Slashdot Mirror


Kazaa And Exportation of U.S. Copyright Laws

Mr. Vidster writes "Interesting article in the NYTimes about the potential issues the U.S. justice system must face when dealing with Sharman Networks and KaZaA. Apparently Sharman and KaZaA have servers in Denmark, source code in Estonia, and the developers live in the Netherlands. How far does the long arm of US copyright law reach?"

37 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. As far as it wants to. by drhairston · · Score: 5, Informative

    Jon Johansen can answer that question for you, and he is only a teengager.

    --
    Dr. Joseph Hairston
    Superintendent, CCBC
    1. Re:As far as it wants to. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Jon Johansen can answer that question for you, and he is only a teengager.
      I presume you meant teenganger when you misspelled that. The USA will not stand for these Russian mobsters trying to destroy our way of life. One day you let a teenganger go free and the next day he gets recruited into a terrorist organization. Sorry, but certain things must be done to preserve the American way of life on Earth. If one of those things is to kill this renegade teenganger Johansen then so be it. Down with teengangers!

    2. Re:As far as it wants to. by halftrack · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are better examples, Jon Johansen is being prosecuted according to norwegian law. Certain US criminal cases come to mind (like Skylarov.) And some people's (IIRC just like Alan Cox') fear of traveling to the US.

      --
      Look a monkey!
    3. Re:As far as it wants to. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The US may indeed have a lot of implied power but don't mistake that for the ability to indoctrinate other countries with US law. They enjoy their freedom to have their own laws just as we do here in the US.

      File sharing is not going anywhere folks.. Not with programs out there like Direct Connect, FileShare, Kazaa and need I mention the millions of ftp sites out there?

      These arguments are SO old. I download movies and games.... if they are worth keeping, I buy them and if they are garbage I delete them and never bother again. If not for this process I would not bother to buy anything(as I have done for years because frankly I dont like blowing money on a game and or movie and then hating it).

      What I also find hilarious about the copyright argument... The RIAA says music sales are down due to d/l's of mp3's and the various other formats of music; however, I guess our current state of the economy would have nothing to do with the decrease in sales? I wonder if they compared other times of poor economy with their sales trends if they would be comparable to the downside trend they have been noticing.

      Just a thought. :-)

    4. Re:As far as it wants to. by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 5, Informative

      Being a Norwegian, I must say that I suspect the Johansen prosecution is all about appeasing the USA. We are allied with the USA, and the USA is an important trade partner as well as defence partner.

      If we did not attempt to prosecute Jon Johansen, it would look like we did not care about the views of the USA. Rather, we will try him in a Court of Law using Norwegian Law. Most domestic IT law experts expects Johansen to win. It will be trying for the poor kid, but he will go loose and the USA will be moderately satisfied we at least tried.

      That being said, I believe the WTO agreements are the papers to look for when researching the scope of Intellectual Property law.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    5. Re:As far as it wants to. by thomas.galvin · · Score: 5, Informative

      What I also find hilarious about the copyright argument... The RIAA says music sales are down due to d/l's of mp3's and the various other formats of music; however, I guess our current state of the economy would have nothing to do with the decrease in sales? I wonder if they compared other times of poor economy with their sales trends if they would be comparable to the downside trend they have been noticing.

      I wonder if they compared their situation to other times providers of non-esentiall goods were guilty of price fixing.

    6. Re:As far as it wants to. by Eppie · · Score: 5, Informative
      Jursidiction is really not that complicated here. If you avail yourself of the benefits of doing business in America, then you are subject to the laws of America. Everybody likes to pretend these are novel issues, but American courts don't find them to be that difficult.

      What follows is a repost of my two-secondprimer on personal jurisdiction on the internet:

      American civil procedure provides for jurisdiction over foreign companies that do business in America. The theory is that if you come to America and avail yourself of our markets, resources, society, labor, and laws, you are bound to obey our laws. This does not mean that you can be sued in New York if you offer goods for sale in China and some American happens to buy them while on vacation in Beijing. It does mean, though, that if you knowingly advertise in America, ship goods to America, or provide services to American clients, you can be sued in America for violating American law.

