Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Sues the Wrong Person
Cildar writes "In the 'oops' category, the RIAA was forced to withdraw its suit against a 66 year old computer neophyte (read Apple User for god's sake) when they discovered she thought 'Kazaa' was a magician playing at local kids' birthday parties. The story is as reported in the Boston Globe." Update: 09/24 15:19 GMT by T : Note, the magician crack is a joke ;)
Serves them right, those RIAA bastards. They weren't counting on our secret weapon - the clueless user!
I think that's the excuse I will use, too.
-
"Vengeance is fine," sayeth the Lord.
I bet the RIAA will be back with a vengeance once they "discover" that granny had a haxx0red version of Kazaa able to run on the Macintosh. After all, you can use a mac emulator.. are you free to go then?
Hm.. maybe that would be a good use for VMware or similar... "I dont even have Kazaa installed on my computer".. And your VMWare installation is ofcourse - gone...
// instant - "I for one welcome our new Decaff Coffee-Flavoured-Coffee Overlords"
check out cnn article on this http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/biztech/09/24/kazaa.s ues.ap/index.html
Abolishing copyright would make various open source licenses unenforcable..
Trolling is a art,
> (read Apple User for god's sake)
Although a great many Apple users are not neophytes, the fact that a neophyte can run an Apple is a testament to their ease of use.
So there.
Anyone know how much this magician charges for childrens parties...?
And does anyone know where I can download David Blaine, the popular P2P filesharing program?
I have no sig yet I must scream.
This whole thing is turning out to be like a war. The RIAA war machine goes and attacks indiscriminately. It gets bad guys and the good guys. Wonder if they'll also spin it as - It's ok if we get some good guys. Since they're good, God will take them to a better place.
While I agree that copyright and other forms of IP law need some serious revision/balancing, I think the the total abolishment of copyright may be going about 10 steps too far, at least at this point. Such a step would require some major economic modification, and I know that the U.S. at least isn't ready for such a change (I don't live anywhere else, so I can't say anything even mildly authoritative about elsewhere). Abolish anti-murder laws, reduce lifetime-incarceration of innocents! (Yeah, I know, worthless analogy, but hey, I just got to work).
That's super funny; only one problem. It doesn't seem to mention the magician thing anywhere in the linked article.
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
If the US wasn't $$$ orientated towards its policies, the US government would have cracked down on the RIAA itself.
The RIAA is a lose cannon at the moment, it thinks it can do what it pleases, without any consequences for itself.
What takes the piss more, now that RIAA is cracking down on all these things, and with copy protected CDs - the RIAA still expects levies on CDRs etc to compensate for lost revenue. RIAA must be laughing - free money.
The judge did dismiss the suit against the Mac user, but would not dismiss it with prejudice (which would have prevented further litigation against her).
The attorneys for the RIAA still plan to investigate her: "Please note, however, that we will continue our review of the issues you raised and we reserve the right to refile the complaint against Mrs. Ward if and when circumstances warrant"
A user with a Mac, who can't even use Kazaa, and who has never shared music. Now that's obstinance for you.
William
When you're not looking, this sig is in Latin.
This is gonna become more and more frequent as the lawsuits pile up. Without having to get real warrents and go thru a real legal process, these harrassment tactacts will continue costing normal people lots of time, money and agravation.
At this point it should be made very easy for this woman to sue the RIAA, but without the resources of a large corp. it is just going to seem like an impossiable task for her. Thus the lawsuits from the RIAA will just continue with the harassment and scare tactics.
"The word "genius" isn't applicable in football. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein," - Joe Theisman
obviously Kazaa waved his(?) wand and disapeared...
"Oops sorry, the DHCP must have reassigned that address,we THOUGHT it was the one you wanted...Sorry."
This would let their customers still enjoy what they initially signed up for (filesharing, you've seen the adds, etc.)
..........FULL STOP.
Doesn't this put a big fat hole in their main source of information? How many of these need to happen before practices are questioned, and lawsuits start getting dropped? Maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel for these people...
I honestly feel bad for people who have already given in, but I can't say I really blame them with the "go for the jugular" tactics the RIAA is using.
