, as does web browser/server (I browse your site, see a file I want, download it). In a fair world, the RIAA/MPAA would have to sue the entire world and themselves for running file sharing...

      OK, so it almost certainly won't happen with this particular tech-savvy judge, but there are plenty of other judges and surely one of them is daft enough to take such a bold step? Personally, I just think it would be really, really funny if the RIAA's penchant for suing people was the prime cause for the DMCA's demise.

  6. Expected discourse. by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Geeks: You shouldn't go after the P2P software makers, go after users who violate copywrite. A tool is just a tool.

    RIAA: Ok, we'll go after users. Verizson, tell us who this guy is.

    Geeks: You can't go after the users, they have a right to being anonymous.

    Bottom line is you can't have it both ways. The law (good or bad) is being broken. Who should the copywrite holders go after? The tools or the abusers.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:Expected discourse. by rmadmin · · Score: 1

      Hrm... I had an idea. Verizon throw in a clause in the AUP saying 'If we get a P2P complaint, and we can prove that it is a valid complaint, your cut off'

      Then... RIAA: Uhm.. joeuser is doing p2p stuffs

      Verizon: We'll look into it, yup he is, *BOOT*

      Sounds more reasonable to me...

    2. Re:Expected discourse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some laws just can't be enforced. Drug laws, prostitution laws, copyright laws... Anyone you stop is just a drop in the bucket. Better to let the market regulate them.

    3. Re:Expected discourse. by Gerry+Gleason · · Score: 2
      The constitution is not designed to make it easy for law enforcement to catch criminals, it is designed to protect the rights of anyone who is accussed of a crime. If they didn't routinely abuse people's rights, then the courts would not be bending over backwords to make sure the individual's rights are respected.

      I don't know anything about the law they are referring to all the sections of, but it seems to me if there were probable cause demonstrated a supena would be issued and executed. Shouldn't it be the governments lawyers (at whatever level) that would be bringing the action?

      It just seems strange unless this is only a civil matter, why is the RIAA there? What other standing would they have to issue supenas?

    4. Re:Expected discourse. by powerbarr · · Score: 1

      You are making an assumption the anonymous user is a criminal and has stolen the copyrighted work. Even the judge disagreed with this as an article at Salon stated, "The judge disagreed with Verrilli's assumption that the works were stolen"

    5. Re:Expected discourse. by Alex+Belits · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Goodbye any hopes for common carrier status then.
      Right now ISPs at least can argue that they are common carrier, but the second when they assume any control over user that depends on the content he is transferring, they can't, and will be forced to share the responsibility for whatever user is doing.

      That would be e^(this "subpoena" situation) amount of trouble for Verizon.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    6. Re:Expected discourse. by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      And then so-and-so pays Verizon to add a note into their AUP saying, "If you arn't using this software, you're cut off!"

      This sounds like a slippery slope.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    7. Re:Expected discourse. by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Insightful
      > Hrm... I had an idea. Verizon throw in a clause in the AUP saying 'If we get a P2P complaint, and we can prove that it is a valid complaint, your cut off'
      >
      > Then... RIAA: Uhm.. joeuser is doing p2p stuffs
      >
      > Verizon: We'll look into it, yup he is, *BOOT*

      That'd be reasonable, and would translate to this:

      RIAA: P2P activity from IP xx.xx.xx.xx
      Verizon: *boot*

      But this case is about something different. This case is about what RIAA wants:

      RIAA: P2P activity from IP xx.xx.xx.xx. Give us his name."
      Verizon: Yes massa Rosen, here's the customer's name. Customer may pays us moneys, but we's only here to serves you massa Valenti. We's yo bitchez, RIAA/MPAA. It's our pleasure to serves!

      Except what happened was...

      Verizon: "We'll do what the law requires - namely delete any infringing material on our servers and enforce our AUP as we deem fit. The law does not require that we give you his name, so go piss up a rope."

      There's a big difference between those two things, and that's why the parties are in court.

    8. Re:Expected discourse. by Digitalia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Neither. They're a private entity that has criminalized copyright violation. They should go to the police. The police should then conduct their own investigation, involving search orders based upon probable cause. Should the prosecutors find the need, they should be the ones to pursue justice. If Verizon decides to pursue the matter in a civil court, then they should be required to make a motion before a judge for the information, as is the case.

      However, users of internet services should have the same expectations of privacy as users of telephone services. Though it is common for phone companies to reveal a list of ingoing and outgoing calls made by a consumer when a court order is obtained, it is entirely impossible for them to provide a record of the contents of those calls. Just because the ability exists to capture all of the specific information concerning internet use does not mean that that information should be made available. Courts should be required to get a wiretap order, and that order should not be retroactive.

      --
      Pax Digitalia
    9. Re:Expected discourse. by kaxman · · Score: 0

      "That'd be reasonable, and would translate to this:

      RIAA: P2P activity from IP xx.xx.xx.xx
      Verizon: *boot*
      "

      Um. Well. You're an idiot. You see, I've used P2P as an honest to christ distribution tool for media I've personally created, or been asked to help distribute by the creators, and for trading gigs and gigs of stuff that was no longer under copyright, or never was in the first place. P2P has perfectly legitimate uses, and I can honestly say that I've used it for those legitimate purposed a LOT more than I've used it for anything else.

      So...Go piss up a rope.

      --
      Everyone on slashdot has a journal.
    10. Re:Expected discourse. by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Geeks: You can't go after the users, they have a right to being anonymous.

      Hmm, i dunno, i kind of think that the RIAA should go through the courts to get the records from Verizon. BUt they haven't. I don't want my personal information disclosed willynilly to anyone that asks, unless there is a very good reason to do so.

    11. Re:Expected discourse. by plague3106 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why should Verizon have to look into the matter at all?

      The RIAA should bear the burden of proof, not some 3rd party.

    12. Re:Expected discourse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have a fucking clue , but it is fuckdot, so wtf.

    13. Re:Expected discourse. by rocca · · Score: 1

      Except Verizon won't even check the user account (they "haven't involved the customer" and won't until they get a court document). If it was my customer I'd check it out, and if they were violating it I'd have no problem booting them on their ass, but I wouldn't give their information without court orders.

    14. Re:Expected discourse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, we're preaching to the choir here but by legalizing these things they'd be so much safer because people could discuss them openly and agree to use them in reasonable and relatively safe ways. For drugs this should be obvious, but it is just as applicable to prostitution.
      If it's all legit then a prostitute can advertise freely and lay down the ground rules making the whole experience much safer and at the same time more satisfying.
      As for copyright . . . jeez, it's really bizarre when sharing becomes inherently evil. I'd like to see a skit where two kids are sharing their toys and the parents come up and smack the shit out of them for being pirates. That seems to be right down the lines of how copyright is being interpreted by these big money players.

    15. Re:Expected discourse. by Steve+B · · Score: 2
      Geeks: You shouldn't go after the P2P software makers, go after users who violate copywrite. A tool is just a tool.
      RIAA: Ok, we'll go after users. Verizson, tell us who this guy is.

      Was writing the answer into the question accidental or deliberate?

      Yes, they should go after users who violate their rights. The first step of this process is not searching Joe Blow's files. The first step of this process is the lawful establishment of probable cause to search Joe Blow's files. The fact that this takes a bit of work is, to use the formal legal terminology, "tough".

      --
      /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
    16. Re:Expected discourse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lawbreakers are being protected by the law all the time. Some of the ugliest crimes such as child abuse happen mostly within the offender's own 4 walls. It is not permitted to install hidden cameras in each and every bedroom even though 1000s of little girls and boys could be saved from rape. Some things ARE more important than the well-being of 1000s of little children. One of these things is the privacy of the homes of millions of people. Now if society accepts the rape of 1000s of children each year to protect people's privacy, why is it so absurd to accept profit loss for a big company to protect the people's privacy? Is money more important than little children?

  7. Also check out Salon's coverage by Software · · Score: 5, Informative

    here (or http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2002/10/04/verizon/ print.html for the link afraid).

    1. Re:Also check out Salon's coverage by dildatron · · Score: 1

      Also a new Business Week article here.

      --


      If you had nuts on your chin, would they be chin nuts?
    2. Re:Also check out Salon's coverage by powerbarr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Key lines from the Salon article...


      Verrilli also dismissed Verizon's position that the Internet provider's customers have a right to privacy.

      "You don't have a first amendment right to steal copyright works," Verrilli said.

      The judge disagreed with Verrilli's assumption that the works were stolen.


      Seems like the judge understands that just because you have music downloaded or available for download doesn't mean you didn't buy the CD.

    3. Re:Also check out Salon's coverage by rollingcalf · · Score: 2, Informative

      Seems like the judge understands that just because you have music downloaded or available for download doesn't mean you didn't buy the CD.

      Or the music could have been released by the artist for free distribution, as many independent artists have done.

      --
      ---------
      There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
    4. Re:Also check out Salon's coverage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, you could have bought the freakin' album twenty years ago or the cassette or eight track. I went through my MP3s the other day and I realized that at one time or another I actually did own most of that stuff. I was simply filling in all my missing media. God, i used to have boxes of albums and now I have gigs of CDs filling in the missing albums. I don't see a problem there. The money was paid long long ago. Jeez, the majority of MP3s are ancient history and they were paid for handsomely several times over. If the money was wasted on coke, whores, expensive cars, private jets or freakin' golf courses that's not my problem.

  8. Verizon is not protecting a little man by atari2600 · · Score: 5, Insightful



    Verizon by its own admission is protecting the privacy of its subscribers and thats a good thing to do - sounds good and feels good. You would have thousands of companies who would want the names of Internet subscribers if an ISP gave out the name of a subscriber just like that. Verizon would be hoping that the RIAA wouldnt win this case because that would set a bad example and companies who fight for their user's privacy will stand out...so there is more at stake here for both the parties.

    I hope Verizon wins.

    1. Re:Verizon is not protecting a little man by delta407 · · Score: 2
      ... if an ISP gave out the name of a subscriber just like that
      The DMCA (which is law) requires them to release names "just like that". This, of course, assumes "just like that" is by means of a subpoena (you know, court-issued), such as the one they have in this case.

      It's on the books. Whine at your congressmen.
    2. Re:Verizon is not protecting a little man by -=OmegaMan=- · · Score: 1

      Subpoenas aren't necessarily "you know, court-issued." I've seen subpoenas from law enforcement officers as well as lawyers for private parties.

      I believe you're thinking of court orders.

      --

      This sig is xenon coated, and will glow red when in the presence of aliens

    3. Re:Verizon is not protecting a little man by Alex+Belits · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's not a court-issued subpoena. It's a "subpoena" issued by some company without any process that involves court -- I can "subpoena" anything using that. Heck, Osama Bin Laden can write a "subpoena" to CIA for the list of people that tried to capture him, and the paper will be just as invalid.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  9. name of user? by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    i have my home pc on verizon dsl. i also run kazaa on it 24/7 against an 80 gig usb drive. the 80 gig drive is 90% full, with one folder on it simply labeled "mp3".

    any way we can get the name of this user the RIAA is after? the chris tresco dod interview is weighing a little heavily on my mind right now (gulp) ;-P

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:name of user? by delta407 · · Score: 1
      any way we can get the name of this user the RIAA is after?
      That's the thing, Verizon doesn't want to release it, but the DMCA says they have to.

      Read the article next time.
    2. Re:name of user? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      uh... thanks for the obvious.

      next time, look under the obvious for the implicit joke.

      well, actually the burden is on me... i have to rephrase my posts for those who look to criticize first and laugh second.

      *sigh* can't we laugh more and criticize less? can't we all just get along? lol ;-)

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:name of user? by MoneyT · · Score: 2

      My guess would be that we can't get the name because Verizon isn't giving it out. If they did, the RIAA could just as easily go after the user instead of Verizon.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    4. Re:name of user? by Gerry+Gleason · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If your not joking about that part, I suggest you stop unless you want to share a cell with Mr. Tresco.

    5. Re:name of user? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      it's a joke!

      where the hell are people's sense of humor!!?? ;-P

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    6. Re:name of user? by circletimessquare · · Score: 2

      ok, i wrote a poorly formatted joke.

      my apologies to the people who took me seriously.

      but i was only joking about getting the name of the user.

      the rest is true. i share 70 gigs of mp3s 24/7 on kazaa via verizon dsl.

      and if you are saying that the US Govt is going to send me to jail for sharing music files, with all of the problems going on in the world, then you must also say, in the same breath, that the end of american civilization has begun. because then the phrase "we don't get it" applies on about 12 different levels of meaning. ;-P

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    7. Re:name of user? by unicron · · Score: 2, Flamebait

      We just sent a guy to prison for sharing some computer software didn't we? And that industry doesn't hold a candle to the revenue or power of the music industry.

      And by the way, 70 gigs of mp3's aint shit. There's a guy on Kazaa with something like 600 gigs of divx movie files. Read a story about him once, apparently he's the guy behind something like 60% of all movie transfers through Kazaa.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    8. Re:name of user? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Just because some loser has 600GBs of divx hardly diminishes his 70GB share. What are you one of those l33t assholes running a dchub where only people sharing 100GB minimum can join?

      Please, 70GB is a shitload by any standard for one user to share. Hell I got more respect for someone who shares their little 500MB collection on a modem than a snob like you.

    9. Re:name of user? by afay · · Score: 1
      And by the way, 70 gigs of mp3's aint shit. There's a guy on Kazaa with something like 600 gigs of divx movie files. Read a story about him once, apparently he's the guy behind something like 60% of all movie transfers through Kazaa.

      Well, 70 gigs of mp3s translates into about 24,000 songs if one assumes 3 meg songs. 600 gigs of divx's translates into about 925 movies if one assumes 650 meg divx's. I would say the 70 gigs of mp3s is more impressive

      --
      Best slashdot comment
    10. Re:name of user? by Gerry+Gleason · · Score: 2
      I think they can and they would. It's the RIAA that is puruing this, and they would claim you are an evil pirate. That's the thanks you get for helping them market their product.

      That would be the ultimate irony if the name in question is yours. I recomend that you claim you were only trying to get back the millions they took from you by illegal price fixing. Got any receipts for CDs from the period covered by that case?

    11. Re:name of user? by Bartab · · Score: 2

      Read the article next time.

      Articles and court cases with a contrary opinion notwithstanding your statement, of course.

      Guess what, there is a disagreement with what the law means. Even if you're a lawyer (and I know you are not) you wouldn't have the ability to say "The DMCA says so!" while it remains untested in court - especially when it's currently in the process of -being- tested and with no order by the judge.

