Slashdot Mirror
Kazaa Offices Raided
rj writes "ZDNet Australia is reporting the Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI) this morning raided the offices of Kazaa owners, Sharman Networks, along with P2P company Brilliant Digital Entertainment, and the homes of key executives. Background on prosecution of copyright music in Australia over P2P is also available."
How is Kazaa to blame for the transfer of pirated media across its networks? Should we shutdown the alleys because people sell drugs there? Ridiculous. I hope the MIPI gets screwed in the courts for this one.
Ok, this sounds a lot more like a police state than anything the Patriot Act allows (at least in the letter of the law and not its interpretation). Raiding homes in addition to business sites? For what, IP infringement?
.au slashdotters get off saying that the US is a police state. What bollix and hypocricy.
What kind of freedoms do these goons get, anyway, when they raid? Do they take everything, bash down doors, and the like, as the article implies (and as would likely occur under the Patriot Act)?
If this kind of thing is valid, I don't see where so many
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
The words "deckchairs", "rearranging" and "Titanic" spring to mind. Kazaa may be today's Napster, but unless I'm very much mistaken, P2P is just as popular as in the Napster days. The **AA can shut it down and it won't make the slightest bit of difference. I'm sure the big sharers were making plans to move to a different P2P network anyway, what with the lawsuits flying round.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
1) Message Sending. They want to scare file traders into thinking that nobody is beyond the long reach of music executi^H^H^H^H the law. Thus stopping supposed music swapping.
.02
2) They want to see if KAZAA/Sharman are keeping track of who the heavy users are. Thus KAZAA would know about illegal file trading, and be partly liable for copyright infringement.
3) KAZAA/Sharman networks profit by looking the other way. However, if they are actively working to enhance "reliable sources" for file trading, that would look pretty bad.
4) Any inter-office memos/emails relating to the above.
It will be interesting to see exactly how private user's data really is. You would think that Sharman would (or should have) anticipated such a move by the recording industry.
just my
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
Don't you just love this "guilty until proven innocent" bullshit?
Not only is the notion morally bankrupt, but it can bankrupt the innocent people while trying to prove innocense.
But here's a question: I have read somewhere that in europe they have consequences for being wrong in filing a lawsuit. In other words, if you sue someone and it turns out you're wrong, you may have to pay the defendant damages in addition to paying their legal costs. I forget what this is called but it's one hell of a nice deterant to frivolous lawsuits. Does Australia have such law?
Of all the subtle and not-so-subtle evils of the Patriot act, it is, at least to my knowledge, employed soley by the government/gov agencies.
This situation in Australia seems not too dissimilar to SCO busting into Linus' house with presumeably armed gov. officials and confiscating everything.
It's corporate terrorism.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and propose the following;
RIAA/MIPI/"Recording Industry" has been conducting police raids in the United States out on the streets, handing out false tickets on false pretenses, etc... This began occuring over a month ago. Since then, they have lost key decisions in the courts, both in US and Europe, and things are looking bad for them. Now, they are beginning to conduct actual raids on property under obscure laws outside of the United States - obviously an intimidation tatic for those of us in the United States.
Now... why is this good you ask?
Because the day will come when an RIAA representative will knock at my university door and demand to see recipets for all my jazz mp3's (legally and educationaly obtained) I have laying around my harddrives. When this happens, hello Supreme Court.
This series of events is giving us a very clear picture: The RIAA is a dying animal who is now lashing out in any means necessary. Non governmental agencies playing cops - be it here or austrilla - is a fundemental violation of human liberty - which is a value upheld by the UN and the World Court (which Austrilla is a member of). Not that this really matters since no one is going to do anything about it, at least right now.
Later on, we are going to see events like these help us in a completely different court though - the court of public opinion. Isn't it easy to see a Dateline episode being made of this event? Isn't it easy to connect the dots and see that the RIAA and their chums are just doing this so the average American thinks that their home could be raided by Will Smith and his men in black protecting his copyright? Isn't it easy to see that the Average American would go apeshit if the RIAA actually tried to enter their house, and they later found out it was completely against the law?
