Slashdot Mirror
Australian Court says Kazaa Users Breach Copyright
mferrare writes "This from Reuters UK: An Australian court ruled on Monday that users of Kazaa, a popular internet music file-swapping system, breached music copyright and ordered its owners to modify the software. The music industry told the court that Sharman Network licensed users to access a network it knew was being used for piracy and hence it was authorising people to infringe copyright"
The Freenet Project is working towards the next major release of the Freenet software, hopefully this side of Christmas. Among the major new features will be:
- Trusted links, so that only your friends will know that you are
part of the network
- Switch from TCP to UDP to support seamless firewall traversal
- Complete code rewrite and simplification
- Support for live broadcast of information, in addition to storage
and retrieval (allowing everything from IRC over Freenet to "instant
RSS")
Freenet's goal is to ensure that people have the freedom to share knowledge without fear that someone is looking over their shoulder. Unlike Kazaa, Freenet is a voluntary, non-profit free software project.The Freenet project requires $2,300 per month to pay for its full time developer, Matthew Toseland, but currently the project's reserves are very low, so if you can spare it (especially given the more immediate drains on people's generosity), your donation would be much appreciated.
"...was being used for piracy and hence it was authorising people to infringe copyright."
Come on now, this is the same argument that's been going on for decades concerning VHS tapes, cassettes, CDs, DVDs, etc. Sure Kazaa has its share of illegal bits and bytes, but if you want to censore everything, might as well get rid of the internet altogether.
This sig contains repetition and redundancy.
so when are car companies going to be told to put limiters on all their cars set to the max speed limit in that country because, you know if they allow me break the law by speeding then obviously i have no choice but to do it.
...that decided it could change the rules of Formula 1?
who's still using kazaa anyway? it's full of adawares and spywares
http://www.kazaa.com/us/help/new_100percentlegal.h tm
:)
I was hoping to see this updated.... damn
what a crime.
how about we sue utensils manufactures because Jeffrey Dommer used them on his victims
First the US gov and corporations is screwing its population.
Then Australia decides to follow the same path.
What is this world coming to?
From TFA:
The music industry told the court that Sharman Network licensed users to access a network it knew was being used for piracy and hence it was authorising people to infringe copyright.
Ok, so, extending this precedent, Comcast (for example) provides access to a network (the Internet) that it knows is being used for piracy. Ergo, all ISPs are authorising people to infringe copyright. I am amazed a court actually swallowed this.
Stasis is death. Embrace change.
Check out aussie journalist Garth Montgomery's full coverage "kazaagate" site here
Including the full official court ruling as well
No I dont know him, but have found the site very insightful throughout the trial.
Some percentage, unknown to me, of files shared on file sharing networks are copyrighted. This may mean (hypothetically) that those who created these works are not rightfully rewarded for their work, which of course is a Very Bad Thing.
All books in a library, more or less, are copyrighted. They are initially bought, but then the information, the whole of their content, is shared with countless people, which pay little or none in order to aquire this information, and if any money is exchanged, then it does not go to the copyright holders (correct me if I'm wrong).
So, aren't libraries basically analogous to file-sharing networks (or vice versa)? What am I missing?
I feel for you, I really, do.
I am a developer and just had a similar discussion with somebody in a p2p hub.
He was looking for upgrades to his already pirated and cracked software.
I outlined my stance and got a positive reaction from the other users in that hub.
It was as follows, I don't mind if people download and play or use my software or others, but if it becomes enough to want to play online with friends every day, or enough to become a business asset, then that person SHOULD become a customer. Expecting upgrades for something you haven't paid for steps way over the line.
I would be proud to see my software listed on p2p, mainly for the fact of more eyes seeing it.
I just don't like the scrotes that take it too far.
ps, when I read about your national list of pirates, I couldn't help but think of the Flying Spaghetti monster.
liqbase
No, the kazaa thing seems to be in the Federal Court. The Formula 1 issue was a state issue in Victoria.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
1) The NRA defence of "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is now dead
2) Microsoft are liable for writing an OS that they KNEW would enable virus writers to propogate
3) DARPA are buggered as they built the underlying technology to DELIBERATELY enable information sharing.
I'm one of the few people who don't do illegal downloads but this really isn't an attack that work in the above cases so why does it work here?
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Come on now. Kazaa "authorized" them to do it (according to the article). This is a little like prosecuting people who claim the devil made them do it. We think they're insane; not criminals.
... but even so, can one criminally download anything? Hmmmmmmm ... ? Afterall, it is all there just for the taking on Kazaa ... offered for free. Hell, Kazaa is FFFRRREEEEEEEE!!!!
Well, maybe criminally insane
Just like Robin Hood and his merry band. Were the starving of England criminals because they ate the King's food and drank the King's wine, all approppriated by Robin Hood's valiant hoarde?
We the people are starving for entertainment. The world is a shambles. We need a little fantasy. Kazaa gives people something to do. Don't prosecute them.
...manufacturers, they sell cars despite knowing the fact their customers could (and sometimes do) use them to ram raid shops, getaway from cops and drive by shootings (but they do the same to gun manufacturers on that score) etc. the point is how can you be responsible for another persons actions even if you gave them the means they still made the choice to comit the crime
Rob http://scullyshouse.tblog.com
Freenet is slow. And i am not talking about the developemnt cycle (if you are on the unstable branche you would think it goes very fast). I am talking about the download speed.
,an open source client without any spyware, that does provide search (where is the search button in freenet?)
That is because the freenet was developed for anonymisation, not for file exchange. That is, freenet is good against compagnies that sue their own customers.
If you want to leave kazaa because it future is doomed because their next client will/should contain copyright restrictions (I am sure there wil be lots of trolls here that say you can not determine this, true, but flaimbait) you might want to switch to emule
If you live in fear because ou think some compagny might sue you because of copyright violations please use freenet. But you might get afraid they capture you for aiding terrorist/childporn. Don't worrie you will never get such charges get uphold by a court, (if you get there).
