Slashdot Mirror
Kazaa CEO vs. Hilary Rosen
Carpoolio writes "TechTV is continuing its good coverage of the RIAA attack on file swappers, and now they've gone to Australia to interview Nikki Hemming, CEO of Sharman Networks (Kazaa). It's supposedly one of the only TV interviews she's ever done, and Hemming has some interesting things to say about Hilary Rosen and the RIAA, and the future of Kazaa, but without revealing too much. In TechTV's story (part of a three-part series), they've pitted the two against each other, using a recent interview they did with Rosen. Streaming video of the Rosen interview is included on the site."
Once again, the RIAA is going to make life hard for theirselves down the line as they continue to sue their own customer base. Not a good business pratice, never will be.
SecondPageMedia - Wha
Why is it you think this should be illegal to distribute? It would probably be safest to keep this material out of the hands of minors, but what gives you the right to tell someone else what they can and cannot see? In my opinion the government should spend less time monitoring and governing lifestyle issues (drugs, alcohol, porn, hookers, gambleing, etc.) and spend more time on issues like health care, education, and campaign finance reform.
Visualize the world of wine
Sorry, but where I come from, that's mere hypothesis... Rosen probably would agree, but she actually hasn't...
Also, KaZaA (or whatever silliness they do with their capital letters) is known to be one of the most prolific distributors of spyware on the internet, so do we support them, or the technophobic legalistic RIAA?
Oh well, each to their own. Use freenet! (They kennae catch you that way
I agree with you 100%. If anything, the government needs to step in and police people who think that its someone else's job to raise their kids, teach their kids values, teach their kids manners, and keep their kids from growing up to be thugs.
Personally, I think people with the mentality that we need more government to 'protect' us need to be sterilized - to ensure that they can't pollute the genepool with their complacant beliefs and attitudes.
Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
What the fuck does one of the only mean? It makes it sound like there were multiple interviews, but at the same time only one. Which one is it?
I love how TechTV is portraying Kazaa as the noble progressive, leading us all into the GLORIOUS FUTURE OF FILE-SHARING, while Rosen and Co. are stodgy, grumpy old dinosaurs seeking to deprive humanity of life-saving technology.
I know all of the "blah blah outdated business model blah blah" arguments, and even agree with some of them, but TechTV didn't lend itself much credibility (IMHO) with their one-sided opening remarks.
I am now grabbing my ankles, waiting for moderators to get ahold of this.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
MP3s are compressed, they aren't digital copies.
Second, Kazaa is a distribution network, not the material itself. It's not Kazaa's fault that certain people share files like that. Shutting down Kazaa won't fix that problem, just as removing roads isn't the fix for getting rid of smugglers.
Kazaa shut be shut down. There is some really nasty videos there that affect the mental health of young people.
Use search keywords 'faces of death' and you see what I mean. There are some videos where someone shoots a woman in head and that kind of shit that should be banned and illegal to distribute.
I suspect you are trolling, but I will bite...
The presence of those videos, like the copyrighted material, is the responsibility of the users of Kazaa not the makers of Kazaa. Also, if you are worried about the mental health of young people, maybe you should not let young people you care about use Kazaa, if you are conserned about other peoples children, tell them not to let their children use Kazaa. The fact is that the internet (and TV if you ask the right people) are full of material that someone will find objectionable, If you don't like the material, don't seek it out, nobody is forcing you to. Perhaps we should ban angry music and the movie Bambi because they can be damaging to the mental health of young people as well...ell...
"I'll have a Guinness, no wait, make that a Coors Light" -Grad student I work with, who shall remain anonymous...
Please tell me this - do you want YOUR children see a video where someone gets shot in the head?
No, I wouldn't want my kids to see this. But you know what? Technology isn't the enemy. Nor is it anyone's responsibility to police my kids, nor is it anyone else's responsibility to raise my kids. Its my responsibility to shield my sons from seeing objectionable programming, teach them values, respect and morals.
