Slashdot Mirror
Aussie Music Industry Sues ISP Over Filesharing
An anonymous reader writes "In what is believed to be the first case of its kind in the world, the Australian music industry has listed an Internet service provider (ISP) as a respondent in a court case involving music piracy. The ISP is being sued for 'profiting' (by hosting it) from a site which distributes copyright-infringing material."
With all the publicity pumped up by the RIAA and the MPAA, is it any surprise that media companies around the world would start to do the same?
Still, I'm not sure I agree that the ISP is "profiting" from the hosting of copyrighted material on one of its user's homepages. It may be allowing it, but there's no commercial gain whatsoever.
The primary reason why CD sales has dropped is not about cost. I'm sure even teenagers would be prepared to spring the $1 or two to buy the few songs that they really like.
It comes down to convenience. They want instant gratification, and P2P file sharing lets them have it.
Online music services will change this in the near future, though.
"Smoking helps you lose weight - one lung at a time" -- A. E. Neumann
I'm sueing my city for building a road that allowed the thief who stole my car to get away.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I have read many comments on /. about copyright, pro and contra, but I think RMS hit the nail on its head with his Reevaluating Copyright:
The copyright system developed along with the printing press. In the age of the printing press, it was unfeasible for an ordinary reader to copy a book. Copying a book required a printing press, and ordinary readers did not have one. What's more, copying in this way was absurdly expensive unless many copies were made--which means, in effect, that only a publisher could copy a book economically.
So when the public traded to publishers the freedom to copy books, they were selling something which they *could not use*. Trading something you cannot use for something useful and helpful is always good deal. Therefore, copyright was uncontroversial in the age of the printing press, precisely because it did not restrict anything the reading public might commonly do.
But the age of the printing press is gradually ending. The xerox machine and the audio and video tape began the change; digital information technology brings it to fruition. These advances make it possible for ordinary people, not just publishers with specialized equipment, to copy. And they do!
I think the musicians have to perform live as they had to do a hundred years ago and as many musicians have to do now (except the so called stars). The era to become rich by selling millions of CDs without any real work is over.
Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
Auto manufacturers profit when their cars are bought by drug dealers for the purpose of smuggling drugs. Handgun makers profit when someone buys their gun and uses it in a murder. Gardening stores profit when a customer buys large quantities of fertilizer, makes a bomb, and blows up large federal buildings in Oklahoma City.
Should the auto manufacturer, handgun maker, and gardening store be legally liable for the crimes of their customers? Should they even be responsible for following their customers around to make sure they do nothing illegal?
I once bought a pirated CD in a pub, can the landlord be sued?
Actually, thinking further... if I didn't work then I couldn't afford to buy the pirate CD so surely my employer is ultimately responsible, after all they gave me the money to commit this foul act... I'm going to sue my employer for making me a criminal!!!
Or, should I quit my job, become unemployed, claim state benefits, buy a pirate CD and then sue the government?!?!?
When will people learn, the internet is neither inherently good nor evil... it's just a new medium... if kids weren't inside on their PC's pirating CD's they'd be out in the playground trading CDR's stuffed full of music... you gonna sue the school at that point?
I want ARIA to try and sue Telstra/BigPond for profiting from supply of the underlying capacity, and knowingly allowing their users to file swap.
Who would win? (Googlefight predicts aria, but maybe becuase fo their big award ceremony last night)
PS: Telstra has been close to "busted" before for tapping phones of customers who complained about them. So don't think they are a bunch of wimps who woould not fight.
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant