Slashdot Mirror
P2P Bits
yohaas writes "Two Op-Ed stories today in the NY Times address music sharing. In one Kembrew McLeod says that the lawsuits aren't working and gives some alternate suggestions. In the other Harvard Law professor William Fisher says that the industry is going about the situation in the wrong way, concluding that 'the record industry's response to file sharing--trying to block the technology altogether--would generate the worst of all possible results'. Neither article is comprehensive, but they are good read nonetheless." Reader Brill Pappin points out that Canadians aren't afraid of the music industry. And reader The Importance of Being Earnest writes "The INDUCE Act, which would make it a crime to 'induce' copyright infringement, such as by inventing things like the Betamax, has finally been officially introduced. The bill has been renamed the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act [PDF]. In addition to the name change, there has been another slight modication: 'counsel' is no longer part of the proposed statute. Here is a line-by-line refutation of Hatch's introduction [PDF] to the Act. EFF has shown how broad the Act is by writing a mock lawsuit [PDF] suing Apple (for making the iPod), C|Net (for reviewing the iPod), and Toshiba (for supplying hard drives for iPods). Previous Slashdot coverage here."
Well atleast they dropped the Child Exploitation part.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
If bill is passed, please INDUCE vomitting.
And WHY do you put up with it?
I really don't understand...
great.. more laws BOUGHT to prop up an obsolete business model.
when do we start enforcing the constitution and putting a stop to legalized political bribery?
-lk
"The INDUCE Act, which would make it a crime to 'induce' copyright infringement, such as by inventing things like the Betamax, has finally been officially introduced. The bill has been renamed the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act"...isn't a loophole for this simply making a multi-funtion method for *whatever* where one of the funtions happens to circumvent or break copyright protections?
Fingers crossed... ...that this act never makes it as a law. ...that the EFF's mock lawsuit is seen and understood by people with influence. ...that Senator Hatch's financial backing discredits his attempts to ruin intellectual property.
To make a pig go forward, tie a string around its leg and pull it backward.
The basic instinct of anyone or anything - pig or human (or as the RIAA seems to consider P2P users pigs) - is to go the opposite of the way you're being directed. Now, I'm not saying the RIAA should encourage P2P, I'm just saying they are definitely going about it the wrong way. I've gotta agree, they're doing it all the wrong way. Perhaps some positive campaigns, not negative ones?
--<Mike>--
Reader Brill Pappin points out that Canadians aren't afraid of the music industry.
Not really true, there's just a bit of confusion going on now. The courts are sorting it out for us and will let us know if we should be afraid or not real soon.
There was a photo of the Culture minister wearing a t-shirt that said "I support canadianmusic.com." Of course, it really should have said "I support thecanadianmusicindustry.com." Two entirely different things.
Pretty logic Canadians are not afraid....
File sharing is legal here...
http://news.com.com/2100-1027-5182641.html
Overuse of the Pumping Lemma causes blindness
That the RIAA is spending millions or tens of millions or more of their "hard earned" money to combat piracy, but yet they see fit to increase the price of downloaded songs from iTunes, Napster, etc. At $.99 songs were a bargain, but why the hell would I go out to download an album that I can buy on a CD for the same price???
sPh
I could start about how corporations have bought the congress and that we are going down a road to hell, but unfortunately it has been this way for a long time
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
Can't write ftp code. Could be used to copy files... Worse, don't try reading a childrens book to your kids while away on business (which the US Navy encourages by offering recording services). Unlawful encoding of copyrited material.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
File sharing is legal in Canada and its had no effect on the quality of music and art, just look at all the high quiality IP comming out of the land up north! I even hear that Shatner is back in the recording studio.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Orrin Hatch needs to be voted out of office promptly and permanently. In fact he should be barred from participating in any political process for the rest of his life.
A Fatal OE Exception has occurred, Sig will now reboot.
Both assume that somehow the RIAA should play nice with alternative distribution/promotion methods, and somehow that they are trying to do that, just going about it the wrong way.
Frankly, that's foolish.
The RIAA has absolutly nothing to gain by releasing the promotional controls they have over the industry. Why? Because it completly removes all their power. P2P/Webcasting make the threat of the next big thing coming up outside their reach very possible...and possibly very likly.
The fight over P2P and webcasting is not intended to raise money in the short term, it's intended to monopolize the promotional channels to ensure their long-term relevence.
