Slashdot Mirror
Kazaa Appeal Likely In 2006
daria42 writes "Although the company behind Kazaa has already vowed to launch an appeal of yesterday's decision that it had breached music industry copyright, it now appears likely any such appeal will have to wait until early 2006. The music industry seems to think it'll be able to get billions of dollars in damages out of the company, Sharman Networks, although the amount has yet to be decided - and who knows if they can pay." From the article: "Sharman Networks is expected to lodge its request for leave to appeal before the deadline of three weeks from yesterday's decision expires. Sharman's lawyer, Mary Still, reiterated through a spokesperson today the company's position last night that it would 'appeal those parts of the decision where we were not successful' remained unchanged."
I think at this point it will be hard to change people's mind, so long as they know about this. It is like the last election: People will take a stance and not move, and there will be precious few neutral or swing states (or people).
Not only "land of the free" but "land of the lawyers" who love a good old 1st amendment smackdown. Shihar 153932
Yes, but whatever assets they do have will be taken by the music companies (and being who they are they *will* get them). Since that's all the companies could have got anyway they won't mind.
I am trolling
Since no one wants to buy our products, let's just sue!
WOW, you are a scary man. DEAL WITH IT???? I'd sure hate to be wrongly accused in your country and found guilty.
Anyway it is to make sure that due process was followed and to help insure you are not convicted of something you did not do.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
The last I checked, judges and juries are comprised by human beings, known to make the occasional error, and are vested with a huge degree of power and authority. The best defense we've found so far against human error is review by many. Even newspaper articles are reviewed by an editor before publication. Should we not apply the same mechanism to judicial verdicts, that often possess the power to bankrupt or imprison someone?
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
I mean, surely the inventors of the BSD TCP stack have known for a long time that piracy was occuring over the network. And it's possible to do data fingerprinting, even at the TCP level. So what stops them from being legally liable in the future?
So, I should lose my constitutional rights because of a shift in technology? Funny, technology makes it damn easy to keep track of people through spying on communications and the use of camera systems. Throw in RFID and you've got something there. Forget about your rights, technology has made them obsolete. Or was your argument meant to last only so far as you being able to get shit for free?
Good Riddance to a bad piece of bloatware. I'll be happy to see Kazaa die. Although I may not be happy about the implications.
Yes, but whatever assets they do have will be taken by the music companies (and being who they are they *will* get them). Since that's all the companies could have got anyway they won't mind.
You think the company being sued has ANY assetts at all? I think they are much smarter than that...
My guess is that any assetts, including copyrights, customer accounts, etc. in fact do not belong to them, instead they are a "management" company with the legal responsibility to "maintain" these accounts and assetts for another party, the party of interest.
If Kazaa loses this fight, they'll just close shop. Since they have no assetts, the RIAA can't do jack, and KaZZaa, another "management company" opens its doors at 12:00:01 AM the following day, to begin another 3 years of legal battling with the RIAA and spyware installs on Lusers' computers.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
"When push comes to shove, they may be able to come up with a legal definition to try to separate Kazaa from these."
Huh? This was all covered in the decision. Sharman tried the "we're just a carrier" defense and were laughed at.
"But most likely, this sucks, because the judge didn't realize quite the landmine he was stepping into."
Reading the decision shows that they went way beyond that. I think many people who've RTFA but who haven't RTFCD are under the impression that the ruling was made after 20 minutes; the reality is that the case stretched on for many, many months, and included the testimony of computer science professors from UC Berkeley and other institutions. The common Slashdot mentality of "everybody is naive and stupid besides me" doesn't apply here. Really, guys... read the decision if you want to understand the background.
Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.