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."

147 of 787 comments (clear)

  1. wait a second by Kyle+Hamilton · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I understand raiding the offices but the homes to? This smells a lot like the US patriot act

    --
    Linux is like living in a teepee. No Windows, no Gates, Apache in house.
    1. Re:wait a second by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 4, Funny
      I understand raiding the offices but the homes to? This smells a lot like the US patriot act

      In addition, hundreds of thousands of music files and terabytes worth of pirated DivX movies were confiscated on the RAID at the Sharman office. Kazaa is essentially shut down as there are no files available to be shared now that they're all in police custody. *rolls eyes*.

      What's the point of raiding the offices of a software company who just makes the P2P client? They're not committing the crime!

    2. Re:wait a second by NormalVisual · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sarcasm, it's what's for dinner. Guess you missed the dinner bell.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    3. Re:wait a second by Bendebecker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It would be like raiding the offices of Colt or Smith & Weson becuase gangs all use guns. What's next? Arresting Mr. Clean cause someone slipped on a recently mopped floor???

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
  2. Raided them for what? by andih8u · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did they think they had a slew of mp3s sitting around on cds in their homes? I know that raiding the offices and homes of execs is fairly common in accounting scandals and the like, but this seems a bit overkill.

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    1. Re:Raided them for what? by Theresa1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I suspect that they didn't care what they found. The reason for the raid was probably intimidation.

      --
      This is a manual signature virus. Copy to your signiture file and help me spread.
  3. Legal? by s0rbix · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, if 99% of alleys were filled with drug pushers, and 99% of the people who used the alleys were drug pushers, then yes, i'd be supporting shutting down alleys.

      Do you really think that more than 1% of the traffic on Kazaa comes from legitimate sharing? The network operators could easily log the names of files that are being downloaded. They don't, because that information could be subpeonaed, and it would give clear indication that Kazaa is a copyrighted music/video swapping tool.

      Sure, there are some legitimate uses for file sharing, like swapping public domain files. But ask almost any college student what kazaa is, and they'll explain that it is for sharing music...

      It's a bit of a cop-out to say that the creators of a network of file sharing systems can't be responsible for its content. There is nothing stopping them from being responsible for the content - they could require shareable files to be hashed and verified before they could be shared.

    2. Re:Legal? by krymsin01 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Well, if 99% of alleys were filled with drug pushers, and 99% of the people who used the alleys were drug pushers, then yes, i'd be supporting shutting down alleys
      I agree with your point that if 99% of all activity in alleys were illegal, we should close the alleys.

      It's a bit of a cop-out to say that the creators of a network of file sharing systems can't be responsible for its content. There is nothing stopping them from being responsible for the content - they could require shareable files to be hashed and verified before they could be shared.
      However, if you are saying that the creators of the filesharing networks are responsible, then the logical extension of your argument would be to say that the builders of the alleys should be held resposible for the actions of those who occupy their creations.

      Sorry, but that simply doesn't make sense.

      (sorry, screwed the first post up. go ahead, mod it down.)
      --
      stuff
    3. Re:Legal? by TechnoWeeniePas · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Dont forget about the porn...Kazaa is great for sharing porn...not just music! Collage students and old people alike love porn!

    4. Re:Legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The creators of the file sharing networks knew EXACTLY what they were doing. If the alley manufacturer included special features like locked boxes that drug pushers could stand in and pass drugs and money back and forth through small slots, then yes, there is liability on the part of the alley manufacturer.

      Kazaa (or at least Kazaa Lite) removed the ability to see what files an individual user had shared primarily to make it more difficult to quantify how much of a violator someone was...

    5. Re:Legal? by pirhana · · Score: 5, Interesting

      >> Well, if 99% of alleys were filled with drug pushers, and 99% of the people who used the alleys were drug pushers, then yes, i'd be supporting shutting down alleys.

      Let me ask you something. If 98% of alleys were filled with drug, what would be your response? what if its still down to 50 or 40% ? Who set this limit ? Any technology is abused with varying degree. Even google is misused heavily. That doesn't mean that google should be shutdown. Any technology, if it has a legitimate use, should be allowed. The danger is that if Kazaa is shutdown because 99% of people use it for copyright infringment, tomorrow same logic would be applied for something with 90% copyright infringment and next day with something even lesser. So where will this end ? Last, this 99% crap itself is wrong. As far as I understand a substantial chunk of p2p network is used for porn sharing. So I dont think its anything even closer to 90%.

    6. Re:Legal? by Kirth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, if 99% of alleys were filled with drug pushers, and 99% of the people who used the alleys were drug pushers, then yes, i'd be supporting shutting down alleys.

      Well, I wouldn't approve, simply because it was a bad idea to outlaw drugs in the first place. Oulawing drugs created a whole new slew of secondary crimes and enough incentives for organized crime to move in.
      --

      --
      "The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
    7. Re:Legal? by retards · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, if 99% of alleys were filled with drug pushers, and 99% of the people who used the alleys were drug pushers, then yes, i'd be supporting shutting down alleys.

      Instead of making it useless for drug pushers to operate? Or making pushing legal? Seems to me it would be alot easier than outlawing alleys and forcing everybody that lives in the city to move to a country house.

      The same applies to P2P. Wouldn't it make more sense to redraft copyright law instead of trying to force people to submit to idiotic markets and ban technology?

      No? Well, tough shit, people are going to continue to live in cities and people are going to continue to steal content as long as it costs way too much.

      The music and movie industry has had 50 golden years to put away some money for a rainy day. If they were stupid enough to think that movie theaters, radio stations and music discs were an eternal cash-cow while using their profits to build castles in the sand, well... give them a Darwin Award.

      Don't make the rest of the population pay for bad economics and planning.

    8. Re:Legal? by chefren · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you shut down the alleys the drug pushers would simply move somewher else. Like the mall. Shut down that and they move again and again and again..

    9. Re:Legal? by bagel2ooo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What of usenet? Couldn't Kazaa proclaim to be a content carrier? There are a lot of venues where there is a good deal of bandwidth utilized for piracy and the (now very liberal definition of) breaching copyright material.

      --
      ( o ) one could say I'm rather baked
    10. Re:Legal? by Alan+Cox · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If 99% of the use of alleys was drug dealing I'd expect the cops to be stamping it out so that the other 1% can enjoy their alleys legitimately not be raiding the offices of the town councils who own them.

      The motor car is used in huge numbers of crime getaways yet nobody sued Ford or suggests Ford fits cars with cameras that look for money bags and refuse to start the engine otherwise.

      Similarly the music industry should be looking for people who are actually breaking the law not harassing those providing tools with legitimate other uses.

    11. Re:Legal? by Accipiter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As far as I understand a substantial chunk of p2p network is used for porn sharing. So I dont think its anything even closer to 90%.

      Ah, so all porn is completely public domain, and not at all copyrighted?

      You can't seriously believe that.

      --

      -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
      (If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't. :P)

    12. Re:Legal? by FashionNugget · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>Even google is misused heavily. That doesn't mean that google should be shutdown.

      How exactly is google misused?

    13. Re:Legal? by uglyduckling · · Score: 2, Interesting

      type copyrightedsong.mp3 into the box and click "Google Search"

    14. Re:Legal? by Jaysyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but apparently 10% is enough for a federal judge, see the Morpheous & Grokster case. I know we are talking about .Au, but they generally end up following our lead anyhow.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    15. Re:Legal? by mydigitalself · · Score: 2

      oh for fscks sake, you fool.
      alleys were not built for drug dealing. kazaa was built for media piracy, no matter what anyone else may claim. simple as that.