      On the Internet, this analysis is a little complicated because websites are accessed internationally, and it is difficult to detect what country people are really browsing from. Still, efforts can be made to exclude certain jurisdictions. For example, Lindows.com [lindows.com] used to have a message [google.com] on their website that refusing to do business in Washington state. This is because they were trying to avoid being dragged into court by MSFT in Washington state.

      There is plenty of caselaw on this emerging area of law:

      • A Blue Note jazz club in Missouri was sued by the Blue Note jazz club in New York. A NY court held that the Missouri club's website, though viewable from NY, did not create jurisdiction in NY because the club was a strictly local Missouri operation. (Bensuan Rest. Corp. v. King, 126 F.3d 25)
      • Likewise, Cybersell of Arizona sued Cybersell of Florida for trademark infringement and was denied jurisdiction because Cybersell of Florida was not really offering its services to Arizonans. (Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc., 130 F.3d 414)
      • OTOH, Zippo (the company that makes lighters) sued Zippo.com (a company that provided fast news updates) in Pennsylvania. Since Zippo offered its news service to netizens across the land, including PA, they were adjuged to be doing business in PA and thus were amenable to suit.

      As the cases make clear, there is a sliding scale that stretches from (1) passive website relating to local activities to (2) interactive website offering services to anybody across the land. Elcomsoft sounds a lot more like Zippo than it does the Blue Note jazz club in Missouri. If they are offering their services to Americans and offering downloads to Americans, they have to expect that they might be sued by Americans in America.

    7. Re:As far as it wants to. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wish you Europeans would gird up your loins and tell our president to go fuck himself.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    8. Re:As far as it wants to. by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Germans tried, but your Chuck Norris-loving prez didn't quite enjoy that.

      That being said, war on terrorism is widely seen as internationally divisive from a non-US perspective. We feel that the war has not been carried out according to intentions.

      Still, world against the US of A would be in interesting spectacle. You would be severely limited in your options by your access to oil on a medium-term basis.

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    9. Re:As far as it wants to. by grumpygrodyguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mmm yeah, except the Libertarian party is economically conservative....meaning screw you as long as I've got mine, a.k.a. what poor people?

      16% of the US population is living below the poverty line, that's the highest that number has been since 1970. And you want to vote Libertarian so we can elevate that number?

      Nope, as far as the poor are concerned Libertarian and Republican are the same thing.

      --
      The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
    10. Re:As far as it wants to. by Skevin · · Score: 4, Funny

      > I presume you meant teenganger when you misspelled that.

      I presume you meant äppleganger when you misspelled that. What's an äppleganger, you ask? Sometimes, parents (especially of Germanic origin) leave their children home alone in front of the PC, only to come home and find some hideously altered travesty (actually a Fey Changeling) sitting in front of a machine that is no longer recognizable as a PC: gone are the beige overtones and sharp corners, only to be replaced with unacceptably nonconformist colors and sweeping, slanting curves. Such an abomination seeks to corrupt all surrounding mortals with ominous mantras such as "Think Different!" or "Switch!". Even the desktop is oft times different (although Gnome users are not as likely the same foreboding disorientation as others). That, my friends, is an äppleganger.
      Our boy Johansen seems to fit the racial profile of the changeling victim, but his computer... I just don't know. Could it be that the Norweigan Police are in cahoots with the sinister Faerie King S'Teef Chobbs and quickly returned the computer, recoginizing it for the instrument of destruction it truly is? Perhaps we have more to fear from these äpplegangers than we truly realize.

      Solomon

      --
      "Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
    11. Re:As far as it wants to. by pumpkinescobarsof2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      im a candian and i feel it's high time YOU (the american people) told YOUR OWN president to go fuck himself.

    12. Re:As far as it wants to. by swb · · Score: 5, Funny

      Libertarians are Republicans that like getting high and watching porn.