Every day, fewer and fewer customers enter my store to buy fewer and fewer CDs. Why is no one buying CDs? Are people not interested in music? Do people prefer to watch TV, see films, read books? I don't know. But there is one, inescapable truth - Internet piracy is mostly to blame.
I'm afraid this isn't obvious to me. I never buy CDs from record stores; I buy them on the internet, often second hand. It is cheaper, easier (order from your house, and they deliver), and I don't like browsing in shops. People are still buying music, legally, just not from you. They buy on the internet, either CDs or downloads (e.g. iTunes Music Store).
At this rate, someday, computer will be considered as a tool to breach copyrights and patents and, therefore, will be declared illegal. Isn't it getting worse every day?
Sharman Network licensed users to access a network it knew was being used for piracy and hence it was authorising people to infringe copyright What? By this logic, the manufacturer of a firearm would be held liable for any murders committed with said firearm because they knew it could be used for such a purpose. Thankfully, such cases have been struck down in the USA. This is an awful decision. If we were to hold manufacturers responsible for what people did with their products, we wouldn't have guns, knives, VCRs, computers, cameras (kiddie porn!), or even pencils. There is almost always a destructive use for any type of technology, but that doesn't mean the technology should be outlawed or it's creators punished.
This game will waste your life. Don't clicky!
C|net:t +Kazaa/2100-1030_3-5849480.html
/ 2005/1242.html
http://news.com.com/Australian+court+rules+agains
Full judgement:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct
- reasonably plain english, and worth reading. No cause for outrage here folks.
And people on Freenet do not swap material which is under copyright?
By continuously exchanging copyrighted material via the internet, copyright law will not end. If we ant to get rid of copyright law, we should petition the goverments, protest (with your money by not spending it on the apparently for you, or in your opinion, to expensive materials), start a political party against copyrights, etc.. Freenet is just another P2P application, and since people have nothing to share except other peoples material, it will be used to do just that.
Donating to Freenet will not solve anything, it will just cause new lawsuits.
So stop complaining about these rulings, it is not your freedom they are ruling about. It is the criminal behaviour they are ruling about. If you walk into a store and steal anything, you get arrested (some call this bad luck!), and you will get some punishments. What is different here? It is not your digital right to exchange copyrighted material at all.
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
I have no idea how this relates to the story....
Trolls, here we go...
"That's it. What's your name? You're blacklisted. Now take yourself and your little bitch friend out of my store - and don't come back." I barked. Cravenly, they complied and scampered off.
Part one ends. The Music Overlord has done Justice.
Bleh. He just killed a customer and that customer's network. And a huge heap of goodwill too. This must be a really *bent* person.
And then he starts criticizing people for NOT coming to his shop, that too after shooing them away. Dude, go learn some marketing 101 before buying a boutique.
So that's my idea - a national blacklist of pirates. If somebody cannot obey the basic rules of society, then they should be excluded from society.
"Society". "National". "Blacklist". "Rules".
Look at this piece of shit. It's okay for this moron to forbid sharing when he's earning the money, but it suddenly becomes "rules", "regulations" and something of "national" concern when he throws out his customers, and divides society by law, just for his scoop!
Hehe. Fill up that blacklist as much as you want. You're screwed anyway.
Hypocrite.
Heh, I enjoyed the troll, however.
Troll on!!
Hm, a family music store owner who cusses out kids, no matter how stupid in his store. Good one.
Frankly, I haven't bought a single CD in about a year (no, I haven't downloaded anything either, I don't have the time, and my currently fairly extensive collection serves me fine on the few occasions I have a moment to listen to my tunes, like in the car on my way to clients'.)
I'm sorry to hear about your business. My mom and I have both built up small companies individually. However, we've done so in areas in which there was demand. I've done my best to keep on top of that demand, and to adapt my services to what's required; as long as I can keep doing this, life goes on.
However, if anyone was so fucking arrogant as to come up with something like a "blacklist", I would be the first to sign up for it voluntarily. As I've said, I don't pirate music; most of what's around today is too shit for me to waste time on. I've 3-4 CDs I've burned from friends, but compared to the ca. 700 I _bought_, you'll agree that these are peanuts.
As I wrote in a letter to the head of consumer relations for EMI Germany when I realized that my girlfriend had bought a copy-protected disc that took me more than 5 minutes to rip a copy of so she could listen to it in her car without scratching the original, I will not subscribe to ANY goods or services from ANY company that treats me like a potential thief instead of a customer. I'm an honest individual, I'm smart and hard-working enough to be prosperous, and that's a pretty choice customer demographic. But hey, no EMI CDs for my girlfriend (who owns several) or myself since...
However, I don't care how barefoot your children have to walk to school, if you, as someone who wants to sell me something (which you do not seem to) even hints at a threat, I will vote with my wallet. Maybe some of the 7-10 friends whom I will, as a statistically average consumer, ask to do likewise, will also avoid doing business with you. So what? You're not selling air or food or water. Maybe some of their friends will too. In fact, I've already noticed myself going to fewer movies just because the RIAA warnings and "no cameras" signs piss me off on principle. So what? There's cafes and books and girls in short skirts outside, I think I can deal.
And you know what? I don't matter. I'm just one among millions. But act like an arrogant prick instead of someone who wants to woo me for the purpose of an honest exchange, no matter how hard you're being hit by '1337 p1r8 d00dz, and you may see that the ones among millions from whom you won't see a red cent out of general principle will add up.
It's capitalism, survival of the fittest. With an attitude like that, no business has any right to exist.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
Freenet is currently quite slow, but these problems should be rectified in the next version. There is no inherent reason that an anonymous P2P system must be slow.
Of course, you are correct that Freenet isn't about "file sharing", its about the free exchange of knowledge and information. If all you care about is getting free music, Freenet probably won't be well suited to your needs.
I call BS! I remember a while back Slashdot posted a similar story on piracy and you just a copied a comment from that word for word.
The story wasn't funny then, it isn't funny now.
My brother with designer jeans and a iriver mp3 player, modernly dressed went to Australia, Adeliade to visit a friend of him.
The guy he visits is Italian-Australian and waits for him outside.
They kept him 2 hours without any explanation. He says he felt like a jew trying to enter Germany in 1939.
FYI, he is a turkish guy. Remember Al Queda blew us 2 times, not we blew anything.
Australian courts should start discussing what can be done to avoid such racist things, not about a fucking spyware and its so called freedom of information.
What a beautiful, touching story. You write with such emotion as to make it obvious that you don't own a CD store, but more probably write for "Working Mother".
The music industry continues to turn a profit each and every year. The billionaire media moguls are still billionaire media moguls. There are still boy bands and one-hit wonders.
The "Extensive Christian Rock Section" could be the problem. It might be worth stocking something that people want to buy!
It's interesting to note that the parent comment went from Insightful to Troll in the time it took me to read it and click reply...
Seriously man, I feel sorry for you that your business is facing a difficult time, but a "national register of pirates" doesn't sound like the best option to me. To ban people from buying CDs would only encourage them to pirate more, wouldn't it?
I will admit that I have used P2P to obtain music in the past (although barely anymore, I prefer to buy music online first) - some of my favourite artists I discovered by P2P - if I have the money, I will by the CD, if I like it. If I don't like it, I probably won't listen again, and since I wouldn't have bought it anyway, nothing lost.
I actively encourage people to buy CDs of the artists in order to support them. Bumblefoot is my favourite artist and I went to the trouble of importing his CDs from the States (not available in the UK) after I had downloaded them with P2P. Interestingly enough, it was Bumblefoot himself who put his own music onto P2P.
You also mention Metallica - a group whose policy on piracy I can't agree with because they were putting strong pressure on Universities to permanently expel students they suspected of sharing their stuff - an action that would have serious effects on their education (duh) and quite possibly long-term effects on their career. It is quite disturbing to realise that this is the way they would have their loyal fans treated for wanting to share their music with other people.
Just so you know, I'm not advocating piracy. I'm advocating sharing music and if possible, buying the CD to support the artist. I'll tell you for nothing that "piracy" has made me a better musician, and has definitely made a difference to the possibility of me recording and distributing my own music some day.
From another article here:
e d-to-clamp-down-on-ripoffs/2005/09/05/112577245613 2.html
/ 2005/1242.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/kazaa-order
"Kazaa's owners would have to apply "maximum pressure" on existing users to upgrade their software to the new, filtered version."
I wonder how the court sees this as being implemented? and how they intend to measure that "maximum pressure" has been applied.
I dont know the architecture of Kazaa. Is it possible for Sharman to "force" a new version out? or could the old version continue to be used as always?
Also the full judgement can be found here:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct
Has anyone ever thought what eliminating recorded music copyright would do to music quality? It might actually make talent count for something as people would be really drawn to hear it live.
musicians should be paid to perform or for other real work that they do. The records that they freely distribute can be used as promos for the performances. Don't they make enough money from that?
And people with talent would actually be forced to use and perfect it and do some real work.
Overall the quality of music could really improve.
So now corporations, if they make software that can potentially be used for copyright infringment, must research all uses of that software that only infringe copyright, and block those?
Watch out bittorrent.
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
from my reading of the FA, the desision is based on the use of Kaza is for downloading of copyrighted materials.
Since, because of the Berne convention, ALL works are automatically copyrighted, that means that the network I am using now, is transmitting this text I'm typing, which is copyrighted.
There is no other data ON the internet, apart from some public domain and some header/routing information (which is not copyrightable). 99% of the data is copyrighted.
That I am giving permission for the network to transmit this is irrelevant to the judges' reasoning for Kaza being illicit, so in Australia, the networks are causing copyright infringement.
Oh, and the telephone.
And letters.
And talking.
Etc....
Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
Another reason for why people don't buy CD's from stores is the pitiful quality of music available there. All they sell is the garbage the music industry churns out. Loads of cookiecutter "bands" and "artists" who have never written an original word or note. Add to that outrageous prices (because of the huge cut record companies take on each and every CD) and it's a small wonder business is slow. Back in the 80's when Compact Disc technology was introduced, the huge price hike was being defended with "the price will fall when the technology propagates". Now, after a quarter of a century, CD prices have not decreased once. Instead, they have been outrunning inflation 3:1 (conservative estimate). Record companies have dug themselves into a hole with raging profiteering and expect the courts to bail them out.
Why was this modded a troll when it's clearly saitre? I mean with gems like "They have fought the War on Drugs with skill, so why not the War on Piracy?"
I thought it was pretty funny myself.
FYI: This is a cut & paste troll that gets posted in every P2P/piracy related article.
When I was younger, it was kind of a thing to do. Go and spend an hour or two meandering around the CD store looking through racks and racks and racks of CDs. In today's world I can't prioritize that kind of time to browsing through music. In the last year I've bought about 10 CDs and it took me less than an hour over the course of the whole year to do it.
I've only gotten one album from the 'net, and it wasn't from an automated file-sharing network. It was from an acquaintence who frequents many of the same music forums that I do. It was Maxim's Hell's Kitchen album. I've since purchased the actual CD, and Maxim's second album "Fallen Angel", as a result of it.
fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
You are so wrong.
Riaa is sueing and warning emule users. It just is not that high-profile. There are more emule users than kazaa in the world. In the USA emule is relatively less popular.
If the anonymisation is done by proxying over more hops it is inherent slower. A faster speed can be reached by direct uploading. Note that uploadcapacity is sparse. Caching does not help get a higher upload. Motivating users to give more upload might help however.
Is there a working search in freenet? or are there still only proposals?
The Brits and Australians seem to be bending over to accomodate any Yankee demands that they respect the American version of IP laws.
Canada learned a long time ago that pandering to Uncle Sam doesn't work. The Americans, especially under Bush, don't honor treaties unless it suits them. You have nothing to gain by pandering and plenty to lose.
Because it is a troll, because that same story has been posted a million times in P2P related stories. It's clearly trolling for flamewars between those who think downloading is okay, and those who don't.
Who is still using Kazaa nowadays ?
The judge also outlines some very basic steps that Kazaa should implement in order to be in compliance with the court order.