    16. Re:Legal? by unitron · · Score: 4, Funny
      "Collage students...love porn!"

      I just had a mental image of a mobile Alexander Calder would never have had publicly shown.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    17. Re:Legal? by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure, there are some legitimate uses for file sharing, like swapping public domain files. But ask almost any college student what kazaa is, and they'll explain that it is for sharing music...

      Music can be legitamately shared. That more than anything is what the MIPI and RIIA and other goons are trying quietly to suppress. The "one percent" as you call it of legitimate use. People like Brian Eno and Peter Gabriel who are releasing (and helping other artists to release) music on their own terms, thus shutting out the recording industry. If this were to continue, in five years that could be 20-25%. So, if the RIIA and others shout PIRATE loud enough in the right ears, no one will ever notice those people and before long they will be legislated (coerced) into either A. Recording music with the industry or B. Not recording music. These people are thugs and are using heavy handed monopolistic practices as well as sly legal trickery to perpetuate their empires. Sorry you can't see that.

    18. Re:Legal? by retards · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only reason the entertainment industry is having trouble right now is because their product is easy to steal!

      Actually, it's not even stealing according to the law. You do, however, have a (populistic) point.

      However, the real reason behind all the fuss is the big money. If media-companies had not invested loads of money in these more and more obsolete delivery mechanisms, there would not be a problem. The question isn't if media publsihers going to get paid per se, but rather if the current media publishers are going to get paid according to outdated business practices.

      All in all: if you don't have a product that people want to buy, either your product sucks or it's too expensive. Tough titty.

    19. Re:Legal? by top_down · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What bad economics and planning would that be? Creating a product and then selling it?

      No it would be relying on an inefficient distribution monopoly for profits.

      The only reason the entertainment industry is having trouble right now is because their product is easy to steal!

      Wrong again. The reason they are in trouble is that they are producing a product, the distribution of music, that is obsolete (well soon anyway) thanks to new technology.

      And don't be so unwise as to call illegal copying "stealing" as you might then easily miss the fact that illegal copying is hugely productive, which in turn means that you will probably miss a sane solution to the whole issue.

      --
      Anyone who generalizes about slashdotters is a typical slashdotter.
    20. Re:Legal? by Feanturi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You obviously don't share porn on the p2p networks. Most of it is homemade and originally distributed by the people who made it. Certainly a percentage of it is cut from actual movies, but the majority is what is referred to as "amateur" work.

      Erm.. I've got gigs and gigs of the stuff, and only a very small percentage of it is home-made. The bulk of it has been lifted from pay-sites and DVD-rips or captured from video tape. Or were you talking about kiddie porn?

    21. Re:Legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > What bad economics and planning would that be? Creating a product and then selling it?

      Let me tell you a bit of history, it is about an industry called the recording industry...

      More then a century ago now, it became practical to make audio recordings and reproduce them.

      Untill that day, when someone wanted to listen to music, the only way was to get someone to play live music.

      Now, this new invention that allowed recording and reproducing music (and sound in general) meant that peopel coudl listen to music without needign a live performance, and coudl do so whenever they wanted.

      This of course put many artists, theatre owners and employees out of their job and business.
      However, some others actually proffited from it, and bullt what we now know as the recording industry.

      THe bad planning that the recording industry is doing now is not realizing that what they have depends on a bit of technology that will not last forever. They started by using new technology, and yet they failed to plan for their technology getting outdated (hey that only happens to others0

      > The only reason the entertainment industry is having trouble right now is because their product is
      > easy to steal! If it wasn't, they would be in the green right now.

      This is often claimed by the music industry, but so far they failed to make any believable argument to support this claim.

      It most likely plays a role, but I do not see any reason for believing it is the only or even the most imporytant factor.

      > As I see it, downloading an MP3 is like shoplifting. No, it isn't a big deal, but it's
      > still breaking the law, and wrong.

      It is breaking the law, if it is wrong is another thing.

      Don't get me wrong, I rather want artists to get payed for their works, and probably more important, I believe a copyright holder has some rights to determine how the work he/she created is used.

      Havign said that, I also believe that a substantial part of what is produced by the music industry does not qualify for beign 'creative' in any way, and as such should be impossible to get copyright on to begin with.

      This however is the result of a deal bewteen society and creative people.

      The problems are 2fold:

      First of all, it is usually not creative people who control copyrights, but business people. As a result, creators do not proffit from copyright usually, hence copyright fails to forfill its purpose, and does nto give artists any 'rights' usually

      Second, those business people broke the deal with society by refusign to forfill their side of the deal (adding things to the public domain once they had their time of monopoly)

      Due to the 2nd, I cannot see taking such copyrighted material as wrong, I see it merely as compensation of failure by the recording industry to forfill their part of the deal, and due to the first I also do not see how it directly affects the rights of creative people.

    22. Re:Legal? by nearlygod · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can think of 2 things wrong with your post. 1. You can't count.

      --
      The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
    23. Re:Legal? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2, Interesting
      As I see it, downloading an MP3 is like shoplifting. No, it isn't a big deal, but it's still breaking the law, and wrong.
      You must live in an ass-backward place (say, like the USA) to have such lopsided laws. Up here, downloading MP3s as well as copying music CDs is totally legal when done for private use.
    24. Re:Legal? by the_mad_poster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only reason the entertainment industry is having trouble right now is because their product is easy to steal! If it wasn't, they would be in the green right now.

      Got facts? Because I have the perennial "music sales went up while Napster was around and dropped off when it died". "Post hoc, ergo propter hoc", but it's more "evidence" than you posted.

      On top of that, wouldn't Occam's Razor suggest that the simplest explanation to this problem is that people don't want to buy the music? Why would the remedy to that automatically be assumed to be anything other than the product itself for this particular industry, when common sense and prior knowledge tells us that the most common reason for people not purchasing a product is an inability to percieve a value in that purchase? Or, to put it more bluntly: the most likely reason people aren't buying this or any other product is that they don't think it's worth it.

      Now, if you have some evidence that suggests something other than the common wisdom, I'm all ears. I'm not too proud to learn something new.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    25. Re:Legal? by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If 98% of the alleys were filled with drugs, wouldn't it just be more efficient to legalize drugs?

    26. Re:Legal? by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, if you type in "index of" and the name of a file, you will occasionally turn up a web server's directory listing. For example, this link is a search for anything with MP3 in the page. I wouldn't call it a misuse however, because it's exactly what Google is for (finding pages that answer your query).

    27. Re:Legal? by Gigs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years , the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped ,or turned back, for their private benefit."

      - Heinlein's Lifeline

    28. Re:Legal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I didn't realise the music industry owned the copyrights to porn films as well. You learn something new every day.

    29. Re:Legal? by Sique · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What bad economics and planning would that be? Creating a product and then selling it? The only reason the entertainment industry is having trouble right now is because their product is easy to steal!

      Your argument falls somewhat short. The only reason that the entertainment industry exists in the first place is that it was expensive to start copying, but once you got it running, you could put out many copies very cheap.

      So when stuff like the printing press was invented and used, suddenly the burdensome path of copying books, music and other creative works by hand was obsolete. Once you had the work in your printing press, you could generate hundreds of copies. But the investition in the actual press, in generating the plates for printing and proofreading were expensive, so many artist couldn't afford that themselves. So they couldn't get their own work out to earn money, because they couldn't afford the initial costs necessary to start copying, thus forcing them to get other people to invest into them.