      Greens are Democrats that can't get a trade union job or don't work at all.

      Where I live there's almost always some wingnut racist biker running for president. That's who I vote for.

    13. Re:As far as it wants to. by Jace+of+Fuse! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nope, as far as the poor are concerned Libertarian and Republican are the same thing.

      There is certainly merit to that argument, and I won't deny that economically, a Libertarian president could do almost exactly the same damage a Republican will do, except there are major differences that matter to me...

      A Libertarian wouldn't take every opportunity to bomb the shit out of other countries...

      A Libertarian would oppose things like the DMCA...

      A Libertarian would work on laws that punish real evil people without trying to take away every last civil right we have left.

      If you don't like the Libertarians, don't don't have to vote for them. But if you can honestly say you LIKE this bullshit "Two Party" system we have, then I think it's safe to assume you don't mind having your rights slowly taken away.

      More important than that, if you ever vote for any one candidate you don't like just to "take votes" from someone you like even less, you're just as guilty as the person who doesn't vote at all.

      If everybody voted for the candidate they truely felt best represented their views, I highly doubt we'd ever see anyone like Bush in office again.

      --

      "Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

      Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
    14. Re:As far as it wants to. by hyphz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Jursidiction is really not that complicated
      > here. If you avail yourself of the benefits of
      > doing business in America, then you are subject
      > to the laws of America.

      But this isn't quite the case. If I'm running a firm in the UK (for example), then I'm subject to the taxes and business laws of the UK. If I get orders from the US, it's harder - not easier - for me to ship them. Do I then have to be considered subject to US law simply because people from the US choose to use my product?

      Or does the fact that I have an Internet presence automatically mean I just want to sell to the US? Ah yes, of course, they're the biggest Internet users so I must have an interest in them if I use the net. (Never mind that there are still more non-Americans using the Net than Americans - they just aren't all in the same country.)

      Hey, how about some ISPs set up a ".nonus" domain which has no routers or hosts in the states?

      The other problem is it's an aberration from standard law. In every other country, and for every other type of illegal material, there's a simple argument: if you import a product from a country where it's legal, but it's illegal in YOUR country, then customs swipe it and kick YOUR ass. That's reasonably fair.

      The precedent followed by this law would imply further things - like, for example, many other countries suing US gun manufacture firms because the guns they make are being exported to countries where they're illegal.

      If Americans don't know about their own DMCA and don't know that they can't legally download or use Kazaa, why should Dutch people be punished for giving them the option, when doing so isn't locally illegal for them?

    15. Re:As far as it wants to. by blibbleblobble · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Okay. Fair enough. So your website then, the one generating money from adverts. Availing yourself of the french market? Enjoying coming to France and doing business in france? Right. You've lost your freedom to hold nazi views.

      Enjoying coming to Germany and availing yourself of the German market? Excellent. You've lost your right to compare your product with others in adverts.

      Website accessible from Zimbabwe? Sorry, lost your right to critisize the government there. Ditto in Burma and America.

      Availing yourself of the japanese market by benefitting from showing them adverts? Congratulations, you can display child-porn there. Unfortunately, you're still doing business in America, France, Germany, Burma, and Zimbabwe, each of which prohibits it. Moreover, you're doing business in Saudi Arabia, where the penalty is beheading. As you yourself say, policemen in your own country have an obligation to enforce the laws of the country where you do business.

      Any more? If your banner-ad statistics show that you get paid for chineese web-browsers accessing the adverts, you'd better take the christian literature off the site. And of course, any criticism of the chineese government.

      Pretty much the only place you're safe is Russia, because the US police will protect you from Russian law, and Australia, because they're firewalled and can't access the internet.

      Welcome to the free market. Aren't American legal ideas great?

    16. Re:As far as it wants to. by abe+ferlman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, we tried, but his brother runs Florida. What's Canada's excuse? :)

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    17. Re:As far as it wants to. by greenrd · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If everybody voted for the candidate they truely felt best represented their views, I highly doubt we'd ever see anyone like Bush in office again.