      Legal questions are settled in court, not by an ignorant poster on Slashdot.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
    12. Re:name of user? by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      so like, do you work for the RIAA?

      or, like, are you an asshole?

      oh, my mistake, same thing ;-P LOL

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    13. Re:name of user? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my GOD. Are you really that stupid or do you have no capacity to understand humor? JESUS. Slashdot, where +5 Funny isn't enough to get some people to know that its not meant to be serious, its an attempt at humor.

    14. Re:name of user? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Half a league half a league Half a league onward
      All in the valley of Death Rode the six hundred:
      `Forward the Trolls of Slashdot Charge for the guns' he said
      Into the valley of Death Rode the six hundred
      `Forward the Trolls of Slashdot!'
      Was there a man dismay'd?
      Not tho' the soldier knew
      Some one had blunder'd:

      Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do & die,
      Into the valley of Death Rode the six hundred.

      Goat Anus to right of them, Goat Anus to left of them, Goat Anus in front of them

      Volley'd & thunder'd;
      Storm'd at with shot & shell,
      Boldly they rode & well,
      Into the jaws of Death, Into the mouth of Hell
      Rode the six hundred.
      Flash'd all their sabres bare, Flash'd as they turn'd in air, Sabring the gunners there,
      Charging an army while
      All the world wonder'd:
      Plunged in the battery-smoke
      Right thro' the line they broke;
      Tevis Money & Other Gay fags
      Reel'd from the sabre-stroke,
      Shatter'd & sunder'd.
      Then they rode back, but not Not the six hundred.
      Goat Anus to right of them, Goat Anus to left of them, Goat Anus behind them
      Volley'd & thunder'd;
      Storm'd at with shot & shell,
      While horse & hero fell,
      They that had fought so well Came thro' the jaws of Death Back from the mouth of Hell,
      All that was left of them Left of six hundred.
      When can their glory fade?
      O the wild charge they made!
      All the world wonder'd.
      Honour the charge they made!
      Honour the Trolls of Slashdot, Noble six hundred!

    15. Re:name of user? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What(?), do you want the code you clueless fuckstick?

    16. Re:name of user? by NattyDread · · Score: 1

      any way we can get the name of this user the RIAA is after?

      Maybe ... If we said, Please?

      Natty

      --
      Maybe the rain Isn't really to blame. So I'll remove the cause, But not the symptom!
    17. Re:name of user? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, so if I see this right, not sure if I do, but that's why I ask these questions: The only people in danger of law enforcement riding their asses are those that share files on P2P? That would be ironic if the only people that are completely safe are the leeches on Kazaa. The RIAA and MPAA can only see your files if you share them, right? They can't tell if you are downloading them only? That fact alone may slowly spell the end of p2p. The only people on would be the leeches, everyone else would be hiding from the government

  10. But the RIAA goes after both... by SiMac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The RIAA goes after everyone. The software makers, users, ISPs and everyone in between have the potential of being sued.

    Some geeks have a problem with one, some geeks have a problem with another.

    And some geeks have a problem with all of it. Is there really any reason why the shouldn't? Sure, the copyright is being violated, but so are user's liberties.

    1. Re:But the RIAA goes after both... by NattyDread · · Score: 1

      > Some geeks have a problem with one, some geeks have a problem
      > with another. ... and some geeks had roast beef, while others had none [vegitarian geeks]...

      --
      Maybe the rain Isn't really to blame. So I'll remove the cause, But not the symptom!
  11. Tricky by dirvish · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The list of possible subjects for the e-mail is pretty long. I am glad the university I work for has good filters...could be a support nightmare.

  12. Excellent. by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It looks like we are seeing more and more tech saavy judges who are really interested in this issue. Really though more people should be involved as it's a whole new area of law to be researched.

    Hopefully with this trend we'll be seeing more fairness in our laws and not have another Dmitry type affair here.

    I think things are looking up here.

    sri

  13. In brief... by delta407 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the PDF found on this page:
    "The subpoena seeks limited information relating to a computer connected to the Verizon network that is a hub for significant music piracy. Verizon is the only entity that can identify the infringer behind this computer."

    "Verizon refused to comply with the Subpoena. ... Verizon asserted that because '[n]o files of the Customer are hosted, stored or cached by [Verizon],' it need not respond to the Subpoena. RIAA responded by letter, explaining that Verizon's arguments provided no basis for ignoring a subpoena issued under Section 512(h). ... Subsequent conversations between officials at RIAA and Verizon have failed to resolve the matter, and RIAA has informed Verizon that it would be filing this motion."
    The gist of their arguement goes like this:
    • Section 512(h) of the DMCA applies to service providers, like Verizon.
    • The DMCA's procedures for issuing a subpoena to Verizon were met in this case.
    • The DMCA requires Verizon expeditiously to produce the information in the Subpoena.
    • None of the arguments raised by Verizon justifies refusing to comply with a subpoena validly issued by this court.

    I hate to say it, but this time, the RIAA is right (legally). They got the DMCA passed, and Verizon is pretty much screwed here. Of course, Verizon -- AFAIK -- will not get penalties, except for possibly not providing the required information (name, address, phone) in a timely manner.

    Stupid DMCA.
    1. Re:In brief... by Da'Rante · · Score: 1

      This is a good reason for all ISPs to only keep logs of user connections for a reasonable amount of time to do analysis of thier networks, and to assist the user in technical issues. This is also a good argument for being a DHCP user, because without logs as I just stated, and no static asignments Verizon or any other ISP likely will not have the data to give to the court/plaintif as requested by the subpoena.

    2. Re:In brief... by alienw · · Score: 1

      You are aware that DHCP servers have logs that can map a particular computer to an IP address? If you use cable/dsl, the DSL/cable modem has an internal hardware MAC address that uniquely identifies you as a subscriber - that's how they know which modems to grant access to. The DHCP server logs this stuff. I'm sure they can get usage statistics for each subscriber if they wanted/were forced to.

    3. Re:In brief... by unicron · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exactly. Ever wondered why when you get a new nic card it never works until you call your ISP(at least where I live, anyway)? The first time you get set up they log that mac addy. This can lead to some serious headaches(great example: get a cisco 806 router to work with a cable modem. There are even rumors that some ISP's will refuse to give an ip to a cisco or other router company device, because you might have multiple computers on the network, something they want you to pay extra for.)

      As for DHCP, in my area I might as well NOT have it, I've had the same IP for close to 3 months now.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    4. Re:In brief... by pavera · · Score: 1

      Unless, as was spoken of in the article, Verizon can raise sufficient Constitutional questions about the DMCA itself (or at least the subpoena process) that they can get the law (or part of it) repealed. This could be a very good thing, finally someone with real money is actually taking on some of the DMCA on constitutional grounds. Just because the DMCA is law, does not mean it is going to stand up to constitutional challeneges, if the law gets repealed then the fact that Verizon didn't follow it is moot, regardless of whether the RIAA followed all of the rules that would force Verizon to hand over the info.

    5. Re:In brief... by jjo · · Score: 3, Informative
      How can you be sure that RIAA is right? The 512(h) subpoena depends on a 512(c) notification, which only deals with
      ...infringement of copyright by reason of the storage at the direction of a user of material that resides on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider...

      If the supboena depends on a bogus notification (because the allegedly infringing copies do not reside on a system or network controlled by Verizon), how can it have any validity?
    6. Re:In brief... by Eric+Seppanen · · Score: 5, Interesting
      • The DMCA requires Verizon expeditiously to produce the information in the Subpoena.
      • None of the arguments raised by Verizon justifies refusing to comply with a subpoena validly issued by this court.