That we know of...
Everybody dies frustrated and sad and that is beautiful
I'm so glad to be Canadian now, more than ever. I can't imagine a company anywhere else in the world with so much power that they can force an ISP to divulge personal information about their users just because they said so. I mean. Now they've got the address and name of a user that didn't do anything wrong. Can Mrs. Ward sue someone?! Invasion of privacy?! No? I'm probably the furthest possible thing from a lawyer so I wouldn't know, but if that happened to me, I'd be a little more then ticked.
AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
Please note, however, that we will continue our review of the issues you raised and we reserve the right to refile the complaint against Mrs. Ward if and when circumstances warrant," Colin J. Zick, the Foley Hoag lawyer, wrote
What an asswipe.
So there's your defense, p2p users! Get a used G3 or G4 on eBay, run VPC with Win98, and use p2p all you want.
~Philly
First the 12 year old and now this. I wonder what the third strike will be? Perhaps someone inside the RIAA? That'll be a PR disater.
Oh copyright laws is one thing, being able to dodge the law and jump headfirst into a subpoena without the old checks & balances is something else entirely.
Imagine if it were taken one step further, and like the "Microsoft Tax" where a machine sold without an OS still gives MS $$ for the license on the presumption a pirated Windows will be installed on it, imagine if the RIAA were free to just bill people for the songs they'd "alleged" they'd traded
get a wrong IP, pick this 66 year old user, and they suddenly have a bill for the 2,000 songs they've shared out.
So they don't pay as it's nothing to do with them, and *bang* their credit rating is down the tubes.
THAT isn't far off
I think everyone who gets subpoenaed should say "Kazaa? You mean that Shaq movie? Man, that one stunk worse than Steel."
The RIAA will think anyone who saw the Shaq movies is too crazy to sue.
www.google.com
slashdot is like the movie rental shop where I went.
First I went there and rent a lot of "good" movies. After 3 or 4 weeks, I just stopped, because there was nothing new around. I went there 2 months later and the same moveis were around just with 2 or 3 additions.
Slashdot latelly has become:
1 - oh god, another MS vulnerabilty.
2 - SCO Stories
3 - RIAA did this, RIAA did that.
Isn't this supposed to be NEWs for the nerds ? not OLDs for the nerds...
because this wonderfull piece of information can be resumed to:
Someone accused someguy of doing something and latter they found out they were wrong. Is that topnotch story to you ?
ok... you can continue to read the "in Soviet Union RIAA owns you" (always modded funny) and "this seems like the SCO case" comments..
This is the reasoning behind checks and balances, due process and other protections provided under the Constitution.
Pre-US European governments used to be notorious for going after people without a leg to stand on. But it didn't matter. All that mattered was the witch-hunt-like frenzy. That was enough to get them hung or at least imprisoned.
That's when my good pals Hancock, Franklin, Washington, and Jefferson, along with a few other buds, got together and came up with this whole fair trial system. And that was pretty cool up until a few years ago when people really started using the internet.
Thats when, well everybody in congress, who's names are too many to mention, (and not worth mentioning considering what they did) overturned two centuries worth of a tried and true system.
And where does it get you? Sueing grandmas.
I guess those old guys really had some stuff figured out. Their system isn't really silly or outdated like some people might think.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
Good answer. Someone is abusing something, so let's just scrap the whole idea altogether. Let's see how this idea applies to other things: Someone is using a computer to steal money from a bank. Abolish computers, and this won't happen ever again.
Someone is using a car to getaway from a bank robbery. Abolish cars, and this won't happen ever again.
Someone died trying to get high by sniffing carpet cleaner. Abolish carpet cleaner, and this won't happen ever again.
Twit. Just because you never had a creative idea in your life, does not mean copyright does not serve a purpose.
It hurts when I pee.
In 3 years, Microsoft's business model will switch exclusively to the SCO business model.
Since they won't be able to sell their product because it takes them too long to develop them and the quality is barely acceptable in most cases, they'll just start sueing any company that did any work based on MS technologies (Novell/Ximian), any company that cloned the looks of windows (Lindows/Lycoris/Xandros), but also any user who ever used any pirated copy of any MS software (about 80% of the planet).