One of the linked sites proposes that a monthly access fee that allows users to share files indiscriminately('freely') is the ultimate and best solution. The problem with this is, how are we going to determine how the money will be distributed among the many target beneficiaries (the various record companies, the artists and composers who are paid a commission, etc.)
_____
Internet, Productivity Blog
Let's say the EFF's worst nightmare scenario occurs, and legislation eventually gets passed making all sorts of things, from DRM-free hard drives to writing simple Internet clients, to "unprotected" ADCs in every possible consumer device, illegal. Eventually the people are going to realize that we've stumbled into Regulations Hell, and the people will demand a repeal of all of these stupid laws. "Load a program, go to jail" laws will not be popular, and when ordinary people start getting busted for doing utterly benign things, there will be a backlash.
The simple fact of the matter is that the existance of the Internet has made unlimited digital sharing a reality. The genie's out, people love getting free stuff, and nothing short of a police state is going to stop it. The content providers are either going to have to find a business model to take advantage of this, or learn to live with it. It's that simple.
dinner: it's what's for beer
I hope this passes since it could be great at generating income for me or at least be a great investment. First off I can sue Dell since I have a computer from them and it was really easy to get and they gave me no warnings on how easy it was to use a computer to commit fraud. Then I can sue Microsoft for making an operating system that allows for easy copy right infringement. Their "copy" and "paste" methods have cost trillions and trillions of lost sales and IP revenue. Then I am going to sue my ISP for giving me internet access. Finally I am going to sue the government for inventing ARPA Net which evolved into the IP stealing networks we have today. There are pleanty of others on this list but I think this is a good start. All I need is a couple hundred million dollars to start the lawsuits but the return on this inventsment is quite substantial.
this is the most important sig ever! In your face 446154!
Lord knows I don't agree at all with the RIAA/MPAA, and it certainly hasn't stopped me (or probably most other /. readers from "sampling" music "before I buy").
But, their tactics have worked reasonably well, at least as a low-pass filter. I'd say that the lower 80% (in terms of resourcefulness) have significantly reduced or altogether ceased downloading music and videos online. Everyone is afraid at some level of the RIAA, and the effect has been noticeable. Whether or not the RIAA's campaign has been cost-effective is another matter, but that's not to say that it hasn't worked.
This lawsuit is creepy, but extremely plausible. After reading so much Grooklaw recently I felt like I was reading a real lawsuit. Time to write our senators this weekend. Find your senators here:
And the EFF's action item on this, complete with a sample letter, is here.
We should all make a habit of this - I personally don't write these people often enough.
Lawsuit brought against audio / video equipment manufacturers and the studios that bought them that allowed the music / movies to be recorded in the first place. Then the equipment manufacturers and companies that used them that created the CDs, cassettes, DVDs, and VHS tapes of the movies that allow people to see them and possibly record them. Then we go onto the chain stores who purchase the equipment to play them and the media that contains the information that can be copied. all of this before we ever hit the first end-user law-suit.
Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
Could this legislation possibly make posting dupes illegal and finally put a stop to them?
about 15-20 years ago, I was a contributing editor in a long defunct computer magazine.
At a meeting, we had read Jerry's latest rant. It was a particularly idiotic rant, which was saying something. As a rule, he generally gave good reviews to equipment that was given to him and the manufacturer sent a tech to his house to get it set up.
Anyway, I asked the editor in chief (as I was a young pup), why do people read him, and why does the magazine employee him.
He likened Jerry to the town drunk. Yea, you know he a stupid drunk, no you don't take him seriously, but he is a helluva a lot of fun to watch stumble around.
It's all Orrin Hatch's fault, that guy must have RIAA/MPAA agents camped out in his lobby 24/7. Perhaps Utah will wise up and replace the dude.
It's the end of the world and you know it
O no now im gonna get sued
A psychopath can't tell the difference between right and wrong. A sociopath knows the difference - he just doesn't care.
are they making on these matters ?
Its getting too much for many to keep track of.
Are there any chance of these laws beeing implemented ?
Its almost so frequent im thinking "hey let them implement this crap and let THEM find out in a few years this is worst for them (as long as it doesnt come here)"
And by them i mean in the USA
In essence, any business who makes a product that forces the users to infringe is now illegal. Business must create products that allow legal and fair use of IP. You guys got what you wanted. Bravo.
It's a fine day when Atlas Shrugged finally comes to life.
Downhill Battle is the group that's best leading the fight to stop the RIAA and the major record labels. Check out the summer concert flyering campaign.
Don't use Kazaa.
Use one of the below.
