Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Grokster Shutting Down?

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the evil-is-as-evil-does dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Yahoo news is reporting that Grokster is shutting down. In a settlement with Hollywood and the music industry Grokster will be permanently banned from 'participating directly or indirectly in the theft of copyrighted files and requires the company to stop giving away its software.'" A continuation on their deal with Mashboxx, or the end of grokster entirely?

21 of 302 comments (clear)

  1. Propaganda from the AP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The article begins, "Grokster Ltd., a leading developer of Internet file-sharing software popular for stealing songs and movies online,"

    Uh, wait, I thought file-sharing technology was used for a variety of things. Yeah, it's mostly file-swapping of copyrighted material, but hardly the only use. According to the AP, let's just ignore the legal uses entirely and pretend that the whole purpose of this technology was to steal.

    1. Re:Propaganda from the AP by Wavicle · · Score: 5, Informative

      IIRC, Grokster lost their case because they advertised themselves as a great way to get movies and music for free. Essentially marketing themselves as a conduit for copyright infringement. So much so that people were confused and actually believed they were downloading the stuff legally. (Don't start on how could someone think that, I won't argue the qualities of human ignorance.)

      There are plenty of good uses for P2P. Copyright infringement, while popular, is not a "good" use.

      --
      Education is a better safeguard of liberty than a standing army.
      Edward Everett (1794 - 1865)
    2. Re:Propaganda from the AP by ydra2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "then I had something as simple as my taillights on my truck stolen, and realized how crappy it feels."

      I remember how awful it was when somebody stole my headlight. I was in the car out in the parking lot one cold night, just letting the engine warm up when some nasty thief came up and used my headlight to check something in his wallet. Damned thieves have no right to steal my light!

  2. Temporary Victory by mysqlrocks · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "This is a chapter that ends on a high note for the recording industry, the tech community and music fans and consumers everywhere," said Mitch Bainwol, head of the Recording Industry Association of America.

    This is a temporary victory only for the RIAA. They can't change the fact that their business model is becoming obsolete.

    --
    Bradley Holt
    1. Re:Temporary Victory by supun · · Score: 4, Informative

      What do you mean? They get their share from services like iTunes, Napster, and the other legal music download services. Internet stations, like Radio Free Colorado, pay something like $0.07 a song. The RIAA gets their cut of that. So in fact, their business model is changing and not becoming obsolete.

      BTW: All those Pepsi adds where they look like they are anti-RIAA make me laugh, since the RIAA made cash from the legal music downloads.

      --
      :w!
  3. The tech community???? by technoextreme · · Score: 4, Insightful
    "This is a chapter that ends on a high note for the recording industry, the tech community and music fans and consumers everywhere," said Mitch Bainwol, head of the Recording Industry Association of America.

    Cue the almost unanimous outcry about how this guy is not speaking for us.
    --
    Ooo man the floppy drive is broken. No wait. The computer is just upside down.
    1. Re:The tech community???? by Rei · · Score: 4, Funny

      Rabble Rabble!

      --
      "He's a god; it'll take more than one shot." â" Lady Eboshi, Mononoke Hime
  4. I'm curious... by skelly33 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    as to what other kinds of software might be construed as having a hand "directly, or indirectly" in piracy and is subject to being shut down? Apache HTTP server? Outlook Email? Mozilla Firefox? "The Internet"?

    It seems you just can't fight corporate giants with billion dollar legal power...

  5. Re:Quite simply... by drgonzo59 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Welcome to Slashdot, here anything can happen ;-)

  6. Napster... by Chickenofbristol55 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They'll probably be back, but you'll have to pay for the service.

    --
    public class null extends java applet { System.out.print ("Tabula Rasa"); }
  7. Not a big loss, really. by Red+Samurai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Grokster was never really that popular anyway. Anyway, they can shut down whatever network they want, and they can arrest anyone they want, but they'll never kill P2P off. As long as pirates exist, P2P will exist. It's a fact.