      Without legal protection of their work they didn't even had a chance to sell their work to the printing press operator, because all he needed was a single copy to create the printing plates. This put the artist out of the revenue stream for his own work. Many countries had regulations in place to stop this, mostly by forcing the artist to register his work with a royal office of Arts or something similar, and this office then protected the artist from illicit copies, but on the other hand the royal office now could censor the work by not allowing anyone to copy it or not accepting the work in the first place.

      Copyright (or Author's right according to the Berne Convention) was deviced to give the control of the work back to the author, who was still forced to sell rights to his work to printing press operators (because buying a printing press was still expensive). It took some time until Copyright was available to non-citizens. Charles Dickens for instance was never able to stop U.S. printers to sell his books, because U.S. Copyright law at this time was only protecting U.S. citizens. It wasn't until american authors themselves were trying to sell their works outside of U.S. (namely Samuel Langhorne Clemens a.k.a. Mark Twain) until the U.S. agreed to protect non-citizen works in reverse for protection of U.S. works outside the U.S.

      The same situation came up with all developing countries which weren't very keen at protecting copyright from other countries until they had enough own works to protect abroad which made it worthwile to give protection to outlanders in exchange (think Japan in the early 20th century, Taiwan in the 70ies). This makes one wonder if it makes sense at all to force third world countries to enforce copyright at all. No one playing catchup in the last 150 years was protecting copyright until he reached a certain level himself ;)

      Back to the music industry. It has only one big selling point for artists: It can help to overcome the initial costs to spread the work and thus guaranteering a revenue stream back to the artist. There is no other actual unique service the music industry is providing to the artist. All other services could also be provided by a personal agent which gets a share of the revenue or a fixed salary or whatever.

      The music industry is also a service provider to the music listener: In an ideal world it helps the music listener to find music according to his taste and his purchasing power, preselect, finetune and in other ways improve the listening experience. Basicly it is acting as an agent between artist and listener.

      But both of those roles are loosing its importance to the music world. Copying costs near to nothing to nearly everyone, so the initial costs for an artist to spread the work is approaching zero. This makes the big selling point of music industry services to the artist void. All it has left is the additional services (connections, career counselling...), which could be bo

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    30. Re:Legal? by Foogle · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's not correct. The reason you see so many of the same pictures attributed to different sites is because the sites are just the distributors. They buy licenses to the different sets from actual pornographers and then label them with their own brand.

  4. Re:Huh. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, who's going to stop Billionares with cops?

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  5. It's about time by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Funny

    At last, someone has finally gotten in trouble for bundling spyware in their products!

  6. Obligatory reference by jdifool · · Score: 3, Funny
    -Hi, may I help you ?
    -All your offices are belong to us*

    *with Aussie strong accent, plz.

    Regards,
    jdif

    --
    Let's overcome our weakness.
    1. Re:Obligatory reference by Yorrike · · Score: 5, Funny
      I'm a Kiwi, but this should satisfy your lust for Austrlsainism:

      a> G'day blue, wha's th' goss?
      b> All ya baches, barbies and crocs are belong to us, mate.
      a> S'truth?
      b> S'truth. It's bonza, mate. You have no chance to survive, make yer time.
      a> Crickey dick!

      --

      Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?

    2. Re:Obligatory reference by lewp · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's not a subpoena.
      This is a subpoena!

      --
      Game... blouses.
    3. Re:Obligatory reference by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 4, Funny
      Actually, I believe that what you meant to say was,

      All you OFFICE(TM) are belong to us.

      Filthy abusers of IP like you sicken me. How could you not recognize that that word belongs to MS.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    4. Re:Obligatory reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm an Australian, but this should satisfy lust as a New Zealander:

      *Baaaaaaaa!*

      So long as we're getting into mindless stereotypes here. ;-)

  7. Uh by mkro · · Score: 5, Insightful
    MIPI obtained 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
    This "copyright is holier than God Himself" crap is corrupting the law. I don't like bad analogies, but everyone remembers the example with the father of raped girl being the judge in the trial. That an interest group is doing the police's work is unacceptable. (Yes, I know the BSA is operating in a similar way, but that is no excuse.)
    --
    I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    1. Re:Uh by Crypto+Gnome · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it's imnportant to note that:

      The BSA has ZERO (extenuating/special) legal force behind them.

      And YES I am specifically talking about in the US.

      They basically are a business offering to audit you. They fact that they're making their offers with intentionally intimidating letters written in the best of legalspeak is neither here nor there.

      They have ZERO legal rights for search-and-seizure or any such like (until, of course, they can prove to a judge "probable cause" or other similar evidence just like anyone else who wants to request a search warrant).

      These anti-music/movie-piracy moguls , on the other hand, have had several particularly nasty laws passed which give them FULL LEGAL SANCTION to act more like a police force than any other business in the pursuit of evidence and/or prosecution.

      So basically no, the BSA is *not* operating in a similar way. The BSA just TALK BIG and hope to scare you. The *AAs of the US are businesses with powers significantly similar to The Police Force.

      --
      Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
    2. Re:Uh by cthugha · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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.

  8. erm, ok. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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?

    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 .au slashdotters get off saying that the US is a police state. What bollix and hypocricy.

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:erm, ok. by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If this kind of thing is valid, I don't see where so many .au slashdotters get off saying that the US is a police state. What bollix and hypocricy.

      Where's the hypocrisy in that??

      If your own country act like this, can't you comment about other countries where police can do the same?

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  9. No Biggie by illuminata · · Score: 4, Funny

    MIPI just got confused. They didn't realize that a file sharing network didn't include physical files.

    Besides, with a name like MIPI, could you really stay mad at them for that long?

    --


    Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
  10. Re:hah by Jason1729 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They don't need jurisdiction over the servers, just over the people using them.

    Jason
    ProfQuotes

  11. third of nine by thirdofnine · · Score: 5, Informative
    Channel Nine in Sydney reported that they also raided Telstra Head Office, Monash University and the University of NSW, all for file trading.

    Third of Nine

    --
    Well, um, yes.
  12. Nazis by Omni+Magnus · · Score: 5, Funny

    I am guessing that throughout the world, the different recording associations got into a contest to see who could become the most Nazi in their tactics. Until now, RIAA had the lead. To counter this, the RIAA will probably round up all of the file traders into camps. This will allow them to win.

  13. Not likely by radicalskeptic · · Score: 4, Insightful
    MIPI general manager Michael Speck told ZDNet Australia the order was specifically targeted at the operators of the Kazaa network. "This is not about individuals, this is about the big fish," said Speck. "This is a signal that Internet music piracy is finished in Australia."

    Yes, stopping Kazaa will end music piracy in Australia. Because nobody has ever heard of


    None of which look like they're going away.
    --
    WARNING: If accidentally read, induce vomiting.
    1. Re:Not likely by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Informative

      You forgot:

      - BitTorrent
      - Shareaza (gnutella2)
      - eDonkey2000
      - FTP - with IPs traded amongst friends/etc. (a crude P2P, in a sense)
      - as well as a slew of others I'm not aware of, I'm sure.

      All this knowledge simply from being online for a couple years. Imagine what a hardcore file trader is aware of.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    2. Re:Not likely by rock_climbing_guy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Correct me if I'm mistaken, but wasn't the Kazaa network designed so that it doesn't rely on a central server? In that case, even if the company disappears, the network should still be around as long as people are wanting to use it to trade music.

      --
      Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
    3. Re:Not likely by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Informative

      Correct me if I'm mistaken, but wasn't the Kazaa network designed so that it doesn't rely on a central server? In that case, even if the company disappears, the network should still be around as long as people are wanting to use it to trade music.