ES5
Filetopia
Freenet(slow)
http://www.ovmj.org/GNUnet/
http://mute-net.sourceforge.net/
Dear Senator Hatch,
In order to comply with the Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act of 2004, I am turning in my now illegal devices which can be used to infringe copyrights to you so that they can be properly disposed of.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Now, round up a bunch of broken VCRs and old 486 PCs (think thrift stores), and send them, along with your letter to:
Senator Orrin Hatch
104 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON DC 20510
Unknown host pong.
Does anyone know the cumulative total of all the RIAA lawsuits? These are just being instantiated in order to scare the general populus into thinking they get sued. Sure, go download music as much as you want but if you share it you get sued. It is definitely a one way street.
What I don't understand is that I can have an archive of music on a network and someone can "break in" and steal that music from me and then I can get sued by the RIAA. Where is the logic in that!
Aj
GroupShares Inc. - A Free and Interactive Stock Market Community
-------
artlu.net
Well, there's a fairly simple solution to that.
Expand the issue to not being merely file sharing (which is an issue of reproduction and distribution) but expand it to the entire scope of copyright (so that this scheme would also apply to creating derivatives, and some public distributions and performances and such), and then instead of paying a monthly fee, don't pay at all. But rather than make this available altogether, which would merely be the abolishment of copyright, instead only permit natural persons to be shielded by this, provided they are acting noncommercially.
Then things become pretty simple: ordinary people don't pay artists at all, unless either a) they want to (because they feel charitable, or can't find an alternative source for the works) or b) they're using it commercially. Businesses would of course have to pay regardless of whether or not they're using the work commercially.
How that money is allocated would be just as it is now: up to the various parties involved to hash out.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I can't be the *only* one to read the headline and imagine something not dissimilar to the TCP/IP "evil" bit?
That's a scary bill, I don't think it will pass, its too vague.
But, I'm getting tired of hearing how some elected fuck nut bought and paid for by special interests are introducing a bill to fuck over Americans.
Key word, ELECTED OFFICAL.
How can I hope for the best for America, when they want to re-elected people like this over and over. When questioning our presidents actions is Un-American? When watching a movie like Fahrenheit 9/11 can make your blood boil, and still people don't do anything.
Seems like the Dark Ages.
The RIAA is just another group funded by large corporations to pursue their interests, rather than the interests of individuals, and I could care less if they disappeared tomorrow. I know this, though: Sharing songs with no revenue going to the people that created them is financially harmful to the songwriters. Music isn't something that a person can't live without, and listening to radio is free.
Here's something else I know. If labels like RCA didn't spend $250,000 recording a CD (that could be done for easily 1/10 that cost) they'd have less to cry about in the profit news.
Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
the lawsuits are such a joke, they don't impede anyone. and they just make 12 yr olds suffer.
Best Community for Gaming and Gadgets!
These days, Sony (re)introduces the MiniDisc. The MiniDisc can play "illegal" MP3-files, just like the iPod (although MP3-files must be converted to Sony's ATRAC format). If the iPod might be "illegal" according to the proposed law, then the MiniDisc must be illegal as well. Sony has known for years that the MiniDisc could store and play "pirated" music, that's why they made it impossible to use them as MP3-players. And that's why RIAA, Sony Music and other record companies tried to fight the original MP3-players such as the Rio. Sony should know about "illegal copying", after all they introduced the Betamax - a device that some people thought would ruin the movie industry.
EFF has shown how broad the Act is by writing a mock lawsuit [PDF] suing Apple (for making the iPod)
Ummm...that's not too far from reality. The RIAA tried to sue Rio for making MP3 players in the late 90's. I refer you to this wired article.
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
"Senator Orrin Hatch today introduced a bill that supporters say would prevent software companies from profiting from Internet piracy. But opponents say it would outlaw legitimate technology, possibly even VCRs. Orinn Hatch's campaign received contributions from the bill's industry supporters in his last election."
Sounded like a Headline News blurb until the last sentence huh? Just imagine if news outlets were required to report on Politicians' conflicts of interest when they were mentioned in connection with legislation that would benefit their backers. Just imagine how much effect that little disclaimer would have on the mind of people listening to the story. We could do a better job of controlling campaign influence than McCain-Feingold does without limiting free speech at all. Whores like Hatch and Boxer would be exposed on a regular basis. IANAL though, so what do you guys think?