      That's not correct. The DMCA requires Verizon to identify the owners of files on Verizon's system, but only if the complaining party can identify the work being infringed. This isn't too terrible in the case of files hosted at Verizon, because Verizon can easily check that there really does appear to be copyright infringement going on.

      But it's not clear that section 512(h) applies to situations where files aren't hosted at the ISP. The reasons why it shouldn't are obvious: the ISP has no way to judge the truthfulness of the claim, and what would result would be immediate power for any copyright holder to demand the identity of an internet user at any time, with zero requirement of a legitimate claim against that user. Such a system would be ripe for abuse and harassment of users.

      --
      314-15-9265
    7. Re:In brief... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a good reason for all ISPs to only keep logs of user connections for a reasonable amount of time to do analysis of thier networks, and to assist the user in technical issues.
      You are aware that DHCP servers have logs that can map a particular computer to an IP address? If you use cable/dsl, the DSL/cable modem has an internal hardware MAC address that uniquely identifies you as a subscriber - that's how they know which modems to grant access to. The DHCP server logs this stuff. I'm sure they can get usage statistics for each subscriber if they wanted/were forced to.
      Ok, now I'm sorry I have to point this out to you, but how exactly can you get the IP->User map if you only identify users via MAC and periodically clear MAC->IP mapping logs?

    8. Re:In brief... by Da'Rante · · Score: 1

      You are aware that DHCP servers have logs that can map a particular computer to an IP address? I suspect I am more aware than you. My argument still stands. Why would I say keep logs for a short time, if I meant keep all but the DHCP logs for a short time. The provider could throw out the logs hourly, or daily. The RIAA and the likes would have to act pretty fast to get an injunction to save those logs. Shoot, use shred to delete them, store them on a non journaled filesystem, and exclude the filesystem from the backup processes. Now an ISP can claim truthfully that they do not have a means to supply the information. There may be some exceptions, but they could protect most users this way.

    9. Re:In brief... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, where you live. You should move dude. My ISP lets me do whatever I like and they're cheap. I swap nics all day long and use proxies and whatever no problem. You're being fucked.
      You ought to call up your ISP and ask them why they're fucking you and then when they come back with their bitch ass comment you can quote them Glenn Danzig's immortal lines from the Misfits days.
      Attitude! You've got some fucking attitude.
      I can't believe what you said to me!
      You got an attitude.
      And then slam down the phone and move somewhere that has decent net access.

  14. Not the point at all. by TheConfusedOne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The law already provides provisions for the RIAA member companies to use the courts to seek subpoenas for the information that they want from Verizon. The DMCA put in certain provisions for an expedited subpoena process relating to certain information that ISP's have.

    The ISP's are arguing that this exception does not extend to information about users who are merely using Verizon's IP pipes rather than storing an offending file on Verizon's servers (which Verizon has control over). So, Verizon wants the RIAA companies to go through the normal channel to request the subpoena. Why? Well mainly because it's more complicated, time consuming, and expensive for the RIAA companies to go through the normal channels. This means that the number of subpoenas served to Verizon is decreased and keeps them from being swamped. If the RIAA companies don't have to go through that process then they can have crawler-bots spew out subpoena demands and swamp the ISP's with information requests.

    It's not a Verizon's defending the small guy or trying to be a scoff law. It's a "there's already a way to do this, follow the rules" thing. It's really a question of who has to bear the brunt of the costs of protecting these copyrights. It would seem quite logical that the ones generating the revenue should bear it.

    --
    --- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
  15. Yet Another article by forand · · Score: 1

    Similar, although not as well written, article here at bbc new.

    1. Re:Yet Another article by Vigilante42 · · Score: 1
      The funny part is that they constantly refer to the "RIIA".
      "If you got a letter from the RIIA ... I'd say there's a good chance that you would stop"
      RIIA lawyer Cary Sherman
      Usually I quite like BBC as a news source, but I really don't think RIIA deserves the bad press...
  16. It is an important point by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Does a 512(a) provider count as the same as a 512(b provider? This clearly conplicates aspects for 512(f) and 512(j) providers, but could come as a reliefe to those 512(b) and 512(q) providers. The 512(k) providers (if there are any of those still in existance) will obviously be covered under any rational ruling that also covers 512(d) and 512(g) unless it also covers 512(c)

    I hope this clears things up for you all.

    1. Re:It is an important point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ha ha ha. If I had mod points I would Mod you up for making a funny.

  17. Politics-Shmolitics by dubiousmike · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You know, there are always those who argue that when someone like Saddam starts fscking with others, that instead of starting some large military campaign, why not just hire (or send) some commando types in and assasinate them.

    For God's sake, when will someone digitally take out the RIAA? DoS, hack 'em, upload trojans, something! If there were ANYONE on earth that could do so without getting caught, they'd be found here on /.

    I realize that I am being awfully generalistic (did I just make up a word?) but seriously, I am sick of these organizations messing with us.

    Sure, let's do it the legal way, you say. Just like I can write my congressman with a 10000 signatures and he'll vote the way we want. Bullshit.

    Sorry to rant. But someone had to suggest it.

    Thank goodness no one can mod me as "raving lunitic"!

    1. Re:Politics-Shmolitics by unicron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You act like the RIAA is an artifical intelligence sitting in a server somewhere. The RIAA are fighting for their cause and their way of life. These things aren't stored on a computer. We're trying to make ourselves look intelligent and moral, not just re-inforce what they already think of us. This war will be won by us in a legal, grassroots way. People like you are the reason the majority of us aren't taken seriously. I for one would not desire to have someone like you on my side in this issue. You're negative and counter-productive.

      As for your comment on how if anyone could do it, the /. crew could, you couldn't be more wrong. Not to talk shit, but people with the skill to go where they want and do what they wish on the net..this /. is a joke. Not trying to talk shit, but it's the truth. We're seen as a collection of software pirates hiding behind the false pretense of a cause. All the TRUE hackers I know, people that are 40 now, have houses and kids and jobs, etc, people that used to be in Acid and LOD, etc, think this webpage is the scene's ultimate bad joke. Just the truth...

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    2. Re:Politics-Shmolitics by taernim · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong... but /.'s subtitle is "News for Nerds"... not "News for People Who Claim to Be Hackers, Whether or Not They Actually Are or Were One"

      So how about not generalizing and lumping everyone who reads /. into this category.
      Maybe you're just taking "this webpage" too seriously...

      --
      "PC Load Letter? What the $@#% does that mean?!"
    3. Re:Politics-Shmolitics by ahfoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "This war will be won by us in a legal grassroots way"
      There is no war, they lost a long time ago. This isn't a war, it's corporate grieving. Corporations don't have parents, they have business models. These corporations have all lost their business model due to advances in technology and they're in the process of grieving their loss. I think it would all make more sense to you if you read Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's work On Death and Dying. This is not a war, this is denial of a painful reality by a wealthy family that is being played out in the courts.
      In essence, the judge is being forced to act as a counselor for a grieving family that refuses to face their loss. This is not an uncommon role for the courts and that's partly why we're seeing so much integration of mandatory mediation by counseling professionals into the court system.
      In this particular instance I thought the judge's reference to the issue of "constitutional avoidance" was very telling. The lawyer for the plaintif tried to tell the judge when his own interpretation of the facts was and was not appropriate. This suggestion that the judge's thinking is muddled mirrors the counseling situation in which the client tells the counselor that the counselor is acting irrationally when all the counselor is doing is listening to the client. As a counselor, that's the kind of clue you look for to help your client begin their recovery.