      You are correct, but your conclusion is not (and it's not your fault, either -- it's good ol' politics and business obscuring good clean engineering).

      Kazaa operates in a fairly decentralized manner. At one point, the FastTrack network (what Kazaa uses internally) was open. However, the protocol was reverse engineered (by the GiFT project members and others), and third party clients started popping up. The FastTrack folks sold licenses to use their network -- plus, the use of an open protocol was detrimental to the client vendors, like Kazaa, as it meant that users could choose a (nicer) spyware-free client. The protocol was modified to contain an authentication system that *is* centralized. If Kazaa (the company) won't authorize you, you can't use the network.

      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.

    4. Re:Not likely by kubrick · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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
  14. UYFB by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Use Your Forgotten Brain. Just because it's not in the US, doesn't mean it can't smell like the stench surrounding the abuses of liberty that the US Patriot Act articulates. Abuse of law enforcement for private gain is not limited to President VP Cheney and his "Justice" department henchmen. I bet your "conservative" values think that librarians are commies, because they encourage sharing.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:UYFB by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

      Thanks for proofreading my post: my problem was typing "think" instead of hold, in a sentence that would have said "I bet your "conservative" values hold that librarians are commies, because they encourage sharing", if I had proofread it more carefully myself.

      In gratitude, I will call your kettle black: that last sentence of your first paragraph was a run on sentence, more comprehensible if changed to "...comments on an article where most are modded...". Oh, and it's spelled "grammar".

      I've been thinking for myself for decades, and I don't plan to take your patronizing advice to stop now. I've read the Patriot Act. As have the judges who are starting to throw it out as unconstitutional. The people who are unlawfully detained are reading it, and most of them are being released with nothing but hatred for American "justice" regardless of whether it's the heinous Patriot Act, or any of the more just laws. When I see someone being bashed in a thread for pointing out the similarities in the widespread abuses of justice plaguing our world, I'll defend them. Even if it offends your inability to stop reading a thread you find uninteresting. I'm not sorry that I interrupted your flow of infotainment with an important relevant issue. You can go back to your snug world of denial, but don't expect me to join you.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  15. What you gonna do when they come for you? by Channard · · Score: 4, Funny
    Well, who's going to stop Billionares with cops?

    Trillionaires with Mafia support? (I mean Mafia backing, not people who threaten to make you sleep with the fishes unless you reboot your PC before ringing)

  16. Is this at all important? by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.
  17. Anton Pillar order by DreamerFi · · Score: 3, Informative
    The article (I read it, sorry - I'll hand in my slashdot ID at the end of this posting) mentions an "Anton Pillar order. From that article:

    One of the most painful aspects of all is the requirement after the order is served, usually within 14 days, to provide documentary evidence to the court, which PROVES that you own the software that is the subject of the court order (and may extend to PROVING that ALL software is legally acquired), by showing software compliance registers (an inventory approach), license numbers, discs and manuals, AND originals of all invoices from the SUPPLIERS of the software that you own.


    -John
    1. Re:Anton Pillar order by erroneus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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?

    2. Re:Anton Pillar order by DreamerFi · · Score: 2, Informative

      No. I don't think it is fine at all. I don't know about other countries, but here in the Netherlands there's a limit to how long you MUST keep invoices, receipts etc, and that limit is only for documents that influence your tax forms. For companies it's longer than for individuals, but neither is as long as copyright lasts. It also means every time Mickey Mouse buys an extension, I get to buy new storage space, because I have to keep stuff around longer.

      -John

    3. Re:Anton Pillar order by cthugha · · Score: 3, Informative

      If someone brings a frivolous action then they're likely to have costs awarded against them on an indemnity basis (as opposed to costs on a standard basis if they just lost without having been shown to have acted frivolously). Furthermore, a lawyer who assists in bringing a case s/he knows is baseless and is done for some ulterior purpose is likely to be forced to indemnify the client for costs, and may face disciplinary proceedings.

      Both the crime and tort of barratry have, however, been abolished in most Australian jurisdictions.

  18. Yet more bogus damages calculations by darnok · · Score: 5, Funny

    The ZDNet article points out that if all the "pirated" tracks in Australia were purchased for $A0.99, then the record companies would be $2b better off.

    As of now, my understanding is that Apple sells tracks for $US0.99, and is in pretty close to a breakeven state for iTunes (this may have changed recently, as surely the sheer volume going through iTunes would cause them to move into profit at some point). Regardless, it seems that $US0.99 is pretty close to the breakeven point, and you'd assume the breakeven cost in Australia would be no lower than that given the population is so small - let's cut the record companies some slack and assume $US0.90 is the breakeven point for online music sales in Australia.

    $A0.99 translates to $US0.76. Now, since it costs $US0.90 to provide a downloadable music track, Kazaa is actually *saving* the record companies $US0.14 per downloaded track. By my calculation, the 850,000 tracks downloaded via Kazaa haved saved Australian record companies $US119,000 in providing that service.

    What's that? Bogus use of statistics, you say?...

  19. Raided?! by truesaer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought only the cops could performs raids! Thank god this is in australia....if Fritz Hollings has his way we will probably have special music industy SWAT teams roaming the country soon.

  20. I doubt that MIPI finds anything.. by Kalroth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sherman Networks would be bloody stupid to have anything illegal (music/software/etc) on any of their computers and I really doubt they had anything.

    This just seems like the MIPI along with the rest of the record industry is trying to harass Sherman Networks into going away. Personally I don't like/use KaZaa or any other P2P utility, but I think it's a necessary evil.

    Oh well, if they should manage to close down KaZaa, there's plenty of underground alternatives for the (ab)users. Seems like wasted resources from a desperate industry.

  21. It's just like the commercials. by Gldm · · Score: 5, Funny

    (shot of men in riot gear overturning desks, rifling through offices and smashing computers)

    Voice in aussie accent: Search engine!

    (shot of Fosters can)

    Voice in aussie accent: Beer!

    --

    Introducing the new Occam Fusion! Now with sqrt(-1) fewer blades!

  22. fly off the handle much? by andih8u · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The argument that this even remotely has anything to do with the patriot act is stupid. It certainly has no provisions for raiding people's homes on behalf of the record industry. The people you should be directing your anger towards is more than likely the RIAA, who's undoubtedly the puppet master for this MIPI thing.

    --


    slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
    1. Re:fly off the handle much? by Urkki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which would you choose if you had to choose between
      - a free society with terrorists occasionally being able to carry out their strike and people occasionally breaking law (eg music piracy)
      and
      - a police state where people have no privacy and can be easily imprisoned/executed/deported/"made to disappear"
      ?

      Note: this is just a general question in the context, specifically *not* referring to any particular legislation (such as Patriot Act) or country (such as US or China).

    2. Re:fly off the handle much? by smallfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Live free or die!

    3. Re:fly off the handle much? by orthogonal · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The argument that [Anton Pillar searches, where the target of the search is not informed of prior to the search] even remotely has anything to do with the patriot act is stupid. It certainly has no provisions for raiding people's homes on behalf of the record industry.

      According to Freedom Fight Canada, an "Anton Pillar order is an order allowing for an applicant (without notice to a respondent) to enter the respondent's premises and inspect or seize documents or other items."

      Under the Patriot Act, the government is allowed (with a secret warrant) to conduct secret "sneak and peek" searches, without ever informing the target of the search.

      The difference is that with Anton Pillar, a private entity can request the search -- so far under U.S. law, only the government can. Of course, if you can find a friendly prosecutor and convince him that there's a possibility a crime has been committed, he'll do your search for you. Indeed, some will argue that that makes U.S. law more favorable to corporations, large corporations generally having more sway with law enforcement than private citizens.