... Al Gore. :-)
Man, there's this great ad campaign in Vancouver, BC where a kid gets caught stealing a candy bar and just tells his dad 'but you steal satellite singals.' It's brought to you by the concerned statelite people of north america or something.o otleggers feel bad about themselves?!? I just wish the cable companies or record companies would flat out admit it's them who are frowning apon what you are doing
Man, i love those 'Concerened X's of Y.' Who are these people. Are they a a group of house wives (or husbands) who get together and say 'our society is falling to pieces, we must raise money to publish adds that will make satelite-single-stealers/internet-pirates/movie-b
At the end of teh day, I'm goign to give up UT because 'killing people online is still killing.'
And remember children: 'When you download MP3s, you Download Communism!!!'
The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
Funny thing, I already pay a monthly fee for file sharing, talk to my ISP.
Unix, an obscure operating system developed by bored researchers in an attempt to get a better game playing experience.
Can I file a lawsuit on someone's behalf? For example, if I am on a bus and someone is humming or whistling a tune, can I sue that person on behalf of the RIAA for violating copyright by doing an illegal public performance of a copywrighted work? It seems to me that the more lawsuits and more attention the RIAA gets will undermine all their attempts to where a politician would rather be supported by Hammas than the RIAA.
'Same speed C but faster'
Assuming that this passes, here is a partial list of technologies that will shortly be outlawed, as they could be used to violate IP laws...
Portable MP3 Players (iPod, Rio, etc)
Tape Decks
Record Players
DVD Players
Camcorders
VCR's
Computers
Cell Phones
Voice Mail
Cameras
Typewriters
Pencils
Pens
Paint Brushes
Chalk
This list subject to change at will without notice.
There is no mod option "-1: Disagree" for a reason. "Overrated" is not an acceptable substitute. Post something instead.
Exactly which of his constituants is Senator Hatch representing by introducing this bill? The Osmunds?
The way I read the text of the INDUCE Act that offending "activity" would have to clearly be intended for infringement and "...including whether the activity relies on infringement for its commercial viability" so this is not describing any software or device that facilitates piracy but rather software or devices that clearly have a purpose of nothing other than piracy *and* the creators of said tool are using it as a revenue source. So I'm not sure how this would apply to cases where a kid writes a crack tool and releases it for free... since there's no revenue, no commercial viability, does this not apply?
We are all presumed guilty anyway, as we are charged a tax on blank CD's for money to go to the "poor starving" artists. SOCAN has collected the money, but last I had heard none (or very little) had ever made it to the artists as it was mainly used to pay for the administration of collecting the fee.
This is not the sig line you are looking for... -- Old Jedi Sig Line Trick
The EFF picked the wrong subject for their pseudo-lawsuit to illustrate the idiocy of the law. A better choice would have been a lawsuit against Sony (Beta) and JVC and Panasonic (VHS) over their introduction of the VCR. Joe Sixpack probably doesn't know the iPod from Adam's off ox, but he knows what he records the football game on and how inconvenient it'd be if he couldn't.
the market is saying that the prices are too high (among other things)... perhaps the record companies should lower their prices and maybe people will be willing to ante up the pennies or so per song...
Take any Kazaa search query, add the phrase "parent directory" and "index of", and type it into Google. Now, who do you sue? Google, for not teaching their webcrawlers that there are good pages to index and evil pages to index? Microsoft and the Apache Software Foundation, for writing filesharing software that can commit copyright infringement?
In practice the answer will be "You sue whomever you can bully into an out-of-court settlement", but I'd like to know what this bill's sponsors think the answer should be.
Think about it, Joe Schmoe doesn't give a fuck about their freedom because it isn't in their face enough. Let this go through as a law and watch the shit fly as they try taking all those Joes' video recorders away.
Wanna have more fun? Then make sure you send a nice peaceful mob around to every polititon and **AA member's home and confiscate their illegal recording devices too.
XP is basicly 98 with a lot more extra features to hunt down and disable. --Dram
You know its true!
It's not surprising that Canadians are not flocking to pay sites for music. At $.99 USD for each song, an entire CD will often cost more than $20 CAD. Most CD's in Canada are already priced at $12-$16 CAD. Why would we want more expensive, inferior quality music in the form of MP3 or other?
Prohibition lasted 14 years.
/raises his glass of free as in beer to the next 14 years of Prohibition
The DMCA was 4 years ago.
Does this mean we only have another ~10 years before the backlash gets us out of "regulation hell"? Or should we count from some other regulation, perhaps the IICA Hatch is proposing?
I wonder who will be our generation's Al Capone?
(But it's already illegal to copy and distribute)
But we need to protect our precious property!