  18. HELP A BROTHA OUT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My usenet server has died. Can somebody give me one I can connect to?

  19. RIAA sues free music source for 7 BILLION dollars by goombah99 · · Score: 1
    ripped from the headlines on Onion.com LOS ANGELES--The Recording Industry Association of America filed a $7.1 billion lawsuit against the nation's radio stations Monday, accusing them of freely distributing copyrighted music.

    "It's criminal," RIAA president Hilary Rosen said. "Anyone at any time can simply turn on a radio and hear a copyrighted song. Making matters worse, these radio stations often play the best, catchiest song off the album over and over until people get sick of it. Where is the incentive for people to go out and buy the album?"

    According to Rosen, the radio stations acquire copies of RIAA artists' CDs and then broadcast them using a special transmitter, making it possible for anyone with a compatible radio-wave receiver to listen to the songs.

    "These radio stations are extremely popular," Rosen said. "They flagrantly string our songs together in 'uninterrupted music blocks' of up to 70 minutes in length, broadcasting nearly one CD's worth of product without a break, and they actually have the gall to allow businesses to advertise between songs. It's bad enough that they're giving away our music for free, but they're actually making a profit off this scheme."

    RIAA attorney Russell Frackman said the lawsuit is intended to protect the artists. "If this radio trend continues, it will severely damage a musician's ability to earn a living off his music," Frackman said. "[Metallica drummer] Lars Ulrich stopped in the other day wondering why his last royalty check was so small, and I didn't know what to say. How do you tell a man who's devoted his whole life to his music that someone is able to just give it away for free? That pirates are taking away his right to support himself with his craft?"

    For the record companies and the RIAA, one of the most disturbing aspects of the radio-station broadcasts is that anyone with a receiver and an analog tape recorder can record the music and play it back at will. "I've heard reports that children as young as 8 tape radio broadcasts for their own personal use," Rosen said. "They listen to a channel that has a limited rotation of only the most popular songs--commonly called 'Top 40' stations--then hit the 'record' button when they hear the opening strains of the song they want. And how much are they paying for these songs? A big fat zip."

    Continued Rosen: "According to our research, there is one of these Top 40 stations in every major city in the country. This has to be stopped before the music industry's entire economic infrastructure collapses."

    Especially distressing to the RIAA are radio stations' "all-request hours," when listeners call in to ask radio announcers, or "disc jockeys," to play a certain song.

    "What's the point of putting out a new Ja Rule or Sum 41 album if people can just call up and hear any song off the album that they want?" Frackman asked. "In some instances, these stations actually have the nerve to let the caller 'dedicate' his act of thievery to a friend or lover. Could you imagine a bank letting somebody rob its vaults and then allowing the thief to thank his girlfriend Tricia and the whole gang down at Bumpy's?" Defenders of radio-based music distribution insist that the relatively poor sound quality of radio broadcasts negates the record companies' charges.

    "Radio doesn't have the same sound quality as a CD," said Paul "Cubby" Bryant, music director of New York radio station Z100, one of the nation's largest distributors of free music and a defendant in the suit. "Real music lovers will still buy CDs. If anything, we're exposing people to music they might not otherwise hear. These record companies should be thanking us, not suing us." Outraged by the RIAA suit, many radio listeners are threatening to boycott the record companies.

    "All these companies care about is profits," said Amy Legrand, 21, an avid Jacksonville, FL, radio user who surreptitiously records up to 10 songs a day off the radio. "Top 40 radio is taking the power out of the hands of the Ahmet Erteguns of the world and bringing it back to the people of Clear Channel and Infinity Broadcasting. It's about time somebody finally stood up to those record-company fascists."

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  20. And is that a bad thing by RatBastard · · Score: 2

    Enlightened self-interest is not a bad way to run their business.

    --
    Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  21. RIAA may be right by cachorro · · Score: 1

    ...unless, of course, DMCA is found unconstitutional,
    but that would have to be determined by a court...go figure.

  22. Think this is bad? by peterdaly · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't see what the RIAA is complaining about.

    Have you ever called Verizon to try and get a problem with their service resolved?

    For heaven's sake, when I pay my phone bill with a check over the phone with this company, I have to talk to a human and give them all the info they need to create a paper check which they then deposit. Who their size doesn't do the electronic check thing now adays?

    Don't even get me starting with if one of our T1's at work has a problem...

    Sounds to me like the RIAA is just sore they don't get better treatment than everyone else.

    -Pete

    1. Re:Think this is bad? by TheRealFixer · · Score: 2

      Off topic:

      A lot of companies still do the completely outdated and pointless electronic-to-paper check thing... usually because of one reason: They can charge some huge "service" fee for having to print the check, which is almost pure profit for them.

      In this regard, Europe is still lightyears ahead of the US banking system. Quite a few European banks are fully electronic, no checks needed at all, with almost every personal transaction being direct account-to-account electronic transfers. No phony check clearing periods, and no lame "service" fees charged to you for actually doing something that saves the bank money.

    2. Re:Think this is bad? by Sri+Lumpa · · Score: 1


      Yup, I live in the UK and just today I paid my rent by Internet banking, just gave the name of my landlord's account and its number and the sort number... oh! wait, I did that the first time and just selected the right account from a pulldown list this month and entered the amount and when to pay. That's bloody complicated, isn't it? I didn't even have to leave my bed to do that (thanks to my laptop :)).

      --
      "The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
  23. its like by nege · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You don't try and fight MPAA and Verizon; you get MPAA and Verizon to fight each other.''

  24. Thanks for notifying us. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We now have your IP address. Please step away from the computer and await prosecution.

    1. Re:Thanks for notifying us. by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Funny

      no you don't! HAHAHAHAHA

      stupid geek person!

      i don't have an Internet Post office address!

      there is no internet post office, don't you get it!? email isn't like regular mail!

      man, you geeks are dumber than i thought ;-P

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  25. STOP FSCKING POSTING THIS SHIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the seventh time I've seen this stupid friggin' article posted on Slashdot. It was funny the first couple of times, but can you just give it a rest for a few days? PLEASE?!

    1. Re:STOP FSCKING POSTING THIS SHIT by goombah99 · · Score: 1

      Dont FSCKING READ IT! Its a lot more interesting that most of the Drivel here and if people keep posting itsobviously because most people have not seen it. Except for losers like you who read every post every hour every day. lighten up and go read the onion, winer boy.

      --
      Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  26. I hate both of them! What to do? by Maul · · Score: 2

    Darn it! I hate both the RIAA as well as Verizon!
    Who am I supposed to root for?

    --

    "You spoony bard!" -Tellah

  27. Waste of time... by sterno · · Score: 2

    The funny thing is that the reason the RIAA ends up pissing people off is the same reason an electronic attack would be pointless. They shun computers and they do everything they can to insure that the experience of downloading electronic music is as unplesant as possible.

    Hacking them would probably help them overall if you think about it. "Oh our system are down, you see how bad this Internet thing is, go buy CD's, they don't go down like this Internet thing." Not to mention the fact that the hacking would make them look like the victims of the evil computer geeks rather than the other way around.

    Don't do anything stupid, for your sake and for all of our sakes.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  28. Wouldn't it be funny... by Boone^ · · Score: 4, Funny

    if the user didn't know they were being targeted, and they were reading about the legal stuff along with the rest of us going "huh, sucks to be that guy!"