      The other difference between Anton Pillar and the Patriot Act is that the legislative intent of the Patriot Act was that its provisions should apply only to suspected acts of terrorism. However, US Attorney General John Ashcroft has aggressively pushed to ignore the legislative intent behind the Patriot Act, and use its provisions for to investigate non-terrorist related activity.

      Summary:
      • both the US and Australia allow "sneak and peek" searches in which the target of the search is not informed of he search;
      • In Australia, a private citizen can apply for such an order; in the US, only police and prosecutors can, making it effectively unavailable to private citizens, but available to corporations;
      • Legislation in the US limits such searches to investigations of terrorism, but John Ashcroft is working mightily to extend its use to non-terrorism related activities.

      Conclusion: via the mechanism of the Patriot Act, "sneak and peek" searches could be conducted on behalf of the recording industry if it alleges that copyright "piracy" is linked to terrorist fundraising, or if John Ashcroft succeeds in using Patriot Act mechanisms for commonplace investigations.

      So I think comparisons to the Patriot Act are warranted (no pun intended).
  23. Dammit! by chrispl · · Score: 3, Funny

    And I just got WAY into Australian pop music! Now I'll never get my fix.

    --
    What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
  24. What this is about by eclectro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    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 .02

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  25. Much scarrier than Patriot Act... by ElDooderino · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Much scarrier than Patriot Act... by Bigman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmm didn't you read this story? Losing 8 computer, all your software and practically anything electrical in your house because you changed a setting in your broadband modem? Seems to me thats a little over the top. But it happened in Toledo, Ohio - It could happen to you next where you are!

      --
      *--BigMan--- Time flies like an arrow.. but personally I prefer a nice glass of wine!
  26. Re:Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm Australian with an Iranian background and have never, ever experienced any racism. I also have many International friends studying in various Universities of Australia - again, no racism.

    I think the problem is people take offense to playful comments too easily.

  27. Re:MIPI? by Fjornir · · Score: 2, Informative

    Full details can be found here.

    --
    I want a new world. I think this one is broken.
  28. MY office is in no danger of being raided.... by letdownjournals · · Score: 3, Funny

    ... I'm using a Mac.

    Wait...

  29. Re:Well.. by mishac · · Score: 2

    You actually have a good point. I'm not saying that there is no racism in australia, when there is, BUT:

    the line between PC and non-PC is different there. Many comments that would make an American/Brit/Canadian feel uncomfortable, are perfectly acceptable in Aus, and are not taken offensively.

    This is comming from a non-white canadian BTW.

  30. Hmmm... by MarkJensen · · Score: 2, Funny

    Could this be considered a case of "putting the squeeze on the Sharman"?

    Mr. Whipple will not be happy about this!

    (Sorry, I resisted as long as I could...)

  31. Why this is a "good" trend... by simrook · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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...
    1. Re:Why this is a "good" trend... by Cyno · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The RIAA is a dying animal...

      The RIAA and SCO have so much in common. Who wants to bet the MPAA will follow suit?

  32. Re:Huh. by BDyess · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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

  33. Evidence accumulation by Neo-Rio-101 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think they're hoping to find pirated or illegal ANYTHING in the executive houses or anything of Sharman's networks.

    I think their plan is to do a raid and even if it turns up ONE slightly dodgy file, they're going to use that to link it with Kazaa and music piracy... which may give them a leg to stand on in court.

    The issue is this: these days its pretty damn hard to find a single PC out there without one slightly dodgy file on it.

    --
    READY.
    PRINT ""+-0
  34. Re:MIPI? by skimitar · · Score: 2, Informative
    They are affiliated with ARIA (Australian Recording Industry Association) and funded by record companies. So we are talking about a raid by a private organisation. Bizarre. Their contact details (if anyone fancies dropping them a line, ahem) are here

    The ARIA press release is available here if anyone wants evidence that FUD isn't confined to Microsoft and SCO.

    So in essence the MIPI is an organisation set up by the music industry to investigate alleged music piracy. I would have thought that carrying out the raid would have been the responsibility of the police or other government agency, rather than an industry association, but apparently jackboots are more freely available here than I thought (Godwin's Law notwithstanding).

  35. Want to stop this Australia? by Quizo69 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  36. Obligatory Simpsons quote by marsu_k · · Score: 2, Funny

    Mobster 1: "I thought you said Troy McClure was dead!"
    Fat Tony: "No, what I said was he sleeps with the fishes."

  37. Putting the pressure on... by dominion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

  38. Tad OT... by mog007 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I sense a pattern...

    The United States, which started as property of the British Empire, has begun to revoke its citizen's rights.

    Austrailia, which ALSO started off as a branch of the British Empire, has started raiding the home, read: Private Dwellings, of people that work at a place that happens to traffic copyrighted material. They weren't even searched by law enforcement officers.

    Does this mean that India is going to make it mandatory to consume beef, or something? Are the citizens of Ireland going to lose their rights, next? What about you silly Brits, are you next?

  39. Police did not conduct the search? by John+Seminal · · Score: 3, Interesting
    MIPI obtained 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 - yesterday from Justice Murray Wilcox, and began raiding premises in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria this morning searching for documents and electronic evidence to support its case against the peer-to-peer companies.

    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."

    1. Re:Police did not conduct the search? by foniksonik · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess the good ol' US of A is still the highest bastion of personal and business privacy in the world eh? Yeah this happened in Australia... not that I have a prob with Australians mind you... but well it appears that they have different laws 'down under'.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  40. It is all about the money by RY · · Score: 5, Funny

    It just goes to prove that America is not alone.
    Australia also has the best judicial system that money can buy.

    .

  41. First sentence of article by Jeffv323 · · Score: 2, Funny

    "MIPI obtained 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 ? yesterday from Justice Murray Wilcox, and began raiding premises in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria this morning searching for documents and electronic evidence to support its case against the peer-to-peer companies."

    Holy run-on sentence, Batman! Jeez...

    --
    I'm a minister!
    1. Re:First sentence of article by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 2, Funny

      Holy diagrammed sentence, Batman!
      It's certainly complicated, and a fairly confusing one, but it is not a run-on sentence. I can break it down if you want, but the gist of it is:
      MIPI obtained an Anton Pilar order [clauses], and began raiding premises [clauses].

      Their only grammatical mistake is that they have a compound predicate, (MIPI obtained...and began raiding...) rather than a compound sentence, so there should not be a comma in there after "Wilcox".

      Now let's watch the mod effect; the wrong information gets modded up, while the correct information doesn't.

      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
  42. denial by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you took off your tinfoil hat, you'd notice that government raids of people's homes, on the pretext that their company might have been abused by other people to ignore copyrights, is government by fear and threat of force: fascism. Why is the air so thick with Anonymous Cowards reeling at the charges of fascism?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:denial by Winkhorst · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "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."
    2. Re:denial by Bendebecker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      According to webster.com, Fascism is:
      Fascism - a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

      If you read Musollini's paper on the subject (you'll find a copy in just about any introductory book on philosphy) you would find the fascism is basically the elevation of the state above all else (which Musollini basically equated himself too, in fascist states the dictator usually became a symbhol of the state and eventaully displaces the position of the state itself.) So you see, government raids are only a tool of fascism and not its main characteristic. Before the american revolution, british soldiers became infamous for searching peoples houses without warrant but that did not make the british fascists, only tyrants. So the charge you should be leveling is that of tyranny by the government. It led our country to revolution once before and such a charge is far more likely to get our public officals attention were calling them nazis will only get you ignored.