Yes, media companies are using piracy as an bullshit explanation of lost sales. Yes, DRM is just a way to block long established fair use rights. But people that are copying the stuff just contribute to problem. Anyone who buys DRMed content (including DVDs) or even a single item from these media companies is just financing the behavior. Don't like it? Stop giving them money. Yes, you are responsible for your own actions.
"I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of"
It doesn't sound like your city/town is very Christian, being full of pirates.
"It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases"
You should have left it that way. Independant record buyers, like myself and most of my friends, are vey loyal, and continue to buy cds when we can, while at the same time downloading music. I live in a big city, and the several indie cd stores are still thriving.
Records stores can still survive in this day and age. Maybe you're not an incompetent businessman. Maybe no one in your city/town does purchase records. But what does that say about your community?
Modding:
60% Troll
20% Insightful
20% Informative
100% Whooosh!
``Well, maybe criminally insane ... but even so, can one criminally download anything? Hmmmmmmm ... ? Afterall, it is all there just for the taking on Kazaa ... offered for free. Hell, Kazaa is FFFRRREEEEEEEE!!!!
Just like Robin Hood and his merry band. Were the starving of England criminals because they ate the King's food and drank the King's wine, all approppriated by Robin Hood's valiant hoarde?''
And in some countries, the downloaders are not doing anything illegal. The files are being offered for download, and how would you know if they got there legally or illegaly? It's the people sharing the files even though they don't have a license to do so that are the real criminals. Yes, the Robin Hoods.
A separate issue is who actually has the moral high ground...the entertainment industry who charge ridiculous prices for their wares? The people who will happily grab everything they can for free, and don't pay a dime to the creators? Or the people who break the law to provide free access to the wares?
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I think you're right. I buy online too because I can get almost anything I want for around £8.99. There are two record shops in town. The lowest price in the cheapest one (excluding sales of course) is £12.99 so I usually save at least £4 per CD. The major chain record shops in a nearby city sell chart CDs for £12.99 but want £15.99 for older or niche music so I'm saving £7 per CD if I use their prices.
I think the online stores have got the pricing right. Not only are they cheaper to start with, the ones I use tend to charge more for new CDs and CDs tend to get cheaper as they get older. The major chains start low (in comparison to their other CDs anyway) for new releases but the price goes up as a CD gets older! And let's not forget that a shop can only carry a limited range of CDs so if I'm after something obscure I'm unlikely to find it in a shop.
For these reasons the first place I look now is online. I only buy from a shop if I happen to walk past when a sale's on and I find a good deal. It's very rare that I think a CD is worth more than £10. I'd rather go without than pay more than it's worth to me.
I don't think P2P networks are to blame for declining sales. I think that P2P users are downloading music either to check it out before they buy and deleting what they don't like (I've done that a couple of times in the past) or they're freeloaders and wouldn't buy it anyway. Couple that with the current low standard of new releases and high prices and it's no wonder that bricks and mortar shops are losing out.
Andy.
SYDNEY (Reuters) - An Australian court ruled on Monday that users of the Internet, a popular computer network, breached music, video, image, text and software copyright and ordered its owners to modify the software [so that nothing could be downloaded].
"The Internet authorised users to infringe everyones' copyright," Federal Court Judge Murray Wilcox said in his ruling.
Australia's major companies sued the Internet's owners and developers, claiming the Internet had cost them millions of dollars in lost sales.
The music industry told the court that the Internet licensed users to access a network it knew was being used for piracy and hence it was authorising people to infringe copyright.
The Internet defended the use of the Internet to download stuff, but said it could not control the actions of estimated 450 million world-wide users.
As a result of this ruling, Australians will no longer be allowed to use the Internet until the Internet makes it impossible to download stuff.
I feel like I wasted enough of my own life reading his shitty post that I don't want anyone else to have to go through it too.
Let's see them filter all copyrighted content, and then we'll find out just how many non-infringing uses P2P applications actually have.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Newsagents sued for encouraging piracy of books by selling pens and paper.
Seriously though, it's easy enough to argue that the primary use of Kazaa et al is piracy. However, were there enough appropriately licensed content (eg creative commons etc.) then this would be less clear. It would be a shame to lose the right to use peer to peer technology for 'legitimate' tasks, especially if projects like BitTorrent come under fire for the same reasons.
In other news, an Australian court ruled that the national highway system must be dismantled. Judge Kanga stated in his ruling "It's clear that these roads were intended from the beginning to facilitate illegal activities. Every smuggling operation or fleeing criminal in the country is using these roads. The complex system of registrations, fees, taxes, and licenses does not relieve the road authorities from their culpability in enabling these criminal activities. Without the roads, there are no high speed chases, period. This cannot continue in the face of the law."
Isn't it odd how every country seems to imitate the worst behaviors of the originating country? If the US will pass such a ridiculous set of laws as the DMCA, well golly we all better get right to our own version!
I think that is a bad thing to implement, as it will create a bunch of small 'freenets', not one large community.
What use is it to just share your political feelings with your friends, which already know?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I can't recall an actual court case, but it was decided that because time-shifting broadcast content was an ethical advantage to both parties (viewer sees their show, companies get their ads to more viewers), the case set precedent for legal recording.
You are right about Freenet being slow...but emule is SLOOOOOOW as well.
Trying to download any file that's popular and large (over a 100MB) usually takes DAYS. Plus there are bots on emule/edonkey network that steal all the bandwidth and download everything.
I feel like I've read this comment a bajillion times, on every single Slashdot thread that has had anything to do with copyright infringement for the last 12 months.
I think sharing in general is not piracy!
It is just the nature of men to share so that happiness prevails.
Anti-sharing is work of the Devil! Anathema to RIAA and all who oppose sharing!
Piracy is when you steal and sell for profit! No profit is made by sharing! But the evil money and the evil US authorities and evil music companies and the Devil think they can f**k with us! No way!
Blessed be those, who share and cursed be those who dont for GOD will not allow them to live in heaven!
sex is better than war!
Death of Usenet, film at 11...
It might be clever understated satire, but it gets posted EVERY time the copyright/piracy/P2P thread hits Slashdot.