My two year old is more polite than the other children in our neighborhood. He says thank you, please, may I have (insert item here), etc. You know why? Because my wife and I take the time to teach him. He's not shacked up in some daycare with minimum wage trolls who don't interact with him - he's at home, with my wife and she's teaching him how to be a respectful child... At least until he enters the public education system with children raised by lazy parents like you.
If you feel that society as a whole should be responsible for raising your children, then I feel sorry not only for your kids but society as a whole.
Parents are a lot less involved with their kids now than they were when I was growing up. As a result, children are a lot less respectful of adults and others in general. Its your kind of parenting and beliefs that governemnt needs to do your childrearing for you that leads to the degradation of society.
Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
Why do they constantly tout the number of times kazaa has been downloaded (as they do in this article) when the number of connected users is what matters?
If it's been downloaded 240 million times, why the hell aren't there 240 million users on when I connect? Now, granted, due to times zones, jobs, and what-not everyone would not be on at once, but still, shouldn't there be more than ~3 million people connected at once?
Either one of these figures is wrong, or I'm missing something. Or perhaps this is a sign that a lot of people that download kazaa have trouble getting it to work...
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking
I'm not trolling, I'm dead serious. I can assure you that when you have some kids of your own you'll understand me.
Your options are
1) don't have children
2) don't let your kids use the computer
3) don't let them use kazaa
4) use kazaa's filter option
5) educate your kids about approriate and inappropriate material (e.g. faces of death in the videostore, jack ass on mtv, top-shelf magazines, and on the internet) and behavior (e.g. copyright infringement). Foster an open atmosphere so your kids tell you when they run across anything that bothers them, rather than sneak around behind your back, or lie awake at night worrying about what they saw and what your reaction to hearing about it might be.
Summary of your options;
1) don't parent
2) don't parent
3) don't parent
4) don't parent
5) parent like a responsible adult.
Would you suggest banning the catholic faith because some of their clergy abused children? Or is it perhaps better to make sure that if your child is uncomfortable with any interaction with the world out there which it can't deal with, they will ask your guidance and help?
No shit, parenting is hard. Practice on pets. They don't use kazaa. If you're not ready for the fact that kids grow up and get to see the world, whether you like it or not, then wear a rubber.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
Can't you turn down the volume?
I read the first half of the link you posted. I don't get it, but I'm no music aficionado. I just listen to the crap on the radio.
This is why I buy USED CDs.
No moral, ethical or legal complications. I get a good original copy of the CD. I pay nearly half the price, even for newer CDs. My local "TUNES" chain typically gets in DJ copies of the disks as well, thus, never sold originally anyway. The rest often look like they were never even opened, in most cases I suspect they were stolen by someone, then traded in to the store.
I also feel much more confident in supporting my local store since I know they probably make a much larger profit on used than they do new.
It's like deja vu.. all over again
Dontcha think it's about time to retire that joke?
I'm surprised that no one has set up a company to anonymize P2P... I know there are companies that anonymize web surfing in general, but it seems like someone could write an app that would anonymize all TCP/IP traffic going out from your computer.
IANAL, but I would imagine that it would be best if it was written by a company NOT involved in the P2P industry. That way, the company is simply offering generic anonymous internet and can't be slapped with charges like Napster of being designed solely for the intent of transferring copywrited material.
If the company is continuously shuffling IP addresses among its various members, and not keeping records that can be subpoenaed in court, then the RIAA is once again unable to attack individuals.
The only downside would be the huge volume of traffic going through the anonymizing site, making it a fairly expensive service that casual P2P users would probably never subscribe to.