      --
      There's a growing sense that even if The Future comes,
      most of us won't be able to afford it.
      -- Lemmy
    3. Re:denial by wan23 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Someone trying this stunt in Texas would find that they owned a nice set of lead pellets, which were returned to them at high velocity.

      And then the person who so graciously returned those pellets would find that the government doesn't take kindly to those who shoot at people with legal authorization to be where they are. Death penalty probably considering it's Texas we're talking about. Since you love your guns so much you can ask for a firing squad. :-P

    4. Re:denial by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Er, the Texas cops will just shoot you to pieces, or get the Feds to firebomb you a la Waco if you're really well armed. If you survive, you'll be executed. And the man who personifies this Peckinpah nighmare will steal the White House, and start bombing his way through countries with oil gas and pipelines his corporate cronies want to sieze.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  43. Kazaa k++ still has 2,589,853 users online by technomanceraus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm using Kazaa k++ in australia at the moment, connects and downloads are unaffected, nothing to see hear ... move along

    --
    -= Technomancer =-
  44. Anton Pillar orders explained. by ratzmilk · · Score: 5, Informative
    We have Anton Pillar orders here in Oz because we are part of the British Commonwealth and the Queen of England is our Head of Start, and one of their (our) Lords made the follow ruling.

    In Anton Piller K.G. v. Manufacturing Processes Ltd., [1976] 1 All E.R. 779 at 782 Lord Denning stated:

    "Let me say at once that no court in this land has any power to issue a search warrant to enter a man's house so as to see if there are papers or documents there which are of an incriminating nature, whether libels or infringements of copyright or anything else of the kind. No constable or bailiff can knock at the door and demand entry so as to inspect papers or documents. The householder can shut the door in his face and say, 'Get out.' That was established in the leading case of Entick v. Carrington (1765), 19 State Tr. 1029. None of us would wish to whittle down that principle in the slightest. But the order sought in this case is not a search warrant. It does not authorize the plaintiff's solicitors or anyone else to enter the defendants' premises against their will. Id does not authorize the breading down of any doors, nor the slipping in by a back door, nor getting in by an open door or window. It only authorizes entry and inspection by the permission of the defendants. The plaintiff's must get the defendants' permission. But it does do this: it brings pressure on the defendants to give permission. It does more. It actually orders them to give permission - with, I suppose, the result that if they do not give permission they are guilty of contempt of court."

    As you can see, you can if you so chose deny access, but you had better have a pretty good reason.

    --
    I wish I could think of a witty Sig. Sigh!
    1. Re:Anton Pillar orders explained. by Zak3056 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      None of us would wish to whittle down that principle in the slightest. But the order sought in this case is not a search warrant. It does not authorize the plaintiff's solicitors or anyone else to enter the defendants' premises against their will. Id does not authorize the breading down of any doors, nor the slipping in by a back door, nor getting in by an open door or window. It only authorizes entry and inspection by the permission of the defendants. The plaintiff's must get the defendants' permission. But it does do this: it brings pressure on the defendants to give permission. It does more. It actually orders them to give permission - with, I suppose, the result that if they do not give permission they are guilty of contempt of court.

      Jesus tapdancing Christ. I thought Orwell said 1984, not 1976!

      That's the most shocking example of doublethink I've ever seen.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
  45. Re:Huh. by Groote+Ka · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Apparently, they can do this.

    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?

  46. More than 1%? You bet! by Undefined+Parameter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, yes, a substantial portion of Kazaa and other file-sharing programs/networks are in use illegally.

    However, there is also a substantial portion which is used for, among other things, advertisements, legal restores (example: a long time ago, I used a file sharing network to backup an mp3 which I legally owned... the original had been corrupted during a backup to a bad CD; I lost a lot of data, but most of it didn't turn out to be important, luckily), and semi-legal file transfers (where the host might be in, say, Japan where the file is illegal, but the downloader is in the US where there is no copyright and is therefore legal).

    With all due respect, sir, I think you're focusing on the negative side of file sharing.

    ~UP

    --
    Eat the Path.
    1. Re:More than 1%? You bet! by the_mad_poster · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are wrong. Unless the company explicitly releases its copyright on the content and puts it in the public domain, the copyright stands even if the company doesn't (that's one of the big beefs with people that don't like current copyright laws - even after ridiculous amounts of time, liquidations, bankruptcy, death, etc. - it's STILL nigh impossible to have a copyright released). In Loki's case, I'm pretty sure they also transferred their copyrights back to the original game owners, but I could be wrong. At any rate, the mere fact that Loki is gone doesn't give you the right to download a copy of the title you didn't make yourself. That's the other catch: downloading a coyp from a pal is illegal - it has to be a copy YOU MADE from your OWN original.

      And this is why I have exactly NO respect for most copyright laws and don't care one bit about the people "stealing" some music, movies, and software (but, hey - let's face it.. if someone's downloading a warez version of HL2 ten minutes after it hits store shelves... well, they're just a dirty theif).

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
  47. Pay the Piper by malia8888 · · Score: 3, Funny
    From one of the ZD Net articles:

    and some studies have shown that file-sharing may actually contribute to greater expenditure by participants on legitimate music.

    I wonder where these studies came from? Saying file-sharing encourages the purchase of legitimate music is like saying hookers encourage fidelity in marriage.:P

    --
    Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.
    1. Re:Pay the Piper by POds · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actualy i think on some level, copying music does lead to greater expenditure. I wouldnt say that it leads to greater expenditure on a nation or world wide scale but there are people that will copy music before even having heard it, just because its free.

      I've done this several time and it lead me to purchase the next albums by those artists.

      Although i'll admit, when i was younger, this free music thing was awsome to me and i'd copy things left right and center. I even resorted to buying a CD once, copying it and returning it to the store for another CD which i liked. Criminal, yes i know.

      But theres several sides to the copywrite story, but each and everytime people only seem to mention one of them. Here i've mentioned two and im sure there are others.

      --


      Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
  48. CANADA SUBSIDIZES IT'S ARTISTS... by superangrybrit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and we are already paying a percentage on storage media to artists even though some of us don't even download MP3s!!!

    We already payed for that music already through our taxes and hidden fees.

    Where does it end?

    It's time we cut the free money flow to these thieves.

  49. I wonder what information they took by hsoom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    I know we give the Americans here on /. 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.

  50. Australian law allows police to search by donscarletti · · Score: 5, Informative
    IANAL however my parents are Australian lawyers (in the states of New South Wales and Victoria, not Queensland) so I aksed them.

    Australian law allows a warrant to be issued providing that a Justice of the Peace has been convinced that there is reasonable grounds for suspecting that there is evidence of a crime on the premises.

    I don't know how this compares with the US justice system and whether this was only granted by the patriot act (I doubt it). This has been the case for many years.

    This is an invetigation of kazaa and it is reasonable that police be able to investigate suspected crimes wherever the evidence may be, otherwise criminals could conceal evidence in their homes and be totally immune to investigation.

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  51. No privacy in AU Either by DeanFox · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It appears that the United States isn't the only country where the right to privacy is extinct.

    They must get permission and you can deny them entry, but if you do, you're a criminal and have committed the crime of contempt of court. What kind of law is that!?

    I thought they broke the mold with Ashcroft. But apparently his minions have inhabited this Earth for some time now. Scary.

    From a movie I once saw... Screaming "They're all over the place. We'll never get rid of them."