Let's return to the orignal question. Why is this good?
Because the RIAA and every incarnation of it is pushing the very lines of human rights and freedoms that have been affirmed around the globe since the end of World War II.
I have never seen America stand down in the face of a constitutional violation, never. Hell, even some of my republican friends acknowledge Roe v. Wade. Let the RIAA come and try to impose this scare tatic here in the USA. I fore one can't wait for this good thing to happen. Two days after they try to enter a house in the US (legally or illegaly) Scallia and Rehinquist will join forces and strike the RIAA back to the seventh circle of hell from which it spawned.
Be happy with the RIAA's actions - it's a sign the end is near.
- The Ever Defiant Simrook
(p/s - All spelling errors are mine and mine alone.)
'Truth' is linked in a circular relation with systems of power which produce and sustain it...
The article says they used "an Anton Pilar order - which allows a copyright holder to enter a premises to search for and seize material that breaches copyright without alerting the target through court proceedings".
Let's say they find signed confessions by each of the execs, saying they formed the company for the express purpose of allowing other people to breach copyrights. These confessions do not, themselves, breach any copyright laws. They would in fact be copyrighted by the execs themselves. Could those confessions be seized and used in court, under the Anton Pilar law?
IANAL, but this seems like an abuse of an unrelated law to get law enforcement powers for free. I believe this was already tried by their US cousins.
--Bill
I've started a political party which is currently looking for 500 members to get ourselves on the Federal ballot this upcoming election:
www.neteffect.org.au
If you want to have a representative in parliament who actually understands how this type of behaviour is a bad thing, and do something about it, then I recommend you visit our site and read through what we have to offer.
It's time that we Aussies had a REAL "younger generation" to represent our views instead of a 42 year old "young-un"; someone who knows what a frag is, someone who cares about our online rights and someone who understands the pickle we're in regarding current copyright/patent laws.
Oh, and someone (me of course) who's a regular Slashdot poster....
At the very least have a look at our policies and forum - I think you'll find that we're very much aiming to be a real force for change in Australia.
Visceral Psyche Films
First, go to this link: www.dfat.gov.au/missions/.
Once there, look up the nearest Australian consulate. Then, give them a call and tell them that you're furious that they would allow this kind of manipulation at the hands of the recording industry.
Be tactful, polite, but firm. Practice what you're going to say. Don't swear, and don't say anything rash or dangerous to your own freedom. (We need you out of jail, so you can join the GNU/United Front militias in the Great Copyright Civil War of 2016)
The RIAA/MPAA may have billions of dollars, and governments all over the world at their beck and call, but what we have is a whole lot stronger: We've got the Slashdot Effect.
They've got the guns, we've got the numbers.
Since when can someone search another person's property? Who is to say they did not take data or information not related directly to finding violations of law? At least if it was the police searching, you could have a court determine what is related to the specific law, and what is not. Who is to say they will not use items found unrelated to the copywrite issue, but which can still cause embarrasment, and use that information against them? It would be the equivelant of person B searching the house of person A for "copywrite violation" but finding tax records, photos of your lover, your address book of friends, etc...
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
I'm using Kazaa k++ in australia at the moment, connects and downloads are unaffected, nothing to see hear ... move along
-= Technomancer =-
However, the article says that the "Anton pilar order" is there to enter a premises to seize material that infringes copyright.
I don't think the police will find any material that infringes copyright in the Australian office of Sharman. I looks more like a fishing expedition and, most likely, a way to annoy Sharman. Pityfull people...
But hey, Australia has said before they would copy US patent policy when the US would ask them to do so (US did, so Australia did what was aksed), as the US is the most important trade partner for Australia. The same might apply here.
Background info:
In Belgium and France, it's possible to enter premises as well to look for patent infringement, but the party who initiates the proceedings is *not* allowed to enter the premises! Only a bailiff and often an independent expert (patent attorney to neither party) and sometimes a police officer (called Saisie Contrefac,on). Could this be a deriverative of that?