    1. Re:Wouldn't it be funny... by Zordak · · Score: 4, Funny
      From a New York Times article, dated February, 2003:

      "The Verizon subscriber, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison today, frequented an online technical new site called "Slashdot" under the pseudonym 'Boone^.' One RIAA laywer commented, "Anybody who reads that commie-leftist-anti-coporate-America web page and parades under an obvious hacker name like that is just asking to be nailed." In reaction to the verdict, the defendant sobbed, "It's like I just got modded to (-1, Music Pirate)." NYT internet analysts are still trying to decipher the comment."

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
  29. Heck, 2600 is probably behind this by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    If my enemy attacks my enemy, I laugh. Maybe 2600 rigged this collision.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:Heck, 2600 is probably behind this by Dalcius · · Score: 3, Funny

      Received: from hax0rb0xen [2600.com] by mail.riaa.com
      Fri, 13 Sept 2002 12:40:53 -0500
      From: "Bob Jones" <bjones@riaa.com>
      To: "Hillary Rosen" <hrosen@riaa.com>
      Subject: Copyright violator on Verizon
      Date: Fri, 13 Sept 2002 12:40:59 -0500

      Mistress,

      We have detected a p2p file-swapper on Verizon networks currently sharing 20GB of Brittany Spears, the Backstreet Boys, N'Sync, Celine Dion and Jennifer Lopez. What should we do?

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
  30. Content Providers VS. Bandwith Providers by turnstyle · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Yes, it looks like the Content Providers & Bandwith Providers are sparring, but don't believe the hype.

    They are both big big business, and they are simply jockying for the best sweetheart deal. No doubt the Content Providers will, before long, be paying some sort of 'tax' to the Bandwith Providers to help break the P2P networks.

    If you're at all technical, you should think about running your own Internet standards based server (ie. http, ftp, etc). If you want to make your files available via a streaming site, I hope you take a look at my approach, Andromeda.

    But no matter what you eventually decide to do, to have control you have to take control.

    --
    Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
    1. Re:Content Providers VS. Bandwith Providers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But no matter what you eventually decide to do, to have control you have to take control"

      I'm sorry, I don't know what you are talking
      about. The copyrighted material does not belong
      to you, and distributing it in a way not intended
      by the owner is wrong... it also happens to be
      illegal.

      People are making a big deal about the change
      of reality and how the "old" model of content
      distibution is, well, old and now it is free to do.
      Well, yes. But this is not relevant. The
      simple fact is, if you want free music, you
      have to make it. Go set up a recording studio,
      perform (and be sure to write your own music
      first, or choose something public domain) and
      set it free under the music equivilant of the
      GPL. If Britney wants to record the same song,
      she can do so, and even sell CDs, but then
      you (and everyone else) will be free to share
      it to your heart's content.

      You may well want free music. Great, make it.
      That's what the Community that gave Slashdot
      a readership in the early days did, but with
      software. It's called Linux, and before that
      was GNU (collectively GNU/Linux). We didn't
      steal anyone's UNIX. We didn't steal anyone's
      Windows. Now it really is Ours and We can use
      the strength of Copyright Law to make sure it
      stays that way.

      You can't have your cake and eat it too. You
      want protection for what is Ours or in the
      Commons, but what you decide should be Free
      you are prepaired to steal. Sorry, this is
      not logical, and quite frankly a loosing
      argument (witness: Napster and it's ilk, this
      case, tomorrows case...)

    2. Re:Content Providers VS. Bandwith Providers by turnstyle · · Score: 1
      In fact I agree with you. Personally, I've never quite understood the justifications for trading copyrighted material over the P2P networks. In fact, I think P2P is a pretty cool thing, but it's being held back by what is proving to be its primary use.

      However, I do think there's a difference between mass anonymous downloading of copyrighted materials, and letting a friend play one of your CD's.

      That's what my software does - it turns an MP3 collection into a streaming site. Most people use it to remotely access thier collection, and they may (or may not) choose to let a friend listen to something.

      Now, I think that's quite a lot different than being able to download just about anything you can think of from people you don't know.

      And the reason it's relevant is that the P2P networks provide a target, and that will eventually prove to be thier downfall. The Content Providers have something to shoot at, and eventually, the Bandwidth Providers will be helping them. If people want to be able to continue to access *thier* stuff over the network, they might want to have a few different options.

      --
      Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
  31. don't hold your breath by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    verizon will win provided no verizon employees have anything to do w/ the case

    "we're sorry your honor, we had to change your opening statement date without informing you..."

  32. Re:I hate both of them! What to do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Who am I supposed to root for?

    I always side with Switzerland on things like this.

  33. Re:I hate both of them! What to do? by nebenfun · · Score: 0

    hmmm...
    let's see...
    it's friday, fall is coming to the northern hemisphere...

    somewhere there is a little boy wishing for a gamecube...

    and an old man wishing for an erection.

    so to answer your question,
    I'd say neither...
    support Blizzard and Apple!

    nbfn

  34. Heinlein, 1939 by Myriad · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit.

    It is interesting to note that Mr. Heinlein penned those words back in 1939.

    function history(){

    history();

    }

    --
    "They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
    1. Re:Heinlein, 1939 by quantum+bit · · Score: 2

      function history(){

      history();

      }


      Oh, no! History is headed toward a stack overflow!

  35. Suggest: take HDD out, bury in shallow grave... by MickLinux · · Score: 1

    ... and replace with alternative P2P HDD that does not offer copyrighted materials. Preferably of you pounding out various tunes on your son's xylophone, while singing through a kazoo.

    Just be sure and bury it in the middle of a state park, or before too long some bank robber is going to be taken down with your HDD as his weapon of choice...

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
    1. Re:Suggest: take HDD out, bury in shallow grave... by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      exactly!

      finally someone who get's it!

      that is why it's all on a usb hdd! ;-P

      so when the RIAA gestapo come calling looking for my purloined music collection i can play hdd switcheroo and simply shout to them "nein juden hier!" ;-P

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    2. Re:Suggest: take HDD out, bury in shallow grave... by Sri+Lumpa · · Score: 1


      Yeah, but if you tell them that you've got nine of them, you'll be in trouble ;)

      --
      "The obvious mathematical breakthrough would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers." Bill Gates,
  36. Al-Fayed/Hamilton by Fiveeight · · Score: 1

    This is almost as good as the Mohammed Al-Fayed VS Neil Hamilton libel case we had here (.uk) a few years ago. General opinion seemed to be "Shame they can't both lose".

    That time it was Al-Fayed, who had an interesting past (and the worst decorated shop in central London), even before accusing MI6 and the Royal family of murdering his son (which, oddly enough, cost Harrods one of their royal warrants), and being sued for libel by Neil Hamilton, after Al-Fayed claimed he took bribes to ask questions in Parliment.

    Hamilton lost and had to pay a big settlement before going to prison. Al-Fayed won, but I don't think telling a court that he bribed MPs was particularly helpful in his endless quest for British citizenship

    So no-one really won

  37. T H E E N D O F A M E R I C A N C I V I L I Z A T by MickLinux · · Score: 1

    The End of American Civilization has begun.

    There. I spelled it out. Now, quit trying to play two games at once, and realize, you live in a single reality. Quit lying to yourself, therefore, and either (1) play by the American Government's rules, or (2) get out. Me, I actually picked both.

    Nonetheless, no matter what you pick, I expect that the same thing that takes down most criminals is the fact that they don't think their method (that is, crime) through to its logical conculsion (usually prison, death, or broken relationships). It's a distinct sign of a lack of intelligence.

