Kazaa Sues Record Labels

dannyp writes "CNN is reporting that Kazaa is suing the record companies, claiming that they used an illegal client to log in to the P2P network - an interesting twist." The lawsuit also claims "...efforts to combat piracy on Kazaa violated terms for using the network."

Comments

Hmmmm..

[El Pollo Loco]

This is probably a futile move. But yet I can't stop grinning thinking about someone standing up to those people for once. DirecTV being sued as well.....I think perhaps people are tired of being pushed around. That and Kazza stands to lose money.

RIAA != Gov

[TwistedSquare]

I know that a lot of the general public confused the RIAA with the Government in recent lawsuits brought about by the RIAA and this is an interesting case where the RIAA are shown the difference... I imagine an investigating Government body could have ignored Kazaa's terms or got a "search warrant" equivalent.

But the RIAA have no such powers... Oh except the ones where they can buy really expensive lawyers and win the case anyway. Yeah, those are handy.

Re:Legality

[satyap]

Heck, no, individuals don't have enough money to have rights.

A Solution from the Dark Side

[Henry V .009]

I have always felt that a P2P network could protect itself by requiring in a license to use said network that no users will use the service to collect IP addresses. In that case they could go after the RIAA for either theft of network services or even DMCA abuse for using an illegal client.

This would not protect network users if law enforcement were to request valid subpoenas for the job, but it would stop non-law enforcement bodies like the RIAA from doing what they are doing now.

This is using our enemies methods against them, which makes it sweet.

Money?

[GuyMannDude]

Does KaZaA really have the financial resources to launch a successful legal attack on the RIAA? I mean, the media conglomerates are rolling in dough. I've never really understood KaZaA's business model and find it hard to believe that they stand a chance. Regardless of merit, the RIAA have got to have some killer lawyers.

Much as I'd like to see KaZaA fight back, I just don't see this being a fair fight. I suspect KaZaA will withdraw their legal challenge pretty soon.

GMD

Illegal client?

[Quobobo]

If using Kazaa Lite on their network is illegal, I'm sure anybody using mlDonkey/giFT to connect to Kazaa could be in trouble, hypothetically.

Self Service?

[tarquin_fim_bim]

The Recording Industry Association of America called Sharman's "newfound admiration for the importance of copyright law" ironic and "self-serving."

I must have missunderstood the purpose of copyright, if it isn't self-serving, what is it for?

KazaaLite License Agreement

[kUnGf00m45t3r]

If you actually read the KazaaLite license agreement, it specifically states that using the product is illegal (I would install just so I could get the exact wording but I'm at work and would rather not lose my job). I guess the RIAA neglected to read it before installing... Haha!

Slashdot dualmindedness again

[AEton]

I swear to God it's like 1984-esque Newspeak. Think one thing. OK, now think the other.

Kazaa sues Google because of Kazaa Lite! Kazaa evil!

Kazaa sues recording industry because they improperly accessed the network! Kazaa good!

Somebody please give me a chart or visual reference for when Kazaa is bad and when the RIAA is bad.

(Alternatively, it's fun to see two evil corporations duking it out, because either way a badguy's going to lose. But that's just my inner optimist.)

Re:Slashdot dualmindedness again

[Jherico]

Don't be obtuse. Good and Evil are not absolute attributes. A person or organization can have both qualities depending on what they're trying to do. Hitler creates paintings in Vienna in the 1930s. Good. Hitler tries to exterminate the jews in the 1940s. Evil.

Its very difficult to try to pin down a group and say 'Everything they do or have ever done is evil'. There's always going to be a counter argument because of something they did that was at least benign.

And the comparison you're trying to draw is to doublethink, NOT newspeak. Orwellian doublethink on the other hand is something entirely different. It is the act of holding two mutually exclusive ideas in your head at the same time, or to discard facts if they impede a required belief. Like believing that freedom and slavery are the same thing.

Newspeak is just a kind of communication, like 'Oldthinkers unbellyfeel ingsoc'.

Re:Imagine...

[MatthewB79]

I wasn't accessing AOL network for any reason other than to chat. The RIAA accesses KaZaA with intent to crapflood, spread a virus or 2, and spy on KaZaA users. There is a difference..

unfortunately ... yes.

[telstar]

The Verizon case found that the RIAA has the right to get the identities of users who they allege are violating copyright laws by sharing copyrighted music.

This finding is still being appealed by Verizon, and Congress is discussing whether this should be allowed to continue. Where the RIAA should get in trouble is with the recent subponea issued for the wrong person. They essentially deprived this person of their right to privacy by wrongfully requesting that the person's ISP reveal their identity. This was in clear violation of their rights ... and if the RIAA didn't have more lawyers than quality musicians, the person could do the country a world of good by suing the RIAA.

Re:Pyrrhic Victory

[El]

Problem is, they didn't click on the Kazaa EULA; they used a reverse-engineered version of Kazaa. Nevertheless, it appears the DMCA may apply here. Companies attempting to protect their copyrights should not be allowed to violate the copyrights of others.

Re:Suddenly

[SatanicPuppy]

Heh. I wish I was a lawyer AND an Engineer. You know the first person who's going to be able to both make a rational argument in court AND understand what the hell he's talking about is going to make a mint.

Live by the DMCA...

[Nom du Keyboard]

Live by the DMCA...

...Die by the DMCA.

And it's about time!

Re:You were wrong

[Experiment 626]

Warez sites with such a "license" don't exempt themselves from prosecution. It's just some idiotic ploy someone thought up long ago.

There's a big difference between government authorities prosecuting someone who is breaking the law, and a private organization violating one law to see if someone else is breaking another.

If I flagrantly violate the Windows EULA by decompiling, reverse engineering, benchmarking, and doing who-knows-what else to it, could I then absolve myself of this by telling them, "I just did it to see if you guys were up to anything illegal"?

This case is interesting because it pits one private organizations's pseudo-law-enforcement powers against another's ability to make up whatever terms of service they feel like. Whether the RIAA or EULAs get taken down a notch by this, the public stand to win.

Even if Kazaa loses, this could be good

[lannocc]

If Kazaa loses, wouldn't this set precedent that stupid Software License Agreements are not enforceable?

Great analogy!

[El]

Because in fact using somebody's network without permission is regarded as criminal tresspass! Kazaa should be filing supoena's to the RIAA to get the identities of the people who trespassed on their network (at the behest of the RIAA) so they can file criminal charges against them... and by the way, doesn't hiring somebody to break the law constitute racketeering? Does RICO apply here?