As you can see, we shouldn't be too worried about the future of Microsoft as a business entity.
Use a Mac and run Kazaa in VirtualPC. When you get served. Remove VirtualPC and say: "It can't be me...Kazaa doesn't run on my Mac!"
Note that Orrin Hatch wanted to give these people rights to blow up people's computers. And how do you think the RIAA got her name from an IP in the first place? My guess is through a DMCA subpoena. This is Not Nice(TM).
So yeah, we screwed the pooch - but we might be back anyway!
On the one hand, I think that the RIAA has a legitimate issue with P2P services sharing their music.
Does that mean that I support the lawsuits? No - I think it's a civil end run around legitimate search and seizure. If I was the RIAA would I be using the lawsuits? No.
Personally, I'd take all the millions in lawyer fees and do something useful, like promote the iTunes Music Store, or pressure Sony and Buymusic.com to not suck more ass than a freshman prison inmate. I'd set up legitimate music downloading services based on Janis Ian's model, where all songs warehoused could be purchased for $1, or an album for $10. I'd set up 128 bit MP3's for $1, have 192 bit for maybe $1.25 - $1.50. Of that, 50% of the profit would go to the artist, 50% to the publisher. Note the word "profit" - it is assumed that the publishers would be taking a fair (bwahahaha - oh, sorry, I almost said that with a straight face) cut based on how much it costs a song to be stored in a central server and bandwidth costs (and that price should not go above $0.50 per song).
It should also be set up like Peanutpress.com, where once you buy a song, you can go back and download it again whenever you want, or can have it streamed wherever you are. (Since songs are much larger than eBooks usually, though, I can see some sort of minor "storage fee", like $0.01 per song per month - it should be your responsibility to back up your own stuff.)
And a quick note for the "$1 per song is too much", I'm sorry if you take this personally, but fuck you. $1 is perfectly legit for a song, $10 for a music album. If you're too damn cheap to pay any price at all for music, at least have the decency not to claim that the cost is too much. Just come out and say "I can't afford $1 after buying my $300 iPod!"
Then, and only then, if people were "sharing songs", then you could sue them, and I would feel you had done your due diligence in serving your customers and could have a solid leg to stand on for the lawsuits.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
The Great Kazaa is a master magician -- he made the reference in the story disappear. His IPA is usually 127.0.0.1, tricky eh?
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
If 12 year olds and people who don't even have file sharing software installed are being targeted, then the "wosrt offenders" list must be pretty big. :)
Images of grannie putting on her bling bling and listening to gangsta rap are dancing in my head. Thanks for the laugh RIAA! Could we nominate them for the Darwin awards for shooting themselves in the foot...repeatedly?
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
However, for some of us, the whole purpose of open source licenses is as a weapon against copyright. RMS talks about the rationalization that it was okay to use copyright, which he did not agree with, as a means to fight against copyright. Hence, copyleft.
It's interesting reading, even if you don't agree.
Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
Oh, but they would be contributing back; without copyright, you can reverse engineer Wndows to you heart's delight, peop;e who work for MS could release code, etc.
Maybe this little old lady had an open wireless network.
She pays her h4x0r neighbor kid to install her new Airport Extreme network, the kid opens it up and with the money she gives him he buys a cheap wireless card.
Bingo Bango! All the free music he wants.
ender-iii
I've been thinking about these RIAA suits, and have realized that not only are morally reprehensible misplacements of blame, but they are legally unjustifiable when looked the suits are looked at as a whole.
The suits claim damages of $150,000 per song. If one music company stole a song from another company, and published it separately, this may be a reasonable claim. The RIAA could claim maybe $150,000 TOTAL lost sales, plus whatever was made by the infringing company.
The problem is, they are holding EVERY FILESHARER liable for the entire amount of lost sales. This isn't just double-dipping on their damages, this is n-dipping. I can imagine that the company might lose $150,000 in total sales of a single song, but if only 1000 people shared the song (an extremely conservative number, probably only relevant for unpopular songs), their claims in total are $150 million in lost sales per song, which is just ludicrous.