I do actually pay for music on the internet, but I'm frustrated by the fragmentation of the content. For example, I pay $9.95 a month for Rhapsody, but there are huge holes in their content. The apple music store has some things Rhapsody does not have, but neither of them has everything I'm interested in. Meanwhile, I can walk over to my local record store and they have CDs from just about every label. What I don't understand is that record companies complain and whine about how the internet is killing their business, but then when someone like me is willing to pay, these same record companies don't provide everything over the internet. The most frustrating experience I have, is that I listen to an album for a few weeks on Rhapsody and then mysteriously it disappears. Even worse, is that individual songs on an album come and go. I email Rhapsody and they say the record company decided to not make it available anymore. What kind of crap is that? Why are radio stations able to play whatever CD they want, but a pay internet site has to go negotiate for every song on every CD? The problem is that the record companies don't want to change. They are just hoping the internet will go away and they can continue doing business the way they always have. It's very frustrating. The internet is a great way to download and sample music, but the companies who control it do not make it easy.
When every song on an album is worth listening to, I buy it, otherwise I use IRC to get the one good song. I don't feel bad about it, because instead of them ripping me off, I rip them off.
Then why the hell did the population of California vote him in?
Are you just waking up from a long nap? Davis _appeared_ better than the competition at the time. Now, the population is voting him out, before he can do any more damage, and peoples around the country are examining their own state's laws re recall processes, whlle their elected niblets are suddenly showing up to work early and staying late.
There has not been a more powerful Democratic statement made about the power of the people in this country since Nixon was ridden out on a rail.
That's beside the point though. So what if it's out of context? The RIAA have always changed their story when it suits them.
You check back over the quotes regarding P2P, and you'll see Rosen and her ilk blathering about "perfect" copies, and how little Johnny downloading this perfect digital reproduction will be the death of the industry.
Then with this, she acknowledges their inferior. Well, Ms. Rosen, if they're inferior, why are you so concerned? The kind of person who would be satisfed with an "inferior" copy of a song is hardly likely to rush out and buy the latest CD's are they.
I think the RIAA's claim about sales being down has less to do with the piracy, and more to do with the rise of more entertainment. I was a HUGE music fan. Spent a fortune on albums, spent most of my time listening to music. These days I rarely listen. I have the net to surf, video games, DVD etc...
What the RIAA don't seem to understand is people only have a finite amount of money and time to spend on leisure. With more and more products competing for your attention every day, perhaps the RIAA need to look at ways they can make their product more appealing, instead of "Here's your music, but you don't really own it".
Compare DVD to CD. DVD offers tons of features. Extras, commentary etc... CD, where you just get the music and that's that (and maybe a video) is about as attractive to buy as a movie only DVD.
"In the end, consumers and artists are brought together by this amazing technology, and they have a level of interactivity they've never had before," she said. "And the music industry is going to benefit, and the movie industry is gonna benefit, and emerging artists, and independent artists, and people who just want to share their views. They're all going to benefit. This technology is here to stay."
>>>
There you have it - the entire reason the RIAA is doing what it is doing - all summed up in one neat, tiny paragraph. Everyone will benefit from this...except the RIAA. This added level of interactivity will render the RIAA completely, utterly useless to all the record labels and put them out of business. plain and simple.
Fear Breeds Knowledge
Hilary says in the interview that less music is getting out there for new bands.
HELLO?
By word of mouth in a few chat rooms, a good song can be all over the world and even playing in discos within minutes [with broadband].
What RIAA has been doing for decades is filling LP's (Long Playing Records as opposed to singles) with CRAP.
Do you want an example?
How about Led Zeppelin's song "Stairway to Heaven". You had to buy the who f**ken album for one song. RIAA, the music industry and all the profiting leaches who live of the work of artists can go and get f**ked.
How many artists have the music industry ruined. Well look at Steve Wright and The Easybeats. They were headed to challenge to Beatles, but were ripped off every step of the way till Wright decided to wait out his contract, but never made a come back.
Make us pay for the HIGH QUALITY songs, public venues, discoes, broadcasting and concerts. But why worry about the low quality sh!t people swap online, unless you want them to pay for stuff they DON'T WANT.