Michael Malone from iinet has posted on the whirlpool forums saying that iinet was one of the four ISPs raided and that no subscriber information was asked for. What were they after then? A rumour I read is that some RIAA infringement notices were returned with a kind 'go to hell' and the raids are in response to this.
/. a hard time about their draconian laws and the RIAA acting like thugs. I have to say that I'm sad to see this sort of thing going on in my own country.
I know we give the Americans here on
Since when can someone search another person's property? Who is to say they did not take data or information not related directly to finding violations of law? At least if it was the police searching, you could have a court determine what is related to the specific law, and what is not.
Next week: Sharman networks search the offices and homes of the MIPI, any nearby U.S. diplomat, and their lawyers. They find copies of Kazaa light, a program that exploits Sharman's IP and network infrastructure illegaly.
Week after that: Local slashdotters' homes and workplaces are searched by the BSA and MIPI, looking mp3 files, a format for illegal music sharing, and for clones of Klondike and Minesweeper, business software "borrowing" their look and feel from Microsoft products.
Repeat untill infinity.
Irene KHAAAAAAN!
I finally have a post to respond to in which I can pontificate on the freedom of the press clause in the US Constitution.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
'Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press;...'
I argue that the freedom of the press includes the right of any citizen, or group of citizens to own a press. At the time that the US Constitution was written the only means (i.e. technology) for communicating with a truly mass audience was the printing press.
Historically, only the Crown had the *right* to own a press. The Crown might *permit* others to operate a press subject to prior restraint, but the Crown controlled the uses of all presses.
In order to have freedom of the press individuals, or groups of individuals must necessarily be able to own, and/or have access to the technology that physically, and infrastructurely allows he/she/them to communicate with a mass audience.
Thus, it must logically follow that the freedom of the press must include the right to own the means of communicating with a mass audience.
New technology that provides the ability to communicate with a mass audience has historically, over time, been encompassed by the notion of the freedom of the press with regard to ownership.
The music industry in trying to advance its copyright claims via the elimination of various channels through which copyrighted materials flow illegally. This runs afoul of the freedom of the press.' That is the notion that a technology which allows for the communication between a person, and a mass audience is covered by the freedom of the press. Ultimately, copyright claims must be superseded by the right of the individual to have at their disposal the means of communicating with a mass audience, i.e. 'freedom of the press.'
"Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
I'll conisder this fair when we can obtain a court order to bust into the offices and homes of the major labels and the ARIA (Austrailian RIAA) offices to randomly collect information on anti trust violations.
No, it's a civil matter brought by private individuals (or, in this case, corporations) which means that the State and its agencies really have no business interfering or being dragged in. Think of it as the civil equivalent of a search warrant: in a criminal matter the State can do the search because the State is a party to the case.
It's not exactly ideal, the Anton Piller order and its cousin the Mareva injunction are sometimes referred to as the tactical nukes of the law, but there isn't another viable way to stop dishonest defendants from trashing evidence or the property you're trying to get back, and it's fairly tightly regulated.
Perhaps Kazaa should raid the record industry executives and represenatives for copies of Kazaa Lite? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
"Why is the air so thick with Anonymous Cowards reeling at the charges of fascism?"
Because most fascists are anonymous cowards until they get enough of them together to feel secure. Then they have their little beerhall putsch and start terrorizing the weak and defenseless.
The scary thing is, this isn't "government" by anything. It's a private entity given the right to force their way into your home because you MIGHT have something that belongs to them. These folks weren't elected by anyone except maybe the stockholders in an unopposed election. If I were Australian, I'd be jumping up and down asking who the hell gave corporations the right to act as a pseudo government. As a citizen of the world, I may just start jumping up and down anyway at the thought that the feared takeover by corporations has already begun. Does anyone here honestly think that Billy Boy wouldn't jump at the chance to run Amerika from his corporate office?
"Is this Winkhorst a nova criminal?" "No just a technical sergeant wanted for interrogation."