This absolutely reeks of the record companies trying to capitalize on filesharing and count each share as a purchase. If the judges awarded the RIAA what they are asking for across the board, they stand to make orders of magnitude more money than they could ever dream of by their own devices. This puts huge questions on their claims of mitigating their damages - they allowed filesharing to go on for many years before starting lawsuits... to build up their claims of lost sales??
-3Suns
~~~~
The Revolution will be Slashdotted
"If any of those [IP address] numbers are wrong or transposed, you're going to get the wrong person,"
In that case, I hope they mess up the next IP address and get 127.0.0.1. That would make for an interesting day.
To be exact, contracts would still be in force. So someone who signed to keep the code secret could still be sued.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
dismiss with prejudice means the issue is dropped or settled and can never be reopened. It's usually in the defendants best interests to have this.
dismiss without prejudice means they can come back and reopen the suit at any time assuming they have evidence or reason to.
The RIAA basically left an avenue open in case this 66 year old woman is actually violating copyright on her Apple with Kazaa. lol
Since when has it been different ;)
We _have_ diversified though. It used to be only MS that we'd bitch about constantly.
Reverse engineering is not the same as opening source! The good idea behind the GPL is that it forces those who adapt the source to release their modifications. Can you imagine a world in which the only way to access source was through reverse compiling? Eccch.
peop;e who work for MS could release code
Abolishing copyright does not also abolish contract law, so NDAs would still be valid. And if the code covered trade secrets, it would be unusable.
To all those who say that GPL does not depend on copyright law, I say: why is GPL far more popular than the more permissive BSD license? I have never heard an effective response to this question.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Elitist bastard. I don't like Ms. Spears (and her "ilk"), but a lot of people do. To you they are tasteless morons, but they like what they like. Who the hell are you to tell them they can't?
Stupid sexy Flanders.
"I believe in God, and the only thing that scares me is Kazaa Soze"
The /. whats? We have editors now? When did that happen?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Nice write-up, I like how you managed to make up the bit about the children's magician, slip a nice anti-Mac troll in the middle there, and still make the front page. That takes skill. Now if only you could have shoe-horned the phrase "M$" in there somewhere.
As for this being yet another PR disaster; the RIAA knows almost everything they do these days is going to be a PR disaster. They simply do not care:
Clearly, record companies and the RIAA had some concerns about backlash before going into this. Certainly the story about the 12-year-old in public housing who was sued hit the headlines fast and hard. Are you at all concerned about public relations backlash?
We knew that this was not going to be a good PR experience from the get-go. But the (record) companies were of the view that this was something we had to do without regard to the PR implications. If PR were the dominant consideration, we would not have taken these actions, and the problem would be continuing unabated, and people would not be thinking twice about the legality of what they're doing. If bad PR is the price, it's a relatively small one compared to the size of the problem.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has counseled about 30 of the 261 people sued, Cohn said, adding that some have settled for fear of spending too much money fighting powerful corporations.
Isn't that the crutch of the matter? It really doesn't matter if what they are doing is right or wrong, as long as they have the money to take it to court and the people they are sueing do not, this will always be the case. What would really be nice would be for some noble rich person to start a trust fund for RIAA 'victems' to help pay for their legal battle if they so wish to fight this in the courts.
Otherwise this will just continue. Let's face it, as fair or unfair as the RIAA may be, most people aren't going to stop buying cds because of this; IMO, most people will just say 'oh that's too bad' like they did with the 12-year old girl and then go out and do what they normally do, if that includes buying a cd than so be it.
The only way to stop such practices is to
a) Educate the masses
or
b) Fight this in court
Both take money unfortunately...
Sounds like both SCO and the RIAA have the same lawyers.