      That's pretty naive. Do you trust politicians to tell the truth about the policies they will implement or support? Just because someone calls themselves "Libertarian", doesn't mean they really are.

  2. Damn, by unicron · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That is a sensitive problem. On one hand, as an American I really want to shake the "world's bully" image we seem to fitting into, yet on the other hand I dont' see the problem with terminating access to outside Kazaa servers, then cracking down on the local ones. You may not be able to punish the guy running the foreign server, but you can limit access to it from within our borders, thereby removing it as an offender. That way, the government has accomplised it's goal(music/software no longer traded through that route) without having to flex nuts at the foreign government in question.

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    1. Re:Damn, by (trb001) · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because of the nature of KaZaA, I believe that it's impossible to shut down foreign servers. I'm not overly familiar with how KaZaA works, but how do you shut down something that, in theory, can run on any computer, any port,without making calls to a centralized server, doesn't track transmitted files and can use encrypted communications? That final part invalidates ip-sniffing, and the random ports restricts your port blocking.

      Finally, how do you prosecute someone if you don't know where they are? Eventually (as it sounds like is somewhat the case with KaZaA) someone will write a system like this and then not release their names. Internal version information is enough to keep track of releases and by the time something has been distributed enough to know it's a pest, it's been distributed enough to become a persistant problem.

      --trb

    2. Re:Damn, by Qrlx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You may not be able to punish the guy running the foreign server, but you can limit access to it from within our borders, thereby removing it as an offender.

      In other words, we should implement our own version of "The Great Firewall of China." Except in America, it will "protect" the citizens from illegal IP rather than, say, Falun Gong websites.

      Who gets to decide what makes it through the "Freedom Shield" or whatever newspeak you'd like to call it? Ashcroft? He won't even dance with his wife because he thinks dancing is immoral! The Copyright Holders of IP? They won't allow anything; the firewall will scan the page for "Ford" or "Friends" or "Star Wars" and deny access, just like BESS does at my girlfriend's school. The web will become useless. Utterly fucking useless.

      Great plan, dipshit.

      Remind me: Why is the government spending my money to protect Sony's IP again? Doesn't Sony have their own lawyers?

    3. Re:Damn, by j-turkey · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This brings up a question I have had for a while. Assuming that a country doesn't want to follow the US in whatever ideal, what does the US govenment do to pressure that country into submission?

      Politics, politics, politics, my friend.

      The US can lean on countries using whatever power it has (it does/will do this). Fact is, the politics of the situation are not the savage, horrible thing that people are whining about, it seems like more of a political/diplomatic reality that has always gone on, that people are recently awaking to. (I'm going to go out on a limb here) It is a realization very similar to the US's young people lashing out because they discover that the "one man, one vote" mantra is bullshit -- its really "one man, one vote...but before that comes lots of campaign financing, handshaking, and lobbying". Its nothing new -- its the way its always worked...people just weren't completely aware...

      The US will use any means at its disposal for leverage, be it foreign aid, tariffs on imports/exports, military power/placement, embargos, control of shipping channels & oil pipelines, land, as well as its powerful positions in the UN. The US is having a related (UN) problem right now with Russia and China. Russia and China have veto power in the UN Security Council, and if the politics aren't played right, they will certainly veto any UN-endorsed action against Iraq. The US was able to gain the support of Russia by negotiating the control and security of the Russian/Iraqi oil fields. Is it an insidous process? I don't think so...I think that its the way the game is played. It just happens that the US gets to play the game with a really good hand (and its not like that great hand was just given to the Americans for nothing, which is what the rest of the world seems to believe).

      Look at any US foreign policy deal in the past two centuries. You will find that there was give and take on all sides, and each country used whatever pressure it could to negotiate whatever deal that was being made.

      --Turkey
      --

      -Turkey

  3. this far by taxman_10m · · Score: 4, Funny

    The real reason we are going to war with Iraq is because Saddam downloaded Episode II off Kazaa.