  8. grokster homepage text by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Informative
    http://www.grokster.com/

    The United States Supreme Court unanimously confirmed
    that using this service to trade copyrighted material is illegal.
    Copying copyrighted motion picture and music files
    using unauthorized peer-to-peer services is illegal and is
    prosecuted by copyright owners.

    There are legal services for downloading music and movies.
    This service is not one of them.

    Grokster hopes to have a safe and legal service available soon.

    If you are interested in that service, go to www.grokster3g.com, or send an email to:

    info@grokster3g.com

    to be included in the beta for the next generation.

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  9. Historical Precedent when Xerox was Outlawed by srobert · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back in the mid-twentieth century, a company called Xerox was producing a machine which could be used to illegally copy copyrighted materials in books. The courts ruled that the company had to stop making and selling the illegal technology and pay damages to the publishers. At least that's how I remember it.

    1. Re:Historical Precedent when Xerox was Outlawed by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Back in the mid-twentieth century, a company called Xerox was producing a machine which could be used to illegally copy copyrighted materials in books.

      Sarcasm is a more useful rhetorical device when the truth that it (directly or indirectly) points out resonates with the sarcastic statement being made. But since Xerox didn't ever position its products as a way to "get free stuff" or spread around copyrighted works by the millions, their equipment's use in copyright infringement was despite their corporate position and publicly proclaimed admonishments. The P2P services that have found themselves in trouble have been loudly supporting piracy since the get-go. Intent is the difference, and lack of it makes your example fall flat. Maybe more fun to allude to old-style forgeries, counterfeiters, or all those other classical (and already blatantly understood as illegal) methods to make your point. Um, except the point wouldn't mean as much.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  10. Uh-oh... bad wording choice there, Mr. AP by Red+Flayer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Grokster Ltd., a leading developer of Internet file-sharing software popular for stealing songs and movies online, agreed Monday to shut down operations...
    ... bans Grokster from participating directly or indirectly in the theft of copyrighted files..."

    Righteous anger its-not-theft-there's-no-deprivation-of-property flamewar to begin in 3... 2... 1...

    Seriously, though, if you want a certain company's product, pay for it. If you wouldn't pay $0.01 for it, then why bother downloading it at all?

    And just to forestall the inevitable, NO, I DON'T WORK FOR THE RECORDING INDUSTRY. I just believe that if you don';t think a product is worth the price offered, then you shouldn't buy the product... nor should you look to the black market for the product. Do without, it won;t kill you. And by not pirating the product, you won't help drive the *AA's assertions that they are losing a ton of cash to piracy.

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    1. Re:Uh-oh... bad wording choice there, Mr. AP by orasio · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not stealing, just because it's not stealing.

      Suppose you had a girlfriend (just for the sake of the argument). If someone looks at your girlfriend in a weird way, you cant say it's a rapist. You can make all analogies you want, and say that the guy has X-ray goggles, but some guy who looks at your girlfriend is not f**kin your girlfriend. You can even say that you want him to pay, because she is a stripper, and charges for people looking at her tits, and he is causing you lost revenue.

      This is much the same. People who copy songs or movies are not doing anything that they could go to jail for. It's a civil issue. They risk being sued. They are not thieves. They are copyright infringers. It's just another thing, and calling one thing with the name of another thing is not healthy, specially for legal stuff. It ends up contaminating the original concepts. The whole idea of copyright infringement not being theft is that copyright is not something sacred, it's just a "temporary" government granted monopoly, and by infringing that monopoly you might or might not hurt the guy that the monopoly was assigned to, so it's his decission to sue you or not.

  11. Article Says BitTorrent is a Service by putko · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article says "BitTorrent" is a service.

    Is this true? I thought it was a file transfer protocol.