This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
I think the RIAA should be forced to prove that someone *does not have a license* to digital music. I no longer have my "Frampton Comes Alive" album that I bought in the 7th grade, but I paid for it at one time. After all, I bought a license to the music, not an "album" or "cd"..that was only the delivery medium, right? So, if I scratch my new CD, I should be able to mail it to the record company and get a new one at the cost of manufacturing that replacement CD? Obviously, none of this is true in the real world and isn't likely to happen anyway. In fact, I don't want the RIAA (or anyone else) keeping track of my music purchases anyway. So why don't we get off of the concept of "licensing" a single work and just have someone (RIAA or whomever) charge us $20 a year that includes a license to all music produced. $20 a year from everyone is a nice revenue stream and would keep artists compensated fairly..the artists would make their extra millions on tours/t-shirts/endorsements anyway.
It seems to me that if someone could demonstrate how to use a common P2P client like Bearshare or and make it look like someone else was using it, it would throw out RIAA's entire case. If I could share my files through my computer, but make it look like it was you doing it, your defense would be "I was hijacked", but I don't know by who. If you could claim that you were hijacked, suddenly everyone else could claim that too. Presto! No case against anyone! They could no longer prove that an IP address is really associated with a particular Verizon (Comcast, Road Runner, etc.) customer. Reasonable doubt could prevail.
Does earthstation 5 and the new kazaa lite protect your identity very well ?
I'll see your alternative OS wager and raise you my giFT FastTrack plugin....
:-)
The sum of $150,000 per song is based on the statutory damages allowed for willful infringement in copyright law.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
If they are tracking people by their IPs. What about DSL and leased IPs? What if your lease goes to someone else and they go after that person? Am I looking at that wrong or do they find a way around that? Like a date and time or something... I dunno it all seems so dumb to me.
Der Tod ist der einzige Weg hier raus!
As the article makes plainly visible, your primary defense in a lawsuit with the RIAA/MPAA should be "prove that was me". The RIAA may have an IP address and know that address is reserved by an ISP, but connecting the time stamps, accesses, and logs may well be impossible. The human error component is very large - numbers maybe transposed, time stamps may be incorrect, etc. just make the process filled with potential for error. Considering the amount of money the RIAA is requesting ($150,000 per song), any amount of potential error is intolerable.
Ummmm... what are you talking about? He quite clearly attacked your idea through a series of broadened applications. Simply because YOU focused on him saying "twit" is another indication of your short-sightedness. You did not comprehend the post for its whole meaning, as your "abolish it" argument does not comprehend the ramifications when it is applied to all other situations.
It's interesting how you decided to quail about being attacked personally (I assume to try and discredit the argument), but you did not offer anything to bolster your original statement, or counter the argument presented. How is that any different from you performing the same type of personal attack? And if you feel he should be discredited for such action, shouldn't you be as well?
Claims of personal attacks aside, you still have not offered anything. Exactly which side is "indefensible" again?
...Let the next mistaken target be a Senator's son/daughter.
magician crack?
Where do I get that? Never heard of it... =P
All my Mac-loving friends say running KazaA is the #1 reason to buy VirtualPC! I like the VMWare idea too, you could even keep your warez within the VM Disk, so at the touch of a button you no longer run KazaA or have any MP3s, ka-ching!
#include <sig.h>
Since RIAA reserved the right to file suit against her again, what happens if they do (or if others use the "I own a Mac, I couldn't possibly be using Kazaa" defense)? If she truly owns a Mac, then she couldn't possibly have installed Kazaa. If I don't own a Mac but claim I do, is the burden of proof on me to prove I own a Mac, or on RIAA to prove I don't?
If the burden of proof is on the RIAA, then what can they do without a true warrant to search my home? That would go well beyond the powers granted to them by the DMCA and would require law enforcement intervention. There's no way to say "we know you don't own a Mac" without coming into my home to prove it.
If the burden of proof is on me, couldn't I just borrow a Mac or a receipt of a friend's Mac (assuming I was lying) to prove I do, in fact, own a Mac? Since RIAA can't come storming into your house (yet...), this seems like it would be more than satisfactory to meet a civil suit requirement for dismissal doesn't it...?
I hope this is a viable idea, and everyone uses it to stick it to the RIAA.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
"Please note, however, that we will continue our review of the issues you raised and we reserve the right to refile the complaint against Mrs. Ward if and when circumstances warrant," Colin J. Zick, the Foley Hoag lawyer, wrote to Beeler.