  4. The long arm of American law ... by halftrack · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... stops at the doorsteps of the US elite.

    --
    Look a monkey!
  5. Do they have to show up? by Lothar+0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is Sharman Networks oblidged to even show up to court in this country? If they refuse to even acknowledge a lawsuit or an injunction, does this mean that federal agents will be dispatched to Vanadu, Estonia, the Netherlands, and Australia? I think not.

    If they say you're infringing copyright, Sharman, just ignore them.

    --
    "Anonymous Coward" is for whistleblowers, not unpopular opinions.
  6. Re:As far as... by unicron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of the countries in the world will accept our food and our military power, but none will be bought to change their laws. We can feed and protect a country till the end of time, but once we're paying them to punish their people to our wishes, we own them, and not a country on earth would allow that.

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  7. Berne Convention by An+El+Haqq · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here, read the

    Berne Convention.

  8. Hahahaha by warmcat · · Score: 5, Funny

    ''...And according to a lawyer for the record industry, the programmers in Estonia who once possessed a copy of the program's source code told a judge there last week that they no longer had it, but they would not say where it was.''

    Your honour, we looked down the back of the sofa. We think maybe the dog ate it.

  9. grrr by (trb001) · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Okay, I'm a native US born citizen and frankly, this peaves the hell out of me. I can't imagine what it does to people in other countries. The argument seems to be that because US citizens download this software and the company gains some of its revenue from advertisements from US companies/advertising firms, it should be subjected to US law? I fail to see why, or any proof that it should be. What cracks me up is that the judge out in CA is going to determine whether or not he has jurisdiction over the case. Uh, is there a disconnect here?

    At some point, a court somewhere is going to have to determine whether or not manufacturing software that allows the trade of copyrighted materials is legal. If they decide it's illegal, God help them to enforce it. The CDBTPA (or whatever..you know what I mean) is trying really hard to push this through, but it's impossible. As someone's .sig on /. says "The can is open, the worms are everywhere". That's precisely what's happened. You can already copy any type of digital material you want, the future hardware/software being protected won't do any good.

    ...critics have said that banning it would unnecessarily restrict speech and technological innovation...

    Let me halt my rant and play devil's advocate for a moment...restricting speech? This is something that is hurting the anti-DRM movement more than it's helping. A neutral person may likely be swayed over to our side until they hear everything referred to as a freedom of speech restriction. Most people don't consider source code a work of speech, just as they don't consider a music file or other audio source one either. Unless it's spoken (a speech) or written word (book), John Doe isn't going to consider the violation breaking the 1st amendment.

    --trb

  10. You say you are a what? by TamMan2000 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a fellow american I am offended that you think we should be shuting down kazaa servers. It is an established principle of the US that we go after the people who break the law, not those that make the tools used to do so, especially if the tools have functions besides the ones that are illegal. When the US decides to ban civilian gun ownership (see also hell freezes over, pigs fly...) THEN we can start to talk about making kazaa illegal.

    --
    "I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
    1. Re:You say you are a what? by Afrosheen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually there's nothing in the law that says you have to buy a gun. If guns are given away, no problem, as long as the potential owners are filling out forms and waiting per the Brady Bill. If everything checks out, no problem.

      Free guns argument= irrelevant.

      Tools are tools. Don't think that Adobe gets sued because some kid Photoshops pictures of something he's auctioning on Ebay to get a better price. Don't think that Stanley tools get sued if someone gets bludgeoned to death with a Stanley hammer. Tools that can have multiple purposes are usually not privy to scrutiny. Password-cracking programs and network scanners aren't really considered illegal tools either, because they can be used for checking security leaks/holes.

  11. Xerox stock plummets after copyright legal cases. by thebitninja · · Score: 4, Informative

    As the court room drama around file copying programs continues, photocopier companies relocate to foreign lands to try and protect themselves from copyright infringment. Pen companies worry about the uses to which their products may be put and all photography companies temporarily suspend trading, worried that users may photograph copy protected items. Once the floodgates have been pried open even a crack it's all on!