(But you're asking to put regulations in effect that stifle innovation)
But we need to protect our precious property!
(But you're disabling all manner of legitmate and fair use)
But we need to protect our precious property!
(But what you propose causes immeasurable collateral damage that has nothing to do with your industry)
But we need to protect our precious property!
(But these laws will criminalize millions of hobbyists who respect and obey copyright law)
But we need to protect our precious property!
(But the measures you propose will do nothing to stop the large-scale bootlegging that is your actual problem)
But we need to protect our precious property!
...and so forth. There is no new content here, and that is going to be the arguement from the studios and publishers from now until the end of time.
dinner: it's what's for beer
By introducing this bill, doesn't he "induce" us into breaking the law, by using devices that we already own that are capable of doing what he wishes to prevent with this law?
Wouldn't that make him the prime Inducer?
Or would the fact that the devices and software already exist, be somehow grandfathered in as being non-inducive as they were legal when they were made, sold, bought?
Wouldn't enforcing a bill recently passed into law be illegal if used to criminally prosecute those who used said items prior to the laws introductions as well?
I have questions. Who has answers?
Who is general failure, and why is he reading my hard drive?
The Canadian Culture Minister you're talking about is Hélène Chalifour Scherrer, and she has a bill to make downloading music not legal again. However, we are days away from the Canadian election, and the riding she's in (Louis-Hébert, Quebec) is a tight race according to this site. Make sure you check this site again after the election (June 28th) to see her fate. And for our Canadian slashdot readers, please get out and vote!
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
newsflash, guns can be misused, yet I don't think we'll be making those illegal
The bottom line is: I don't think its that much of an issues that the music labels might loose a business model entirely. Jobs have been lost for less and just because a small group of over-paid people happens to be on the line it certainly doesnt mean we should loose rights. Factories close all the time and 1000's loose thier jobs just like that, and all it gets is a 10 minute news item. No-one ever suggests we should have continued the manual production line instead of using robots. There are far fewer people who stand to loose much over loss of CD sales and most of them make enough in a year to retire for ever. The industry is saturated with bad music and acts that all sound the same and frankly it wouldnt be such a disaster if it collapsed. I don't believe for a minute that suddenly no-one would produce music, small-time groups probably wouldnt even tell the difference, neither would those with serious fan-bases, music concerts would still be popular, but you probably wouldnt be able to make millions off crappy boy-bands that churn out the same headache inducing crap every month and the side-effect would be many people not bothering to start their own group because "theres not enough money in it" oh what a loss!
For years CDs have been sold on the economic principle of supply and demand - people have been prepared to pay nearly as much as a concert ticket to buy a CD (say 1/2 - 1/3) because in their head they figure "i can listen to the CD 100's of times so it must be worth it. Meanwhile the labels and to some extent the artists have thought "well i can sing this song once and sell it 1000's of times!" Now the consumers have started to figure that they can get music for free, this is also how supply and demand works, no its not the same as shop-lifting or raiding the warehouse! so get over it. Governments have no right to screw with our rights over this.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Kudos to the poster for having finally posted a direct link to a NYT article.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
THANK YOU! Someone understands what I am getting at.
The only way to stop digital copying and sharing is to OUTLAW COMPUTERS. Because digital copying and sharing is what computers do. An appropriate analogy would be trying to outlaw language because it could be used to slander someone. Well, you know, if people want to say bad things about you behind your back, they are going to do so, as long as people are allowed to talk. It doesn't make slander morally right, but the possibility of it is going to exist and have to be lived with, because we have language, and the expression of ideas (slanderous or no) is WHAT LANGUAGE IS FOR.
dinner: it's what's for beer
Worse still, if monthly access fees are required, why should users pay for files the creators chose to distribute freely--such as with a Creative Commons or open source license.
If everyone has to pay a fee, then speech is hardly free.
I think that it is clear from this piece that Pournelle has conflated two different arguments in his head. One is the one that Doctorow has made against DRM, saying it is at its core unworkable and bad for all those involved. The other is the one made so often by P2P users that they should not have to pay for copyright works.
Somewhere Pournelle seems to have jumped to the conclusion that giving up on DRM means giving up on copyright altogether. That is not the case.
-snip-
So what we are really saying here is not do individual authors and composers have a moral right to dictate how their creations shall be distributed, but do they have rights in the legal sense that will be enforced by laws and both civil and criminal courts?
Doctorow and his group say "not really." He also chooses his examples carefully, most of them out at the extremes; but everyone knows that hard cases make bad law, and while the law has to deal with extreme cases, it isn't normally written with only those cases in mind.