    Even where it results in the criminal ruling the world (Napoleon, Hitler), the net result is (a) butt of jokes about megalomaniac little snits with various tics (b) see previous paragraph: prison, death, broken relationships.

    --
    Correct Horse Battery Staple: 72 bits of entropy. Enter "Correct H" into google. When it generates the phrase, that's
  38. Someone should release the IP by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    that way the user can check and be aware that they're after him.

  39. Re:T H E E N D O F A M E R I C A N C I V I L I Z A by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    hey man, all change that results in change that is positive is usually a struggle. the american revolution and the civil war turned out alright (american independence, the end of slavery). these were probably all accompanied by lawyers screaming about illegal activities. i think of napster, the riaa, kazaa, etc., as the birthing pains concerning a new understanding of intellectual property, all of which wrought by the introduction of the internet.

    look, there are 3 things you can "steal":

    1. atoms
    2. data about atoms
    3. data for its own sake.

    1. atoms: you steal a car. a car is a thing. you stole it. end of story. the way it is and the way it should be.

    2. data about atoms. amalgamated incorporated's secret formula 51x. if you steal that data and use the information to make your own production for pruchase of formula 51x, then you have stolen. stealing the information itself wasn't bad, because scientists were already using the information freely about formula 51x to research formula 52x. stealing it to make money off your own version is the badness here.

    the way it is today is that amalgamated incorporated does try to call just using that information a crime, even though it stops scientific progress. see this slashdot story. the way it should be is that use of formula 51x should be free for research, illegal for capital production of products derived from that information. we have a long way to go to fix this mess.

    3. data for its own sake. music, books, etc. we are not in gutenberg's time anymore. we live in a world where information like music and books is as transmuteable as water. in a way, information wants to be free. music is not like formula 51x. it is about nothing specifically, and is enjoyed for it's own sake. this should be free. this is what the promise of the interent is all about! the RIAA guards a world that existed before the internet. they are attempting to reverse history. let them go on with their bad selves, they can't possibly win. pandora's box is already open.

    but who will make money off of music! no one will!???

    so the future is about the status quo? things change dramatically sometimes because of new discoveries. besides, there are always alternative models for turning a dime. someone will learn how to stand at the portals that tell people what they might want to listen to, and artists or the groups that represent the artists will pay them to put their name on that portal. the artists will make money the old fashioned way, by working for it. live concerts. or they won't make money. they will do it because they love to do it. teen age boys will still try to play guitar even if they know they will never be millionaires... it was always about getting the chicks anyways. ;-P see?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  40. Sizes of industries by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    industry doesn't hold a candle to the revenue or power of the music industry.

    I thought I read somewhere that the computer industry was bigger than the entertainment industry. Flexing your muscle in Congress doesn't necessarily mean you are the biggest industry.

  41. Almost Right :) by Srin+Tuar · · Score: 2


    The law (good or bad) is being broken. Who should the copywrite holders go after? The tools or the abusers.


    You almost got it right; it should be: The law (good or bad) is broken. Who should go after the copyright holders? The tools (artists) or the users.

  42. The Judge's HD by theMightyE · · Score: 2, Funny
    It sounds as though the judge had a good grasp of the technology...

    Hmmmmm... I wonder how the judge came to understand the ins and outs of filesharing so well. It couldn't be the same way the rest of the world learned about it, could it? *cough*

    Well, I'm sure the judge won't mind if Jack V. and co. do a little checking around on his hard drive, and maybe take a look at any logs or history files showing where he's been to on the 'net. After all, it is their God-given right to do so, no?

  43. Quick fix by deRusett · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Stop sharing your files on P2P networks Accually make a Peer 2 peer netowrk each person accually buy 1 CD a year, Rip it and share songs with people on the Peer to Peer network, Files can be sent with programs like ICQ, MSN, Yahoo, AIM, ..... the list goes on, set up FTP's like we did back in the mid 90's remember?? Or just stop steeling! I dislike the RIAA as much as the next guy, But If you wrote a book, then one copy was sold and it was then photocopied 1000 times how would you feel?? you spent say 10 months writing it, 500 dollars advertising it locally, then you sell it for 30 bucks, 1 copy is sold, it costs 10 bucks to make you get 20 bucks but are still short 480 bucks. I don't want to see this guy sharing his files get busted, but I don't like P2P networks, they cause a huge drain on Bandwidth on LANs and ISP's

    1. Re:Quick fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wake up and smell the shit. The money is not being made by the musicians who actually perform the music or the songwriters who write it. The money is being made by the record companies. The average performer only gets about 10 cents per song per cd that is sold. So for a $17 cd with 15 songs, the performer makes $1.50. Who makes the majority of the money, the record company who presses the cd, the shippers who deliver it, and the store where it is licensed to a customer to listen to.

    2. Re:Quick fix by Hairy+Dude · · Score: 1
      But If you wrote a book, then one copy was sold and it was then photocopied 1000 times how would you feel??
      Some authors who have contracts with Baen Books seem to think that sort of thing actually increases their revenues.
  44. Users, a different route (Re:Expected discourse.) by phorm · · Score: 2

    Going after the users through a different route would probably be a more-or-less median solution. What that route may be is up to debate, but if Verizon (hopefully) wins then it's quite likely the RIAA will simply move on to a plan B (or C, or D).

    Despite what many cynics will say, Kazaa is useful for legitimate purposes as well as piracy. Just because the postal service can be used to send illegal material doesn't mean that it in itself is illegal. The same stanza applies to Kazaa. Way back when it was less easy to trade such things online, postal was probably used quite a bit for such purposes, in addition to legal mailings. I seem to remember local BBS's and later internet sites advertising CD's full of warez etc that could be ordered and mailed.

    By the same token, Verizon is supplying the medium for perfectly legal communication, which is also being used for piracy.

    And in the end, perhaps they'll net a few 15yr-olds with a few hundred MP3's. Will the bad publicity be worth it? - phorm

  45. The RIAA isn't the REAL problem... by theLOUDroom · · Score: 4, Interesting

    it's member companies are.
    If you completely obliterated RIAA headquarters tomorrow, Sony, Universal, EMI, Warner Brothers and BMG would just create another RIAA type organization.
    It works really well for them the RIAA gets all the bad press and the public doesn't even (usually) realize who is behind something like the DMCA.

    --
    Life is too short to proofread.
    1. Re:The RIAA isn't the REAL problem... by Snover · · Score: 1

      And you're not even blaming the real conglomerates either, like Viacom, AOL-Time Warner, and the three other major groups whose names I don't recall, that hold 99% of all the record labels, television networks, magazines, newspapers, et al.

      --

      [insert witty comment here]
  46. Ah, Heinlein was a lawyer, was he? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2

    This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law.

    I certainly agree with the sentiment expressed by Heinlein, and by sconeu, but how is this relevant? Heinlein wasn't a lawyer, he wrote fiction. Great quote for how you'd like the universe run, but relevant? Don't think so. Get a quote froma real lawyer.

  47. Re:freenews.netfront.net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Make love to yourself in your freetime.. Alternate gently stroking strokes with your dominant hand with gentle anal probes with the other. That should hold you over till comp.lang.policeofficers is available again.

  48. Ethernet (MAC) address by EyeBase · · Score: 1

    you can change the Ethernet address on some nics with linux

    1. Re:Ethernet (MAC) address by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but win9x/2k/xp does it as well... Control panel/network/properties for nic/advanced/network address. Enter new address, reboot, boom, done.