  12. What if......... by yokem_55 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What if the Internet itself had its own law, independent of the jusridiction of any other state? Would this be at all possible? It could be argued that the internet, since it recognizes no geographical boundaries, and exists in its own "cyber-space" could have its own soveriegnty. Computers connected to the internet would be subject to the "law of the internet" and their owners would be responsible for those computers under "internet law." Users of the Internet could have "citizenship," pay some taxes, vote in "internet-land" elections....why not?

    --
    ...and IN SOVIET RUSSIA, beowulf clusters imagine 1, 2, 3 profit!!!! jokes made out of YOU!!!
  13. wired by asv108 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wired had an article about KaZaA's globalization strategy a few weeks ago.

  14. US destroying any goodwill left in the world by Baki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading stories like this must make the last few europeans that still generally have sympathetic feelings towards the US 'defect'.

    I recon myself to be one of those. And yes I do know that not every american is to blame for such arrogant and stupid behaviour, but still, I begin to understand why the USA are so much hated in many parts of the world.

    The arrogance and one sidedness (unilateralism) is getting to the point that it is simply unacceptable, also to people who always felt that the US are our allies such as myself.

    The US may think they don't need anyones sympathy, that they can 'rule the world' on their own. That laws of others don't apply to the US, but that US laws are somehow more just and apply anywhere in the world (and if not, such countries must be pressured into modifying their laws under threat of trade boycotts etc). I however think this is a big mistake and gets the US into deeper trouble.

    I know some 'patriotic' people will qualify this as flamebait, but remember whether you agree or not, whether you like it or not, what I write still in very mild terms (coming from a european with over-average sympathetic feelings towards the US) what more than 90% of europeans are feeling by actions like this.

    Criticising other peoples for such 'infidelity' (i.e. being arrogant in the eyes of people with constructive criticism) won't cause such feelings to go away, on the contrary. I don't think it is helpful for the US to loose its last remaining allies in the world.

  15. The neverending wars by LoRider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is with us Americans who are so eager to start these wars that have no end and no possible way of really winning. They just go on and on and on.

    War on drugs.
    War on terrorism.
    War on people who break copyright laws.

    What next? Instead of waging "war" on everything we don't like, why not try and be alittle more creative.

    Since there is no way that the RIAA or MPAA is going to stop people from making copies of their shit, why not embrace the technology?

    How many people would pay for music if the recording industry charged $9 a cd if you could download it off the net or $11 if you wanted a hardcopy along with the ability to download.

    However they do it, if they just made music available to people in various formats on fast servers, people would buy it. Maybe not the average slashdotter, but the average consumer would.

    I am disgusted that the US governement feels it is somehow their responsibility or right to fight these battles for corporate America. Our government is nothing more than an extension of corporate America and has little to do with representing the citizens or protecting freedom.

    --
    LoRider
  16. Quit redefining "poor"... by tlambert · · Score: 4, Funny

    Quit redefining "poor"... use the system header file instead. Thanks.

    #ifndef __POOR_H__
    #define __POOR_H__ 1

    #define WEEKS_PER_YEAR 52
    #define WORK_HOURS_PER_WEEK 40
    #define MINIMUM_WAGE 5.15

    #define IS_POOR(yearly_income) \
    ((yearly_income (MINIMUM_WAGE * \
    WORK_HOURS_PER_WEEK * WEEKS_PER_YEAR) ? 1 : 0)

    #endif /* __POOR_H__ */

    You want to define certain people as poor? You have three manifest constants to work with. All three of them can only be changed with the approval of standards committees. Knock yourself out.

    Notice: Cranking up any of these values to crank up income for the bottom rung is fine... but nothing you do will make them definitionally "poor"... the only thing that can do that is them not working full time.

    FWIW: Most wealthy Libertarians, just like most wealthy Democrats or wealthy Republicans, etc., are all for bribing less well-off people to not steal their stuff. The various political parties just disagree as to what form the bribes should take.

    -- Terry