-snip-
Imagine, for example, that Apple talked the RIAA into allowing them to remove DRM from songs sold via the iTunes Music Store. What kind of effect would this have on music piracy? Not much, I would argue. All of those songs are already available as mp3s on the P2P networks. The cat is already out of the bag. Adding more (legit) copies of those mp3s will not contribute substantially, partially because people who use the legit services are less likely to use P2P networks.
There is a point that Steve Jobs made when he announced the iTunes music store. The core of it is this: if you make a legal option that is superior to the free options (easier to use, more convenient) most people will chose it. Current technology has made infringement much easier, and you will never be able to stamp it out entirely. What you can do is provide options that more people will want to use.
Well, what if I built an illegal free iTMS? I don't think there is a way to do this. Anything centralized can be busted, and anything distributed will most likely be less reliable.
It is still be the job of law enforcement to try to keep large-scale infringment from happening. Technology makes infringement that much easier, but DRM does not really make it much harder. This doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and give on copyright. But it doesn't mean DRM is the right answer either.
Two quick things about this bill:
1. This has a GREAT chance of passing as Hatch is getting bipartisan support from Minority Chair of the committee Sen. Leahy as well as Majority Leader Frist (Senate Head) and Minority Leader Daschle. This puppy is on the fast track.
2. Rumor has it that Microsoft wrote it and that Apple quietly supports it - despite the iPod stuff. Why? Money to be made from DRM.
nice that I submitted a story about this legislation wednesday. not newsworthy apparently...
Please note, this isn't just a one sided issue. This bill also has it's cosponors Bill Frist (Senate Majority Leader) and Tom Daschle (Senate Minority Leader). We have to call our Senators NOW to stop this.
Also of interest, might be the comments made by Senator Leahy (D-VT) and Senator Frist (R-TN). I've got the entire senate discussion of the bill available on my web page. You should read it and the EFF's rebuttal before calling your senator.
Take action now and we can kill this before it ruins innovation.
My Slashdot account is old enough to drink...
this reminds me of an old one from the RHF http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/90q3/hogs.html
VKh
I think it's funny that they took out the "counsel" part of the original bill. It means that Mr. Hatch is actually listening to criticism, but perhaps only from lawyers.
One article states 23 mil another 40 to 60 mil so my question is where are they coming up with the number s of who is downloading in america.
Never could figure out why my girl liked my bitch tits, then I found out she was a lesbian.
They will never be able to stop P2P. Look at the drug trade. Look at the forces arrayed against them. Not just lawyers with subpoenas but men with guns. Look at the propaganda! Look at the prison time. And yet see how much weed, H and blow are being enjoyed by the masses. "Poor is the man whose pleasure depends on the permission of another." The only people the lawsuits will scare off are the chickenshits.
Thanks for reminding me to vote this year. In my state, the registration forms are online, and I expect EVERYONE who gripes on this list about legislation in their democratic country to VOTE against people who would pass such idiotic laws. I'll be waiting at the polls to watch for you! (Wait, that would be illegal, too...)
Or, here's an idea: Inducing Infringement of Personal Liberties Act. With this innovative new legislation, we could prosecute such evildoers as auto, steak knife, and duct tape companies for maliciously producing products that can easily be used by criminals for such heinous crimes as kidnapping! After all, what are a few CDs compared to a human life?
baaaa
Social media and technology thoughts: http://jasonkinner.wordpress.com
Even if this did make it into law, it would still have to be proven in court. I would think that most "defendants" under this law would try to prove the legislation in it's current form is too broad in scope, as virtually anything can be used to infringe at least something that's "copyright protected". I'd be willing to bet that some judge looks at this and dismiss the case.
If I remember correctly, American law is unenforceable outside of it's borders, but it'll be interesting to see if other countries (e.g. Canada) follows suit.
It is not our abilities that show what we truly are... it is our choices.
The problem with this study is that the people uder study were also under observation. There is a large difference in how people will behave for an authority present and watching, and a distant authority that is not immediatley felt.
You gave one nice example, but I have a much larger one for you - speeding. Speeding is also illegal yet you go out any highway in the nation and drive the speed limit to see how well it is obeyed. Another example is HOV lanes - I see plenty of people driving singly on these, even on the ENCLOSED portions! In Colorado that's a much worse penalty than speeding.