  49. MAC-User by EyeBase · · Score: 1

    ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:00:01:23:45:67

  50. Anonymous User by ColaMan · · Score: 2

    So, how many Verizon users would have a P2P client? Are they crapping themselves, or what?

    Hey, Anonymous Verizon User with a P2P client - are you worried yet? Nothing like watching a game of whack-a-mole and suddenly realising you're one of the moles. *whack*

    --

    You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
    There is a lot of hype here.
  51. Tevis Money, the fucking Queer Buttfuck. tsarkon. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Hi there. Tevis Money. Tevis mother fuckin' Money. What a fucking gay name. I think you are an asshole, buttfuck-Tevis. You are a gerbil fucking ass felching pedophilic man philanderer anus rim licker. We should invent a new system of addressing you, and your minions of rim job. Like hail commander anus. Like Roman Centurions, only gay, and weak as pussies.

    No SPQR tattoos for you unless Q is for QUEER.
    Hail, a festering Buttfuck-Tevis. Like, buttfuck is a rank. I would be Caesar Tsarkon, you would be buttfuck Tevis, 1ST class, with a skill badge in man philandering. You other compatriots would be, Felch Smith, Rim Barney, Lt. Rim Revere, Captain Taco Snot.

    You are the embodiment of fucking gay. And even if you weren't into licking 12 year old boy anus, and more into fingering and raping babies and girls under 12, you would still be a metaphorical fag.
    You are a cum guzzler, a butthole shit sucker. You fuck goats. You are a gerbil taper. Tevis. Bitch fuck cunt Tevis.

    About your sig. World domination with that plastic spoon you use to scoop up cum you fucking fag, and eat it and also feed it to a 6 year old boy held prisoner in your ass sweat saturated used duct tape in a high chair in your cave of iniquity.
    Baka Baka is what you scream when tearing apart virgin anuses, as your tear though their virgin folds, its sounds like raw steak being forcibly ripped against the grain.


    Oh, fuck who am I kidding. Tevis, I miss you honey. I want you to lick my ass like you used to. I wand to give you my hot love. I want to fill our ebony jar of man love with our quivering mounds of love pudding and then eat breakfast serials like we used to, but instead of using milk we use MAN MILK.
    Please, Tevis, come home to daddie JOE. I'll fuck you like its 2069 yeah baby. We can shave each other balls and lick each others nuts again just like old days. You always said you liked the way I sucked your nuts off because that's how your dad did it.

    I miss you TEVIS, I need your ass man love again!
    Tevis Money [mailto] , I want you to fuck me in the ass please. I am dying to be anally accosted. I want to be ravaged like hog. I want you to dress like a farmer and make me oink like a pig. I want an ass reaming like no other. Tevis Money [mailto] , I haven't had this kind of lust for you since the crazy college days. We used to butt fuck each other in the stalls. You always told me not to flush and preferred using my feces as apposed to real lubricant. I remember your chocolaty member, your manhood, draped in my feces. Man, Tevis Money [mailto] , I remember. I was day dreaming, escaping into a nether world where we used to fornicate, and live in fornicatory bliss. You used to like to keep your tubes socks on to enhance they gay look. We were so flitty and light on our feet. I am so very confused these days. I have difficulty conceptualizing the time that was then in contrast to now. I mean, first you were a raging homosexual, now you wont look me in the eye because of this anime woman. I know that bitch is a transvestite, and you lust after my ass while you are being tentacle raped. You are closeting your homosexuality and denying your roots in my ass! Don't be fooled! TEVIS MONEY [mailto] knows how to suck a dick. He may nibble, and bite, and pretend to be sheepish at first, but deep down this cock loving acolyte of shaft licks cock like a bar maid. I am destabilizing. The world is going dark to me. I have scintillating threads of motley thoughts; my ability to control my self evanesces away! I have only an adamantine desire to see your balloon knot once again, and to have you ravage mine! TEVIS MONEY [mailto] - I NEED YOUR HOT MAN SEX NOW. This is your long lost butt buddy Joe, please come back.

    * m o n e y * f u c k s * b u t t h o l e ! ! ! *
    mcccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccm
    oc/ccccc\ccccccccccccc\cccccccccccc/cccc\ccccccco
    n|ccccccc|ccccccccccccc\cccccccccc|cccccc|ccccccn
    e|ccccccc`.ccccccccccccc|ccccccccc|ccccccc:ccccce
    y`cccccccc|ccccccccccccc|cccccccc\|ccccccc|cccccy
    *c\ccccccc|c/ccccccc/cc\\\ccc--__c\\ccccccc:cccc*
    fcc\cccccc\/ccc_--~~cccccccccc~--__|c\ccccc|ccccl
    uccc\cccccc\_-~cccccccccccccccccccc~-_\cccc|cccci
    ccccc\_ccccc\cccccccc_.--------.______\|ccc|ccccc
    kcccccc\ccccc\______//c_c___c_c(_(__>cc\ccc|ccc ck
    sccccccc\ccc.ccCc___)cc______c(_(____>cc|cc/ccc cs
    *ccccccc/\c|cccCc____)/cccccc\c(_____>cc|_/cccc c*
    bcccccc/c/\|cccC_____TMONEY FUCKS ASSccc/cc\ccccc
    uccccc|ccc(ccc_C_____)\______/cc//c_/c/ccccc\ccco
    tccccc|cccc\cc|__ccc\\_________//c(__/ccccccc|ccc
    tcccc|c\cccc\____)ccc`----ccc--'ccccccccccccc|cck
    hcccc|cc\_cccccccccc___\ccccccc/_cccccccccc_/c|c*
    occc|cccccccccccccc/cccc|ccccc|cc\cccccccccccc|c!
    lccc|ccccccccccccc|cccc/ccccccc\cc\ccccccccccc|c!
    eccc|cccccccccc/c/cccc|ccccccccc|cc\ccccccccccc|!
    !ccc|ccccccccc/c/cccccc\__/\___/cccc|cccccccccc|!
    !cc|ccccccccccc/cccccccc|cccc|ccccccc|ccccccccc|!
    !cc|cccccccccc|ccccccccc|cccc|ccccccc|ccccccccc|!
    * m o n e y * f u c k s * b u t t h o l e ! ! ! * [goatse.cx]

    My name is TEVIS MONEY [mailto] and I'm here to Say
    I'm a Virgin and I'm gay
    I'm looking for some ass if you give me some
    If you don't mind making out with a bum
    Call the number on the screen! - I may look like a whimp
    But in bed I'm mean!

    TEVIS MONEY [mailto] HERE here again, and I'm at the drums
    I'm looking for sex amongst the bums
    I have a lot of trouble with HTML
    I keep telling people smarter than me to go to hell
    I give anonymous blowjobs in the subway
    I'm saving for more video games and homoerotic anime

  52. Protecting Peer to Peer transfers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So what I want to know is what are peer to peer software vendors doing to protect file sharers? i.e. Is anyone putting encryption into gnutella clients?

  53. RIAA has the right to the info. by geekee · · Score: 1

    Legal bs aside, if the the RIAA has sufficient evidence that someone on Verizon is sharing copyrighted material, they should be able to go to a juge, get a subpoena, and get the info from Verizon. This is no different than subponaeing phone records, etc.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
  54. Share files which you produce by wolverine1999 · · Score: 1

    Perhaps we should encourage people who create divx, mp3 files which they own the rights to (e.g. some non-professional bands, users who make camcorder videos, etc) to share them on these networks.