Enough is enough...
Since Kazaa has been found in the wrong in Australia,
and kazaalite has been found in the wrong against kazaa,
does this mean that Australia prefers us to use Kazzalite
instead?
---
besides, who uses kazaa?
IIRC it's slow now because of old design decisions that have been changed for the upcoming version. In principle, since Freenet is a cacheing system, there's no reason why it can't be equally fast as a torrent download.
I don't sell sick stuff like Marilyn Manson or cop-killer rap, and I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of.
Cop Killer was speed metal, not rap. Maybe you're facing bankruptcy because you don't know much about the audience to which you're aspiring.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
I've 3-4 CDs I've burned from friends, but compared to the ca. 700 I _bought_, you'll agree that these are peanuts.
Careful there. You've admitted to violating copyright. You might as well be admitting to distributing drugs. (But your honour it was only 3 marijuana leaves! I think you'll agree that's peanuts compared to the coca cola I consume).
Make no mistake RIAA/MPAA and the rest would very much like to, over such a simple thing as copying 4 CDs , send you to prison with a large cellmate named Bubba for ahem company. After taking all your cash and bankrupting you that is.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
The first time this story was posted, I thought, "This guy needs to see a counsellor."
f aces+ruin.+CD+sales+have+dropped+through+the+floor .%22&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2004-22,GGLD :en&filter=0
The second time I saw this story, I thought, "Umm, you already said that."
The third time I wondered what the hell is going on. Then I tried a google search and looky what I found.
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22My+business+
And thats not even half the time the story has been posted. It does the rounds on slashdot quite regularly. It should be added to slashot posting spam filters or something. Great work of fiction, isn't it?
Um, try not take that post seriously.
Ok, I know this is an ironic/sarcastic post, but the thing that really made me laugh was the Australian smugglers that are using the highways...
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
Loads of cookiecutter "bands" and "artists" who have never written an original word or note.
Well, I don't know. It doesn't bother me that someone might be a good songwriter, but not a good performer, or vice versa. As long as the end product is good, it's okay for it to have been a team effort.
What we're seeing now though, are end products that aren't that good.
-- 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.
And yet, its replies are some of the most interesting and insightful comments on this article (not to mention correct spelling and grammar).
...or so I've been told.
Maybe no one comes in any more because you have the biggest selection of Christian music ??? Maybe because the music industry fails to realize that you can only sell so many remastered copies of the same music before everyone who wants it has it. Maybe it is because the music industry fails to release anything of any merit for the last 5+ years and just can't sell anymore Pink Floyd remasters. Maybe because no one wants a 25 year old package and format and thu music industry fails to change with the times.
I have a simple solution: Since originally it was the VCR that "was like the Boston Strangler to a woman alone" to the movie industry. This was the point that the Movie industry wanted to stop technology. Let's say since the invention of the VCR all movie companies must refund all profits realized from video rentals, video sales, dvd rentals and dvd sales. Do you think the movie industry would still be sueing students. The studios would be broke. Even the MPIAA and RIAA have no idea what is good for them.
Why don't you release a download only album - that comes with a screensaver, a wallpaper and maybe a short video of the band. Charge $5 for it since the current $20 reflects material packaging and distribution costs which are no longer valid. You know what - I would by music again!!! For now i am sticking with bands that promote music sharing and boycotting your store and any others.
The last CD i bought had some sort of copy protection on it so that i could not play it on my iPod or my computer. I promptly used P2P to download a working copy, wrote a letter to the distributer and record company and vowed to not purchase again. $20 for something i cannot even listen to. I do not own a cd player any more. That was 1980's technology and just cause the record companies want me to enjoy ancient technologies at thier court derived insitance i will refuse.
Sorry your ancient buisness model is failing. Cry me a fucking river. Lots of other peoples hard work fails after a shorter time than 12 years. If i start selling 12" black and white tv's i am sure my biz will fail too. Bottom line - get with the times!!!!
That depends on the law of his jurisdiction.
For example, depending on the precise circumstances, burning those CDs would be legal (technically, nonactionable) in the US.
-- 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.
Mant: your the AC, aren't you???
I've seen the troll post a couple of times, and this is the one constant response......
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
No I'm not, I wasn't aware it had been posted before, which several people have now pointed out.
So once would have been funny, but if it keeps getting posted, troll is fair enough.
This is a metaphor, a fable, a tale that reflects the music industry as a whole. It's not real. Not at all. Jeez.
Three different users have posted this identical story since the Napster case.
Have made thier living on this type of principal for decades. They do not relenquish the copyright but promote sharing and taping of thier music so that anyone can enjoy.
dumbass, notice the hyphen?
I think its important to see the distinction between something like Kazaa and BitTorrent. Kazaa is somewhat centrally, they are sending advertisments down to all of the users. They know exactly who their users are, and are very capable of seeing their searches as well. BitTorrent the author is completely seperate from the process.He has no clue who is using his software
I think that because of Kazaas connection to all users, it would be rather simple for them to make some kind of attempt to block searches to known copyrighted material. Everyone needs to hop off of their free-data high horses for just a minute and realise this is a company knowingly making money off the work of others without giving them anything
I'm encouraged by this news. Next Australia will obviously be cracking down on gun makers, who know their customers are using their products to murder, rob and terrorize. Australia will order the gun makers to change their gun products to prevent people from shooting each other.
--
make install -not war
Dude... Seriously, come up with some original material. This is about the 10th time I've seen this lame story, word-for-word posted on the internet.
Dont think the industries wouldnt do that if they could.
But since its not practical to do that, they will do their best to attack the end points, and turn them into simple restrictive media devices, under *their* control.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
For the record, I have smoked pot and hashish, I have taken the latter across national borders (I was young and stupid), I have shoplifted (a candy when I was 13), I speed on empty highways whenever I can, I've found money on the streets and not returned it, I slept with an underage girl (I was 17), I lie and cheat on my taxes as much as I can, have snuck into two movies after only paying for one, and I've copied CDs and allowed friends to copy parts of my mp3 collection (ripped from my CDs, but hey, that's life.)