The addition of the authentication system was a huge step back from an engineering standpoint, but a huge jump forward from a business one -- it make Kazaa very lucrative.
It could also have given them a legal liability they didn't previously possess, though... something which might not have been quite so cut-and-dried if they'd just kept re-engineering the protocol occasionally.
deus does not exist but if he does
A quick Google search seems to indicate that this Anton Pillar Order thing started in the UK, and has spread to at least Canada, Australia, Israel, and Trinidad & Tobago. These orders do, in fact, allow private citizens to enter another private citizen's domain (I have not yet determined whether there is any law enforcement oversight to guarantee that evidentiary chains are followed and that the scope of the order is not exceeded).
Note that an Anton Pillar Order is a court order, so this is not just at the searcher's whim. However, prior to having one's premises searched, there is no opportunity for the searchee to lodge any sort of counter-claim, since their foreknowledge of the search is not required.
Even the Howard Bermans and Fritz Hollingses of the United States haven't proposed laws this off-kilter. One wonders whether this type of law would pass "Due Process" scrutinity here-- obviously law enforcement doesn't need to notify the subject of an investigation or raid in advance. That's well-established. But do we have any precedent saying that a private citizen, even holding court order has the right to perform such an act pro se? Any lawyers, paralegals, or armchair legislators care to comment?
I do not have a signature
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/07/news-sullivan.ph p
0 40 112023398.htm
Though no guns were brandished, the bust from a distance looked like classic LAPD, DEA or FBI work, right down to the black "raid" vests the unit members wore. The fact that their yellow stenciled lettering read "RIAA" instead of something from an official law-enforcement agency was lost on 55-year-old parking-lot attendant Ceasar Borrayo.
The Recording Industry Association of America is taking it to the streets.
Even as it suffers setbacks in the courtroom, the RIAA has over the last 18 months built up a national staff of ex-cops to crack down on people making and selling illegal CDs in the hood.
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004Jan/gee20
no
This is the same level of arguement as claiming that people browsing magazines in newsagents is killing the magazine publishing industry because everyone who reads without having paid is robbing from the publisher - at the very simplistic level this is sort of true. Yet most newsagents have figured out that althought there are some lost sales due to people having read the article that they were interested in, this is more than balanced out by people that would not have bought the mag if they had not had a chance to see what was in it first (and most of the people that read it and didn't buy it, would not have bought it anyway).
Eventually, the music business will come round to the fact that they are increasing sales to people like me. I regularly download tracks from Kazaa, but if I discover something that I like, I will almost certainly go out and buy the actual album.
I know of a great place which has greats amount of information for free. this information is about various topics and covers all formats; books, magazines, tapes, cds, movies on dvd/vhs. I fail to see why i cannot copy music from the library to mp3. I can always go there to get it and then rent it for two weeks. why cant i have a copy. moreover, why cant i send this copy to my friend. he is a taxpayer. he also has library card. cant he get the same music? what is stopping my from borrowing a book, copying it by hand and mailing it to my friend? isnt it similar to him going to his local library and taking out the book? I can see a problem with this if i was then charging again for it, but im not. I think the riaa, miaa, mipa, etc should go after the real source of free information, your local/school/etc library. with all this free information on the loose, its a direct threat to our capitalist lifestyles and way of life. remember you're nothing with the new and improved brand y thingy-mabob. so help out the riaa/etc and take a torch to your local library. i think there was a cool book burning see in indiana jones and the last crusade, but it might have involved some nice german fellows in uniform.
I can't imagine any civilized western society having a law such as that (I beileive you, it just confounds the mind). How did we get to this point?
/. is a bunch of nerds at a million typewriters. It's not a political conspiracy determined to undermine your beliefs.
Its interesting that MIPI waited until just after the MGM v Grokster case to request and search.
Probably my tinfoil hat, but I wonder if a failure to find anything would have been detrimental to the Appeals Court case? The RIAA attorney tried to push the point that Grokster were complicit in "trafficking in pirated goods", which the judge duly scolded them for, as abusive.
The timing just seems a little funny?