  52. This is a GOOD thing. Or is it? by GQuon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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!
  53. I wondered what was going on... by james+b · · Score: 2, Informative

    This morning I was standing waiting for my bus outside the building that houses the main Kazaa/Sharman/LEF-interactive office and a couple of guys with cameras and microphones went rushing in.
    I followed them a bit of the way into the building but couldn't see anything.
    Internationally news-worthy stuff doesn't normally happen near my house :)

    /james

  54. Not the first time and it's getting worse by villoks · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well,

    This has happened before in the USA and other countries, too. For example Cult of Scientology used to be famous for its raids to the critics' homes (Zenon's case,other cases

    The situation is also getting worse in Europe, because the upcoming IPR enforcement directive will greatly strenghen Anton Pillar orders in all member states (unless we will manage to mount enough public pressure to stop the process, which is unlikely but not totally impossible - contact your MEPS today!)

    V.

  55. Reaaaaaching for a joke..... by Orion442 · · Score: 3, Funny

    NOBODY expects the US Patriot Act!!!....

    ...and now for something completely different...

  56. Re:It's ironic by TitanBL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Kazaa and the Sherman Networks people would be better off moving to somewhere like Yemen, China or Cuba, where even though you don't have some rights, I doubt they go busting down doors over copyright."

    Oh ya China, good idea, as long as you they did not facilitate the proliferation of information/material of which challenges the "Party".

    "Between 1994 and the present, China's rules and regulations on the Internet became progressively more comprehensive, moving from efforts to regulate Internet business to restrictions on news sites and chat rooms. These regulations give the government wide discretion to arrest and punish any form of expression. For example, "topics that damage the reputation of the State" are banned, but an Internet user has no way of knowing what topics might be considered injurious." More here
    They already banned google

    Yemen sounds good too right?

    Too bad they pretty much banned the Internet in Cuba.

    "History teaches us that anyone who tries to get in the way of progress either gets a war against them or is bypassed. Or to put it in other terms "nature finds a way"."

    You mean like all the wonderful progess we see in China?

    The RIAA is dying - just a matter of time.

    "The USA was built on some principles of being a new, golden land. It's heading for decline into conservatism and corruption. I think that China and India will be the new superpowers."

    I suggest you read The Declaration of Independence

  57. Goodie, goodie, goodie! by Spock+the+Baptist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
    1. Re:Goodie, goodie, goodie! by severed · · Score: 5, Funny
      I am a big fan of the constitution, and freedom in general. Heck, I don't even hate p2p, even though some people pirate stuff that I've made on it. I believe in the marketplace, and that ultimately people will choose to support the production of stuff that they like.

      However, why the big quote from the U.S. Constitution? This happened in Australia.

      Can't you quote someting Australian? :-)

      --

      HaXXXor.com - Naked Chicks Teach You How To Ha

    2. Re:Goodie, goodie, goodie! by PMuse · · Score: 2, Informative

      why the big quote from the U.S. Constitution? . . . Can't you quote someting Australian? :-)

      No, sorry. Can't quote anything Australian on the issue of freedom of speech or the press. Australia has no constitutional clause or bill of rights on this topic. These issues seem to be decided by Australia's High Court, which since 1992 has said that there is an implied right in the Australian constitution to freedom of expression of public political topics, but not on much else.

      What the Australian constitution does say is, "Chapter I. Sec. 51.The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: ... (xviii.) Copyrights, patents of inventions and designs, and trade marks." This is a great deal simpler than the version found in the U.S. Constitution: "Article I. Section 8. The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries". The actual Australian Copyright Law of 1968 makes for pretty dense reading.

      IANA Australian (in fact, IAA American), but it seems that Australia lacks a rallying cry to match that part of the U.S. constitution that the *IAA keeps trying to monopolize for themselves: Amendment I. Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. . . .

      None of this should be taken as a disparagement of Australia, of course. For instance, the U.S. copyright laws are at least as dense and a good deal more restrictive besides. It just seems that prohibiting the ownership and use of presses (e.g. CD burners) in the U.S. would involve slightly more hypocrisy than doing so in Australia. It is an equally bad idea in both places.

      --
      "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
  58. OK, I'll consider this fair... by JumperCable · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

  59. Hasn't MIPI heard... by mr_z_beeblebrox · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't squeeze the Sharman

  60. Hmmm... by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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! ~~
  61. Raided? by NetMasta10bt · · Score: 2, Funny

    What sort of redundancy does their new office layout provide? Are there any significant speed gains with this enhancement?

    [sorry been up for 24 hours rebuilding a damn E4500]

  62. Kazaa is just an enabling mechanism by Feanturi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If Sharman networks is encouraging piracy, then gun manufacturers are encouraging murder. But you don't see Smith & Wesson getting raided. Granted it's less trivial for me to obtain a gun and make the decision to shoot somebody, but I wouldn't have that power at all if nobody was making them. And that power will likely remain available to me for the rest of my days.

    By the same logic it can be said that producers of alcohol, and car manufacturers combined encourage drunk driving, because these two products are used in conjunction quite a lot, yet both industries continue to thrive unmolested.

    It comes down to personal choices made by the individuals who use these products. I dislike Sharman Networks for getting into bed with BDE and their 'secret' trojan module, and as much as I'd like to see them get a smackdown, I really hope they can just walk away from this.

  63. Re:Huh. by ichimunki · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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
  64. Tribute to Mr. Whipple by Cygnus+v1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Don't squeeze the Sharman!"

    --
    ---- Politics: Kissing ass and pointing blames.
  65. 5, Funny? by trezor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is this moded +5 Funny, because we all have given in and realised that this is the future?

    I mean, it's not funny! It's not even unlikely with the development we see worldwide these days (weak goverments, mighty corporations).

    I'd give this post +5, Apocalyptical yet realistic, but for some odd reason that moderation doesn't exist... Oh. And now I can't moderate.

    --
    Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
  66. We already do by bludstone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/07/news-sullivan.ph p

    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/gee200 40 112023398.htm

    --

    no .sig
  67. Same old oversimplistic arguement by plumby · · Score: 2, Interesting
    From the article...According to MIPI, there are around three million users simultaneously online and connected to the Kazaa network at any one time sharing around 573 million files. Over 850,000 tracks are made available by over 2,500 Australian users. If each downloaded track was purchased for US$0.99 the total would be over US$2 billion per month globally.

    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.

  68. free information by phishfood · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:free information by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >>>>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.

      Libraries have been around for thousands of years. That little thing called precident kinda puts water on that book burning thing..

      Still I can think of some great pictures, MPAA logo with a translucent swastika in burning red characters....

      --
  69. Re:Huh. by Kick+the+Donkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

    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.
  70. Interesting Timing by kwandar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

  71. Re:Huh. by godzilla808 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    >Well, who's going to stop Billionares with cops?

    How about the people who make the billionares? If people would only stop buying music!

    --
    ...///...
  72. this was Fortune Magazine Cover Story by peter303 · · Score: 3, Informative
  73. Re:Huh. by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here's how it would go down at my house:

    {knock knock} {sound of door being bashed open} Hullo? I have an Anton Pillar order thingie and I'm here to sieze stuff...

    {Blam, Blam, Blam}

    Really? I have a variety of legal firearms all protected by the 2nd Ammendment and the right to protect my home and property. Now what was that about some sort of legal order?

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  74. Try this in the US. 'specially in the south... by phoenix321 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and get shot the instant you set your first foot on the premises. No vigilant citizen should be expected to allow this madness. If the government does not protect you and your property from private intervention, heck, if it even endorses private break-in as similar to law enforcement with a warrant and due process unter public scrutiny, then it is the right and the duty of all law abiding citizens to withstand and prevent these actions and even if it sounds provocative: by all means necessary.