I also finance terrorism, smuggle fissionable material to al Qaeda operatives in Baluchistan, coordinate a major child pornography operation, smuggle kidnapped women for the purpose of injecting them with MASTER RACE SEED (tm) in my underground lair, and leave the fucking toilet seat up BECAUSE I CAN.
But I guess the CD copying is what they're really interested in.
Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
And in other news, the Australian Court also ruled that it is illegal to drive on the freeway since it should be obvious that some of the other people driving on the freeway are speeding.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
...do you look at something that should be innocent, see that it's full of bad, and decided that it can't go on?
However clear it may be that kazaa (and other P2P's) don't promote the piracy, the piracy is going on. Sooner or later someone is gonna say that, hey, this started out as a good thing but it's infested now. Gotta go.
War on Drugs being fought with skill?
If you had any clue, you would realise how stupid that statement was.
I can use an ftp client to get illegal software.
I can use a browser to get cracks for software.
This just in:
The following software can be used to access copyrighted works:
Mozilla Browser Suite
Firefox
Internet Explorer
Opera
Lynx
Links
www
wget
curl
ftp
cuteftp
wsftp
gftp
(This is not an exaustive list)
ARIA (Australian Recording Industry Association) and the AFI (Australian Film Industry) has called for a ban on the above mentioned list, and any other softwares that allow access to the FTP or WWW networks.
it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
President Bush? Is that you?
- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
Is it piracy or downloading you don't like?
Downloading I bet. Well guess what - iTunes, Napster (and probably AllOfMP3) are legal, not piracy.
Why do you think you have a god-given right to have your business - based on the old, dying physical distribution model - kept alive by the RIAA's gangster law suits?
Basically you don't. The world has changed.
And don't start bleating about "the artists". I've been involved in the music industry on and off for over 30 years, and I can tell you virtually no artist has ever made a cent out of record or CD sales.
All those sales have ever done is prop up the whole physical print/warehouse/distribute/retail model.
And none of that is required any more.
Get over it.
I mean, every other week we see a Slashdot story along the lines of:
"The Australian courts today made a ruling that is totally out of line with the rest of the world's understanding of copyright, human rights, personal freedom, fair use, and common sense. The ruling will definately futz over anyone who reads Slashdot, and will stand to benifit only the *AA-of-choice."
Either the fine folk of Australia aren't petitioning their politicians hard enough to get favorable copyright legistlation in, or the courts are even more corrupt and backwards than the US ones.
So, to my Thunders down Unders: either suffer under the rules, or be the first country (heck, the first CONTINENT) to overthrow the government based on copyright laws. I, for one, will welcome my new Australian filesharing overlords.
UTF-8: There and Back Again
Game modders and hackers do it all the time. They release these things called "patches", which disable restrictions or add value where there was none. In this case the "patch" would disable the filter, as if people couldn't simply misspell the name of the musician whose work they seek. Filtering technology is just like DRM technology. It is infinitely crackable because of its inherent stupidity and automation.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
As is often the case, this law hurts the law-abiding citizen and (probably) fails to slow the illegal traffic that it purports to have the capability to stop. The P2P client distributors are all likely to go completely underground anyway, which leaves the govt with the same old option (going after the individuals who trade pirated music). Same old song and dance ...
SO, you consider it balanced that this ruling basically turns the ARIA into all powerful regulators of all "potentially infringing" technology, able to punish anyone for "not doing enough".
How many technological items will they be allowed to force a "redesign" of in their quest to stop any and all copying.
How many PC's, CD burners, Isp's, DSLAMs, tv's, et al will become crippled, and how many manufacturers will go bankrupt from having to continuously redesign because every other month the precious ARIA decides they just arent "taking enough steps to prevent infringement"
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
The RIAA and MPAA are suing people because profits are down. Profits are down because the music industry and the motion-picture industry are producing crap, not because people download cds and movies.
Do you even know what a protocol is?!?! It's a METHOD for moving data, not a method for filtering it. Learn the OSI model, then you may understand what you're babbling about.
Google is your friend.
l d=1&commentsort=0&tid=141&tid=188&mode=thread&cid= 7278955
/ 0616225&threshold=-1&tid=141&tid=228&tid=3
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=83129&thresho
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/28
license software that allows users to access a network with known copyright violations?? Can you say 'the internet' or 'www'?
Why don't they go after microsoft? Their web browser lets you access a network with millions of known copyright violations. You can't tell me microsoft doesn't know that this software is used to download copyrighted images and software provided by other subscribers to the network.
Nothing is going to change until we shoot the bastards!
Andy Out!
Your proposal is infeasable to the scale of media piracy. The size of the problem is _FAR_ larger than any "blacklist" could effectively hope to manage unless store patrons were required to give their name and show photo ID every time they went into a record store, and then the information gets looked up on computer. This highly invasive procedure is only barely acceptable at airports and border crossings, it's completely absurd to expect it to happen in every single store across the country. If you try to implement such a system at your own store, your sales will, I'm afraid, drop from the very few you have now to zero within weeks.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
this text is not here.
sum.zero
I've found gnunet better for actual use. Freenet people spend a lot of time "advertising", talking about freedom, but the actual network is useless. Gnunet is an anonymous, encrypted network that already supports pure F2F use, multiple transport protocols (not just TCP (with NAT support, of course) and UDP but also tunneling over HTTP and even SMTP), also a graphical client (which has just been rewritten to use glade and improve usability) rather than the goofy "access it through your web browser" method of freenet. Naturally there's also a command line client for scripting. Other nice features are digitally signed namespaces, so you can get your files from a reliable source, directories allowing you to group a set of related files, content migration while still allowing sharing local files in the traditional manner, rich metadata, and a reward system for those who upload. I've found it far superior to freenet as a usable filesharing network. Give it a look.
I am trolling
If the people who copy are blatent freeloaders, then the people who sit on their ass and collect royalities are blatent bums.
When a "freeloader" copies something I create, I am not deprived use of that creation, but if a lazy bum sits on their ass and collects royalities while suing everybody over how they use information at their disposal then we are all deprived use and liberty.