Huh? This is equivalent to saying "Sorry I pushed you down the stairs, but I reserve the right to do it again!"
This is complete and utter lack of respect to Beeler, but tells you alot of what it thinks of its own customers!
Funny you should mention that. You bet your ass that the RIAA has every sharing program there is IN THE WORLD, in order to do "research". I wonder what band the service techies use for their test searches. Metallica, anyone?
The Mini Repository - more links
If she's got no kids living with her I'll bet she's got some form of broadband and an unsecure wireless router. Someone has been accessing it to share files, knowing they couldn't be tracked. If I had broadband and I lived in an apartment building and I was dumb enough not to secure my wireless router, that'd be my defense.
Happy goldfish bowl to you.
If there were no copyright, the whole business model of limiting each copy is gone. One reason source is closed is because revealing it would negate any copy protection. I have no problem with the GPL because it uses copyright to introduce the mindset that information should be shared. Once copyright is abolished, it's no longer needed and has done its job.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
... the recording industry requested information about the wrong IP address, which is usually more than nine digits.
Foley Hoag: Law Firm
Colin Zick: Lawyer at Foley Hoag
Rosen: Presumably another Lawyer at Foley Hoag
Schwartz-Nystrom: Another firm, presumably pure scum.
It was in English.
"When it rains, it pours." --Morton's Salt
a kid with a laptop was sighted nearby and appeared to be eating pringles.
his IP address was 192.168.1.101 so it couldn't have been him right?
Maybe the RIAA will go after THAT IP next....
Why change out your hard drive? Just make sure each sector is zeroed out in its entirety so that the empty space in allocation units is wiped, then reinstall.
;-)
Would look too much like a cover-up with old drive/new install. Easier to claim the HD fried so you replaced the dinky drive with a bigger new drive. The old drive is in the landfill. For charges of the cost of my house per song, ditching the old drive and all wireless gear is very cheap insurance.
Time for full disclosure.. I'm still on dial-up and don't own any wireless gear. DSL is still not avaliable and the cable tax for not having a TV subscription makes the cable too expensive. Slashdot without extensive graphics works fine on dial-up. Not running Kazza or other sharing program except e-mail which can send attachments. I run a LAN but it's all hardwire. I put it in before wireless. It's Cat5. The coax was replaced.
The truth shall set you free!
So now this woman has to pay her lawyers to defend herself, right? She was wrongly accused, in fact did absolutely nothing wrong, yet she is still forced to pay fees? And countersuing for legal costs is such a pain that it's not even worth it. If she did win against the deep-pocketed RIAA lawyers, it would still be a headache and tons of time.
That sucks.
"I either want less corruption, or more chance
to participate in it." -- Ashleigh Brilliant
The could currently do this with the BSD license but haven't (yet :))..
Yes they have.
The TCP/IP stack for Windows 9x, and I believe Windows NT also, came from BSD. They certainly don't like to admit it, but there are certain fingerprinting techniques that show that it is true.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
If she really is a computer neophyte, do you truly believe she has a Wi-Fi setup? I'm not very Mac aware; do they come with Wi-Fi out of the box or something, waiting to be sniffed? I doubt it.
$#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
Score: -1, Misinformed.
The GPL is not an anti-copyright. You do not have to share anything in order to use GPL software. If you got rid of copyright laws, the GPL would lack any force as it depends on copyright law in order to obligate "downstream" distributors of binary package to make the source code available. Three strikes. You're out.
In fact, while some of us might oppose copyright laws, the fact that they exist and give force to licenses like the GPL is a great boon to Free Software. Without them, anyone could simply compile the code from a Free Software package and sell it as a binary only package. It is not likely, in a free market unburdened by copyright, that this would be a very profitable strategy, because any one of us would then be free to give away copies of those binaries. But even so, at the end of the day, obtaining actual source code would be more problematic than it is now. It is quite possible that programmers would be more inclined to keep their source code secret because it would be the source code that would be of incredible value, not the binaries themselves.