For a last proof of how the campain is not working, just fire up your P2P app and look for popular music. A recent example was the soundtrack to Shrek 2, which had about 50-60 people sharing per track when I was looking. These numbers do not seem to be declining, so while the story of your friend is interesting it's the exception rather than the rule.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I wonder who will be our generation's Al Capone?
The great thing about P2P is that we can ALL be Al Capone, just with fewer machine guns.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
oh fuck, I found a piece of soft dark rock and a light hard colored piece of rock, am I in trouble now?
If making things that could infringe on copyright becomes a crime, how long will it be until we have a law that makes anyone who created something that ended up being used in a crime a criminal? Gun makers? Easily. BB Gun makers? That too. How about cars which managed to out run the cops in a chase? Sure this sounds ridiculous and far fetched, but so does this law thats being proposed now.
copywrite infringement != theft
.... loony, fucked up bitch.
So is it illegal to induce a minor to purchase a CD by selling a pornographic artist, such as Britney Spears or Madonna?
Or selling Coca-Cola by having a very sexually attractive actress in a commercial?
$8.95/mo web hosting
3d20
Bearshare can suck my cock.
Spyware lamers.
just think... I can create a text file and place it on a web server. its copyrighted. all rights reserved. Someone is allowed to view it with their browser... but that's all. but of course IE can save the file... and a person can use Windows cut-n-paste feature to copy and save it into a Notepad. and of course the Windows OS has both a command line copy and windows copy commands. All inducing a user to commit crimes!! I can sue MS and reap big bucks from their inducing others to steal my copyrighted works! Yahoo!!!
I mean seriously, someone want to sue me for working on an FTP client that "induces" piracy? Anybody? Think you'd win? And then I could appeal the ruling and get a dumb law struck down (that is, if this idiotic thing passes...).
Does Congress know what kind of technology this bill would make illegal? I mean, the DMCA is one thing (see the deCSS Haiku for awesomeness), but this is just amazing. Glad he's not the senator from my state - but I have nothing to brag about...
I [may] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
what a fucking dumbass. Hell he would fit right in the cabinet. Jerkoff bastard gets paid off by the riaa to put up bills like this.
i'd like to cut his balls off and force him to eat them.
The bill basically makes computers illegal, so wouldn't that make Mr. Hatch a criminal since he probably typed the bill?
Remember, beneath every cynic there lies a romantic, probably an injured one.
The best thing about the RIAA is that they are reaping what they've sown. Many artists that they promote sing about disrespecting authority, getting all you want without working, the pleasures of moral degeneracy, etc. After irresponsibly feeding children that crap, helping to influence them to be selfish adults, they then expect us all to be saints and not us the P2P networks because it's morally wrong. Pleeease! They should have thought about morality a little bit earlier.
If IIAC is introduced, does that mean cp and copy are outlawed? While it might be funny to have a whole lot of congressmen get really embarassed when they are no longer allowed to install ANYTHING on their computer, I think this just is not a good idea.
...that's why there is nowhere near as much corruption as in the United States (which is second only to Italy in my books).
Hell, you're not even allowed to lobby MP's to table questions, there was a huge "Cash for Questions" furore a few years ago when a businessman paid an MP to ask two questions in the commons. That one ended up in court (and one disgrased former MP).
I find the whole IDEA of a lobby to be quite chilling, politicians are there to represent the people of their constituency first, not big business who make so much money they have no right bitching about things in the first place.
At the end of the day, if the RIAA members had embraced online music half a decade ago this would all be a moot point, it is their archaic ways that have put them in the mess they are in now - they should get with the times rather than relying on new laws with which to sue their customers.
I am NaN
stays in America. I feel sorry for you guys, having to live in a system run by the rich for the rich. Suxz to be you eh. ~ a happily poor Canadian
ps sure mod this down, that only proves the point you can't handle the reality that greed and irresponsibility have eliminated individual freedom in America.
Tell me: When we're all felons, how will we vote against our oppressors?
Welcome to the real strategy behind the war on drugs. Selective enforcement of unbounded laws is the ability to remove the right to vote from anyone that disagrees. If none of those who disagree can affect a change, do you really think any change can be had-- especially since *they* control the media?
They started early last century with prohibition, which failed. They then tried with drugs. Now they're trying with music. Next will be sex.
Soon all the pleasures will be owned by the state and everyone will think "Gee, that's just so double-plus good!". Afterall, in just 400 years we had replaced the heel of the Church with the heel of the State.
*Solemnly removes triple-ply aluminum fedora*
It's so sad--
What was I saying?
Oh well, I think I'll go watch some Fox News, and see how our friend Bush is bashing those bastards in Iraq!