Also, since when is copying things a violation of civil liberties? It would be more accurate to say that the right to copy things is a right that exists above government, like free speech, and free religion. Nobody is against the rule of law here, but laws that punish people for copying things are simply unjust, and that's all there is to it. FYI, anarchy and overbearing government tend to give the same results.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
And how have they proven that there was even a single lost sale? Do they have a line of kids outside the courthouse door ready to parade in and declare: "Yes I would have bought that CD, but I was able to pirate it off of the Internet instead."
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
If I don't have "No Tresspassing" signs up and someone walks across my yard to rob the house next to mine, does that mean I helped rob the neighbor?
I guess the USA should have gotten a patent on flawed legal systems.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
You are too stupid to live. Your family should be put to death.
Sorry, no longer accepting anyone's copyright laws...After the global entertainment corporations stole the public domain by paying off American politicians to pass laws that enact a de facto extension of the copyright period. Then trick various courts around the world to accept this purchased American version of indefinite copyright extension as local law by international treaty.
Imagine that you have bought a car with time payments. You make a payment every month and after a predetermined number of months, you own the car. Imagine that the finance company pays off the politicians to extend the number of payments that you have to make every time that you get near the scheduled last payment. They claim that granting you title would cause undue hardship on the people who have come to depend on your monthly payments. No unbribed judge anywhere would accept this.
Copyright is the same way. By granting an exclusive right to collect payments for using a creative work, the copyright law also has a definite time period for which these payments must be made. After that period, the former copyright owner can't legally force payments from users. The copyright ownership transfers to the public. Bribing politicians to pass laws extending copyright periods on works in the current schedule is theft because it steals from the public the funds that they would not have to pay according to the agreed-upon original copyright schedule. The theft of the public domain is the greatest theft of creative works in history. Digital copying is chicken feed compared to this.
When a contract is broken as a result of bad faith, all of its provisions are broken. Therefore we no longer accept any copyright restrictions on any creative works, regardless of their age. When the global entertainment corporations are willing to restore the public domain, then we will be willing to consider DRM and the re-start of the purchase of creative works. Until then, forget it. Does this hurt the 'artists'? Maybe, maybe not. But where were they when the the public domain was stolen?
No one is going to allow some judge somewhere to shut down Kazaa. It's simply too important now. Kazaa is the world's new public library for creative works. Along with Wikipedia for general information and FreeNet for censored political coverage, it is the one of the primal forces of the new Information Age.
It's time for the world governments to begin to understand this. In the new Information Age, it's not the people who control the violence (the police, the military, the mafia,...) who set the agenda, it's the people who control the information. That's us, folks! Kazaa will be destroyed only if we allow it. And, I, for one, of the many millions of Kazaa users, suggest that we keep it.
>> 3/ It's hard to understand why it's okay to borrow a book from a neighboor and not to borrow an mp3 from a guy 1000km away.
It is okay to borrow a book, yes, because you are only borrowing it. Downloading an mp3 from someone is NOT borrowing. The file is being copied. It is being copied by people who do NOT hold the copyright to the work. Just as it is illegal for someone to photocopy a book and sell it or give it away, it is illegal for someone to copy music and sell it or give it away. You can argue if you feel copyright itself is right or wrong, but as it stands now you cannot equate copying an mp3 without permission of the copyright holder to borrowing a book whatsoever; It is illegal, plain and simple.
woooosh!
The same could be said of ISPs then... or computer manufacturers ... heck even people who make DVD recorders ... or why stop there, ban cameras, cos you might take a snapshot of a CD cover!
When I was younger, it was kind of a thing to do. Go and spend an hour or two meandering around the CD store looking through racks and racks and racks of CDs. In today's world I can't prioritize that kind of time to browsing through music. In the last year I've bought about 10 CDs and it took me less than an hour over the course of the whole year to do it.
I totally agree. I remember taking a vacation in Florida and hitting the Virgin store at downtown Disney. It was a huge record store filled with wonder and tracks and all sorts of wonderful things. I browsed around, noted somethings that I wanted here and there and then asked my self... why am I bothering? I guess it was "nice" the fact that this store stocked some vinyl specificly 12 inch remixes of "The Ketchup Song" but there really wasn't a single thing they were offering that I couldn't get online. Once this idea hit me well I hit the Lego store, a store that was clearly infinatly cooler than the Virgin store. You could play with the legos... the sample offering of music was very very limited.
While i'm all for record stores esp indy ones where you can hang out and listen to music and actually get an idea of what they are offering... i'm really more likely to be exposed to music online, and i'm more likely to actually buy something online. It's the sad truth... if you run an indy record shop and don't have any online presence... well sorry.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
My business faces ruin. CD sales have dropped through the floor. People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago.
While this is a troll, i'll respond anyway.
I actually know of a man who went out of his way to sell christian records... as in vinyl and tapes. This was a while ago when CDs were new. And he discovered that his business was failing and this being a while ago this was in the age of 2400bps modems so the guy didn't have the luxury of blaming p2p networks. I think he blamed the Christian chain shops in the local Malls but in the end the cause didn't really matter. The simple fact of the matter was there was not really a demand for Christian music. Needing to make a buck... he decided to stop offering Christian music and started offering porno. New and used books, videos, mags, the works. Before he knew it, he had a small chain of smut shops and was making a decent living.
So the point is, if your business isn't working, it's time to find another business... it's only common sense.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
This is just...amazing. I think next, we should sue car companies who pay to have their cars featured in movies where the cars are used to commit crimes (speeding, drive bys, etc).
Not a perfect analogy but its very akin. Kazaa said "you can find millions of files on our product." That is 100% true. It is also NOT hard to find millions of perfectly legal files on the Kazaa network.
This is just like my school, which has their distro of Red Hat hard coded to NOT play MP3s. XMMS is included but it will literally NOT PLAY MP3s. Their reasoning: they're a vehicle for piracy. Anyone remember when they were saying hte same about CD burners? How about VCRs? How about tapes?