I have come full circle on this issue myself. It seems to me that the best copyright/patent rules are those favored by the Founders. Short terms with plenty of requirements on the part of the copyright seeker to obtain and maintain. This allows inventors, writers, musicians, artists, programmers and others a short time to monopolize their work, but makes it more likely that they will only be able to do so during the key initial period after the idea is first implemented or the work published.
I do not have a signature
... let this woman sue the living shit outta RIAA. Amen.
The lawsuite will be quitely withdrawn and none of us will ever hear about it
karma : former act as leading to inevitable results
Or the article for that matter?
Heck, here is a perfect way for all the ISP's to make this RIAA lawsuit crap go away : when they come asking 'Who has IP address 192.168.2.105 so we can sue them ?!?' just give them bogus replies, pick a customer at random (even better, give them a customer at random that moves less than 100M a month, pretty much insuring it ISN'T a P2P trader.) It will only take about 5 of these in a row before the common public totally freaks out over this witch hunt and says ENOUGH!
Can I copywrite or patent that idea?
Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
Interesting story at CNN (rejected by Little Timmy): Kazaa just sued RAII for copyright infringment... CNN,
Copyright should be abolished because it is unnatural. It would also happen to prevent this particular from suit from ever happening.
-Libertarian secular transhumanist
Malicious Prosecution.
They will apologize only when the court orders them to apologize. Anyone in these same circumstances should countersue, or in this case file a new complaint. Causes of action would be chiefly malicious prosecution, but also illegal business practices, wiretap violations, infringement of privacy, etc.
After all, they have no reason to have her personal information on file. If they choose not to do the right thing then they should themselves be compelled in the courts to do the right thing.
It's not fun to be sued needlessly (exactly this case) for little reason except a large publicity campaign (exactly this case) and to rack up needless legal bills (exactly this case). At least, they should pay her fucking legal bills.
mlnet, poisoned, and iSwipe are all very functional Mac OS X Kazaa clients.
What is more disturbing is that the RIAA stated that IPs are unique identifies. Apparently they never heard of dial-up. In fact even Comcast states that your IP address is not unique (so does Qwest and MSN DSL server). So their argument that somebody screwed up on Comcast part is wrong. It's that their whole way of doing this is completly flawed to begin with.
If they are going on that fact why not have everybody spoof the RIAA IPs and have them suing themselves. Note: I am not recommending doing this just making a point.
So, who's reimbursing this victim of Sony Music, BMG, Virgin, Interscope, Atlantic, Warner Brothers, and Arista's (let's call them by name, not allow them to hide behind the "RIAA" shield) misguided attack the $1000 or so it took to hire a lawyer to file a response?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
First question:
What if you are walking down to the local coffee shop and you hop on their "legally free and open" hotspot. You then proceed to share and dload tons of copy righted music. When the IP is traced it will go to that coffee shop, not to you. How do they find you? I assume they can't, unless your there and they are lookign for you at that time and see Kazaa open on your screen for some reason.
Question 2
What if you have a AP at your house that you leave open for your neighbors and friends to use and one of them is sharing files? The IP gets traced to you right, so are you responsible for their actions if you had no knowledge that they would or were doing that?
Inquireing minds want to know
Ave Molech Setting
uhh guys, there are kazza clients for mac, sigh
:P
macs can do anything my POS xpmachine can do
multi-net
http://www.multinetx.com/MnX/
mlmac
http://www.abyssoft.com/software/mlmac/
among other programs i know exist, (my father uses some obscure one)
still someone useing wi-fi could have been leaching, My sister uses someone elses wi-fi node in her DC apartment, and even if they did run WEP, i would teach her how to break it in a couple hours so there is nothing they can do there.
(i have agreements with neighbors to leach my bandwidth, so i can claim ISP safe harbor clause if i agree to remove material under the DMCA)
could have been ip hijacking, could have been a open proxie a l33t haxor d00d setup
who knows
anyone interested in a W.A.S.T.E cluster at baylor university, msg me/post in my journel, icq, mail, msn or whatever me!
come comment on the madness at http://slashdot.org/~phreak03/journal/