    The United States of America have a long tradition of people's rights, human rights, democracy and personal freedom. If someone is undermining the very foundations of this country, if they try to finally corrupt the entire state starting with the legislative process through bought senators, bypassing the judicial branch through their own actions and even replacing the executive branch with their own mobsters, it is time for every citizen to react. Form militias, arm yourselves. This is exactly what the second amendmendment was created for: empowering the citizen to protect himself from unwarranted searches, abuse of governemntal powers and the failure of the offical system. Don't tolerate private companies violating private property! Don't tolerate companies who subvert the legal process! Don't tolerate the corruption of the land of the free!

    And please remember the following sentences: "I don't agree with what you said, but I'd fight to my death for your right to say it!".

    I don't endorse the breach of copyright or anything like that. Even if Sharman Networks did violate this law or another, I will not hesitate to fight with them or anyone else who is denied his constitutional rights and due process over a non-violent, non-capital and non-life threatening crime.

    (Even if it sounds provocative or flamebait, it is not meant as such. I truly believe in the law and the constitution as the only rightful way to run a country. Posting logged-in to emphase this, even if the TIA and the rest of the three-letter agency scum will have a field day with their eternal databases. And yes, I reinstate: this comment is about about militant actions against the enemies of the constitution and yes I do make a call to arms against attempts to corrupt the last ones of our private rights.)

    By the people - for the people. Nothing else!

  75. Re:p2p valid uses and Movie/Music cost too much!!! by tdwebste · · Score: 2, Informative

    p2p networks have lots of other uses besides music and movie sharing. p2p networks good for sharing any very popular files. A good example where p2p networks might work very well for sharing debian packages.

    IMHO some of the reasons why sharing movies online is so popular are

    1) movies are released 6 months after they are in the US. So if I want to see a recent movie I must get it "illegally"!!

    2) movies are simply too expensive to see in the movie theaters. Last year I saw 2 movies. I simply can not afford the "price" of movies, sorry I am not rich!!

    3) renting movies alwasy struck me as dumb idea. I find watching a movie twice to be a rather unpleasent experience.
    a) After I watching the movie once, it is worthless.
    b) The movies I rent always have scratches.

    So IMHO I should be able to buy a movie for around half the price of a movie ticket, because I don't have a big screen at home. And a movie that'a an old release should cost half as much again.

    I currently buy most of the movies I watch for a little under $2.00 US per CD. And at that price p2p sharing is not worth the bother.

  76. Its a UK law, incidentally by steve_l · · Score: 2, Informative

    It is worth noting that you cannot blame the Aussies for the law, it is something they took from the UK and have retained, though both countries could drop it.

    It is very, very rare -its a kind of pre-emptive seizure which can only be justified by the 'recipients will destroy the evidence' claim.

    Note also that in the UK there are essentially no limits on what the state security organisations can do in the country. Unlike the US, where the CIA and NSA are allowed to break US and local laws abroad. I guess only the FBI can break laws on the US mainland?

    Whatever, the key point is that one democratic countries legal system cannot and should not act as a replica for another. Britain has silly laws (anton pillar, Prevention of Terrorism (emergency powers) act 1974 + successors, RIP (the encryption one), and politicians (esp that david blunkett) are always trying to copy the worst bits of other countries. And that is where we all need to keep an eye on all 'harmonisation' programs, be they copyright, privacy, terrorism: they always go to the most repressive, not the least.

  77. Wake up... by virid · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is not tin-foil hats, this is real. The U.S. Patriot act gives the government the right to go into your house go through your computer and never tell anyone they were there. Also, if you happen to figure out they were there, and you tell anyone, they can put you in jail.

    Welcome to your country...

    --
    "The world only exists in your eyes. You can make it as big or as small as you want." - F Scott Fitzgerald
  78. Actually by JMZero · · Score: 3, Informative

    A lot of porn companies apparently put samples on the file sharing networks as ads. Some apparently even include popups of their sites embedded in wmv's.

    --
    Let's not stir that bag of worms...
  79. Re:Huh. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Yeah, baby! Vote with your dollars!

    I see you've bought yer DVDs and movie tickets...

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  80. Actually... by cr0sh · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Saying file-sharing encourages the purchase of legitimate music is like saying hookers encourage fidelity in marriage.

    While I don't know about the validity of the concept, I do know that there have been studies done exploring the concept that use of prostitutes (as well as having other sexual partners) outside of the marriage can help strengthen and keep the marriage together.

    ::: TANGENT AHEAD :::

    Note that this isn't the same as "fidelity" in marriage, though. Some people have different concepts on what marriage and mutual love can mean/represent. Marriage is more of a contract of trust and commitment. That doesn't mean that two people (who are married) couldn't come to a mutual, trusted agreement to allow each other to seek partners outside of marriage (ie, "open marriages"). It is when that trust breaks down (ie, not telling the other person - whether that is at the beginning or elsewise, not sharing feelings, etc), that the marriage is likely to fall apart.

    This is where the concept of poligamy (and polyamory) is twisted in so many individual's minds. For these people, it seems inconceivable that more than two (unrelated) people can love each other in both a mutual and sexually based manner revolving around trust - yet have no problem with the concept of loving families (that is, groups of family-related people who love each other in a mutual, non-sexual, and trusted manner).

    Once again, if the trust breaks down - whether it is between two people in a traditional or "open" marriage, three or more people in a polygamous or polyamorous "marriage", many people (in a traditional loving family), or hundreds of people (in a corporation) - that structure is going to break down. We see it with so-called "loving" marriages that fall apart, dysfunctional families on Jerry Springer (I know, cheap shot), and Enron.

    It has nothing to do with the structure, but rather the trust (and in the case of marriages and families, the love being exchanged via that trust).

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  81. Re:Huh. by Xeleema · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mod Up!

    Wanted: One Motivated Marine. Must provide Rifle. Other Expenses covered. Includes one-way ticket to Utah.

    ~~~~~
    HARTMAN: Do any of you people know who Charles Whitman was? No response.

    HARTMAN: None of you dumbasses knows?

    COWBOY raises his hand.

    HARTMAN: Private Cowboy?

    COWBOY: Sir, he was that guy who shot all those people from that tower in Austin, Texas, sir!

    HARTMAN: That's affirmative. Charles Whitman killed twenty people from a twenty-eight-story observation tower at the University of Texas from distances up to four hundred yards.

    HARTMAN: looks around.

    HARTMAN: Anybody know who Lee Harvey Oswald was? Almost everybody raises his hand.

    HARTMAN: Private Snowball?

    SNOWBALL: Sir, he shot Kennedy, sir!

    HARTMAN: That's right, and do you know how far away he was?

    SNOWBALL: Sir, it was pretty far! From that book suppository building, sir!

    The recruits laugh at "suppository."

    HARTMAN: All right, knock it off! Two hundred and fifty feet! He was two hundred and fifty feet away and shooting at a moving target. Oswald got off three rounds with an old Italian bolt action rifle in only six seconds and scored two hits, including a head shot! Do any of you people know where these individuals learned to shoot?

    JOKER raises his hand.

    HARTMAN: Private Joker?

    JOKER: Sir, in the Marines, sir!

    HARTMAN: In the Marines! Outstanding! Those individuals showed what one motivated marine and his rifle can do! And before you ladies leave my island, you will be able to do the same thing!

    ~~~~~
    http://www.short-timers.com/fmj.html

    --
    "When I am king, you will be first against the wall..."