This just gets dumber and dumber the farther things go. It's almost like they're saying that the company should not say you can find any type of file on their product (then why would people want it?), but I'm sure they'd find something wrong anyway.
Bomb the RIAA and MPAA. They want to make an example of Kazaa, I want to make an example of them.
Yes.
1/ Contrary to what happens if you steal a can of soup in a supermarket, when you download an mp3, you do not prevent anybody else from having it.
Indeed. And although people like to forget this, the reason stealing is wrong is exactly what separates it from copyright infringement: stealing deprives someone else of the thing you stole. There's nothing inherently wrong with getting something for free; stealing is wrong only because it involves taking something away from someone else.
If we had the technology to let someone point a magic cloning ray at any object and instantly have a copy of their own, there'd be nothing wrong with doing so. Such a tool could eliminate hunger and material poverty, just as P2P can eliminate informational poverty by giving everyone access to the same knowledge, tools, and entertainment.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
"all data will have to pass over multiple peers to reach anonimity" is AFAIK not how Freenet does it. Freenet's anonymity comes from never knowing who fed data into the mutual cache, not from Tor style multiple-hop routing.
Doesn't anyone else think that the judge has made the right decision in this case?
Kazaa knowingly makes advertising revenue from piracy and has taken limited or no steps to correct this. The legitimate P2P industry would do well to disassociate itself from the business model created by companies like Kazaa.
Who still uses Kazaa anyway?
Decision can be found here: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/ 2005/1242.html
then the GNU GPL ceases to exist.
I hope you don't mind companies taking GPL code and closing the source on you.
Winamp was play "Anakin vs Obi-Wan" from my Star Wars Episode III soundtrack CD.
First claiming that Kazaa users are breaching copyright, what's next? Using Winamp to play cartel based CDs instead of the 'media browser' launched by the CD violates the DMCA?
Dark times indeed
Instead of defending systems like Kazaa by arguing whether they breach copyright law, I would like to see more direct attacks on the law itself. Modern copyright law is "right" only because it is the law, not because it inherently has any real moral footing. That's what I think should be attacked.
I personally download and share a lot of old time radio shows from the 1940s and earlier. Most of these shows were never intended for rebroadcast or resale, let alone 60 years later, and were not preserved by any conscious effort on the part of the creators or the copyright holders. Most of the material has survived through the efforts of people like radio station engineers and hobbyists, who saved the transcription discs because of personal interest. They have kept the entertainment of that era alive for decades by making, trading, and often selling copies (illegally!!).
The 1998 Bono Act, which retroactively restored copyright protection to all audio recordings made before 1972, makes "pirates" of these people. Paradoxically, it gives the current copyright holders, who often did nothing whatsoever to preserve the material, the legal grounds to swoop in and attack those who did. Even the earliest wax cylinder recordings made by Thomas Edison in the 1890s will remain under copyright until the year 2067. This isn't right, and I think it would be better in the long run to attack the legislation by refusing to obey it, rather than by concocting elaborate technical arguments. The best argument I can think of is that copyright law can't be valid in cases where it simply doesn't produce justice. I doubt whether that would fly in court, but there might be someone out there who could present it in different terms. For example, could a case be made that by arbitrarily removing material from the public domain Congress breached a contract with the citizens when it passed the Bono Act, and therefore the law itself is void?
Yes, The principle is very much the same. To feed it into the "mutual cache" you first have to store the data. During the store phase it passes several peers. During the download phase it passes also multiple peers.
So in the end the anonimy is reached by passing it over a unknown number of peers. There are smart optimisations for this, but in the end it not as efficient as an real peer to peer network.
Best Troll ever. I love the comment about 'how well the war on drugs' was handled (As in not very well)
The judge in that court must be out of his mind to think that he can globally control what words are acceptable in file names and what words are unacceptable. I guess it will based up the daily directives of RIAA executives to the courts. You will comply or all your offending files will be deleted. Expect a daily update from a media owned government near you with a list of words and word combination unsuitable for use in file names.
Shows what can be achieved with sufficient ignorance and money. This judge undoubtabley will the favourite for the dumb judgement of the year award.
I hearby claim patent rights to the non-infringing file name checker. The alternate of using my program will be the automatic deletion of files using copyright infringing words under DRM. Make sure that when you save that file it will really be saved, buy it yesterday to be safe.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
My heart bleeds for you. I seem to be able to buy DVD's over the net for AUD$21.00 delivered, which makes CD's just poor value. CD=30-73 mins DVD=2hours plus. DVDs are stealing/canabalizing CD sales, even music DVD's are cheaper.
With Mall rents rising, sales slowing, wireless ipods etc, things will not get better, until some drastic re-pricing takes place. 2nd hand market is alive and well too - especially with gas prices - about to cut into retail more. Co-sell coffee.
As for Kazza, who cares. A poor judgement with a improbable/unsubstainable remedy will not affect a Vanuatu base, and it can just be onsold and reborn again with an ineffective filter + stealth fixes. This is great news, and will breed better P2P'ers. It is sad to see guns kill people logic being lamely accepted, when democracy is at stake.
"I'm proud to have one of the most extensive Christian rock sections that I know of"
It doesn't sound like your city/town is very Christian, being full of pirates.
"It was one of those boutique record stores that sell obscure, independent releases"
Don't you remember that story about Jesus, lots of guys and 7 loaves of bread and some fish? Jesus made a huge number of bread loaves for 5000 men out of seven loaves, the grandparent is just following Lord's example, copying stuff.
YHBT.
That bullshit grandparent post is anonymously copy/pasted to every copyright related story.
I think this is a troll but I have some information anyway.
When this all first started the RIAA used to trot out this record store owner from Syracuse NY who would complain how filesharing had hurt his business.
I knew this guy. I knew him because I sued to work for a record company in the area. When he first opened his store he called abd begged me to sell him all my extra promo copies (I had thousands) to stock his "used" record store.
Promo copies are paid for by the artist. This is the level of ethics in this business.
I said no, for the record. And I left that scummy business soon after.
Do you have any promo copies in your store? if you're an indie, I bet you do. And I view that as WAY worse than filesharing.