Bribary IS illegal now. The problem is that there are many ways to give money for 'favors' legally, and get around the problem.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Isn't it funny that point of copyright is too promote creative works (such as high tech), but this law protects copyright by creating a legal minefield for hightech devices and software typically covered by the term "creative works". This law clearly shows that congress is NOT deriving their powers from the constitution, for example where does it say they can deter "creative works", oh wait....(sorry for the over used cliche, but it works so well)
And somebody PLEASE drag me into court for breaking it.
The first thing my defence lawyer would do is have the COURT STENOGRAPHER arrested for using a device which INDUCEs users to INFRINGE COPYRIGHT.
The second thing would be to ask the PROSECUTION if they have a piece of paper/writing pad/pen or even a pencil, either on their person or if they even own or use any of these devices. (And then have THEM arrested for breaking the law).
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
I wonder how many senators would have to go home and uninstall their CD burners and throw away their mp3 players and VCRs once(if) they pass this...
My email:
/ 20040330/tc_washpost/a34300_
d ex_e.cfm.
Honourable Ms. Scherrer;
I have heard your recent comments about seeking to change the Copyright Act.
I would urge you to consider very carefully what steps are taken in any
changes to this act. As the act stands, Canadians pay a levy on
recordable media, money from which specifically goes to the music industry in
compensation for supposed lost revenues.
As such if the law is changed, I would also expect any media levies to be
immediately lifted, as the proper method for handling any cases
of copyright infringement would then fall to the music industry and the legal
system of Canada, and not to a discriminatory levy applied
to the majority of law-abiding citizens.
Beyond this, the issue of whether revenues are lost at all is entirely
debatable, as you can see in this story from the Washington Post
citing a study done by two university researchers specializing in economics:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/washpost
2004mar29
This issue of copyright is a very important one to me because those countries
that address the issue properly stand to be at the
fore-front of the information economy. Limiting information flow to prop up
business models that simply are no longer feasible is not the
way to go about this.
Thank you for your time.
Adam Monteith
Their response:
Dear Mr. Monteith:
On behalf of Ms. Hlne Chalifour Scherrer, Minister of Canadian
Heritage, thank you for your correspondence regarding potential changes to
the Copyright Act and expressing your views regarding the private copying
levy on blank audio recording media.
Ms. Chalifour Scherrer appreciates your advising her of your views
and has noted your comments with respect to these matters. Policy
developments abroad encouraged the establishment of private copying levies
for the benefit of authors, performers and producers of sound recordings
long before Canada decided to establish such mechanisms. The private
copying levy has been promoted as the only efficient mechanism to offset
increasing reproduction capacity made available through developments in
consumer electronics.
The levy on blank audio recording media was developed to apply
generally on all media ordinarily used by consumers to copy music for their
private use. Accordingly, the law governing the levy was drafted to give
the Copyright Board of Canada, a specialized tribunal, the authority and
discretion necessary to accurately evaluate the appropriate portion of
music copied onto some of the media used by consumers for any digital data.
It should be noted that the Government is not involved in the
collection, administration or distribution of the levy; These tasks are
carried out by the Canadian Private Copying Collective (CPCC). Detailed
information on the levy is outlined on the CPCC Web site at
http://cpcc.ca/english/about.htm and the Copyright Board Web site at
http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/index.html.
Information and updates on the copyright reform process, including
issues on file sharing and the private copying levy, are available on the
Department of Canadian Heritage Web site at
http://www.pch.gc.ca/progs/ac-ca/progs/pda-cpb/in
I trust that this information is useful. Please accept our best
wishes.
"Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested." (LT 2004)
Click The Vote has free tools to fax Congress as well as a Pro-P2P "Make Share Fair" petition for people to sign. Action is needed now on The INDUCE Act, The Digital Media Consumers' Rights Act and the PIRATE Act (which still needs House approval).
It would seem to me that this law could actually backfire on the copyright holders (MPAA, RIAA, etc.) This is because it would seem, though I have not read the dull text, that they are "inducing, aiding and abetting" copyright infringement by creating the content in the first place. Without content, what would there be to steal? It would be an interesting case, anyways.
In the beginning the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and is widely considered as a bad move.
Well, the results are in, and what an exciting election that was! The Canadian Culture Minister, Hélène Chalifour Scherrer has been readily defeated. The results for this particular riding is available here.
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
Are portable amplified speakers going to become illegal because they transfer the stolen music from electronic pulses into sound waves?