    --
    http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_s tone_your_children/dt21_18a.html
  12. Re:Besides Bittorrent and Usenet.... by varmittang · · Score: 5, Informative

    eDonkey
    Overnet
    Emule-kademlia
    BitTorrent
    Fasttrack (Kazaa, Imesh, Grobster)
    FileTP (FTP/HTTP downloads)
    Gnutella (Bearshare, Limewire,etc)
    Gnutella2 (Shareaza)
    Soulseek
    Direct-Connect
    Opennap

    Most of them are accessable by using a MLdonkey client, some are still in the works. MLdonkey Can be found at http://www.nongnu.org/mldonkey/

    --
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    12345
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
  13. Timeline: by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1990: We'll add passwords for computer games. Piracy "stopped."
    1995: We'll copy-protect audio CDs. Piracy "stopped."
    1997: We'll copy-protect DVDs. Piracy "stopped."
    2001: We'll shut Napster down. Piracy "stopped."
    2002: We'll shut Kazaa down. Piracy "stopped."
    2005: We'll shut Grokster down. Piracy...

  14. Re:Dingdingding! by fwarren · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yup

    Follow the money

    The whole outcry against file sharing comes down to control. Most money in music is made on the back catalog. He who owns the distribution channel owns the back catalog and makes the money.

    When the next Beatles, or Elvis shows up on the scene, they want to see them signed with a major label, not issuing their CD's via bittorrent, other p2p and their website.

    Just like the agents in the matrix, they control all the doors...and they want to keep it that way.

    --
    vi + /etc over regedit any day of the week.
  15. Insightful? No. FUD! by kiddailey · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Why the hell was that moderated +5 insightful? It's so full of holes it isn't even funny.

    "I don't believe there are any real (as in frequently used) legitimate reasons for P2P networks to exist other than to distribute material illegally. ... I'm not saying that it's not possible to use P2P networks for legit reasons, and I'm not saying that on occasion people do obtain legal materials from them."

    I run a community gaming site that catalogs maps for First Person Shooters. With over 10 GB of maps and growing, P2P combined with magnet links is an incredibly valuable method of file distribution that doesn't require loads of cash, server cycles and bandwidth to operate and maintain. It boasts hundreds of downloads a week. I'd hardly call that "occassional."

    Really though, it's not a good way for an author to market something (no tracking, no content control, no targeting, etc), and it's not a convenient way for the consumer to retrieve something (file descriptors can be poor, you get queued up, you have to share back to get good rates with some services, etc).

    No tracking, content control and targeting? Not convenient? You have to share back to get good rates? File descriptions are poor?

    Any qualified web admin can implement tracking on the web site that's listing the download whether it be magnet, torrent or otherwise. As well, some P2P apps provide limited download tracking. BitTorrent on it's own does not provide tracking either (you'd have to analyze torrent downloads in the server log files), so your point is kind of moot.

    Not convenient? Ever heard of a magnet link? You put a link on your page. Clicking it launches the user's P2P app and starts the download. How is that not convenient? On a comparison to BitTorrent I'd say it's just as, if not more convenient (I don't have to delete old torrent files with magnet links). Compared to HTTP downloads, all P2P tech is obviously less convenient since you have to download P2P software.

    Share back to get good rates? Funny... that's how BitTorrent works and a good number of other P2P networks don't.

    The one giant exception here is Bittorrent ... encourages the distribution of *legitamate* content because it a) allows the author to create and maintain a torrent that isn't connected to some vast network of crap, b) torrents can be "distributed" via websites, which is where you want your consumer to be, c) the consumer gets faster downloads, d) the author pays for less bandwidth.

    As I mentioned, magnet links eliminate the problems of the "vast network of crap." They contain a file hash similar to a torrent file and can contain one or more source seed server addresses. They can be put on a website just like any URL with the added benefit that they don't require you to have a one-to-one relationship of all your files to torrent files.

    The fact that you even need to maintain and distribute torrent files is a pain. If I've got 4,000 files I want to distribute via BitTorrent, it requires that I maintain 4,000 torrent files. Granted, a software author may not have 4,000 files, but the requirement to maintain them still exists regardless.

    The consumer only gets faster downloads with BitTorrent if they are able to get it configured and playing nice with their particular setup. Most, but not all, "average Joes" I've tried to sell BitTorrent on always complain about painful tweaking and crappy speeds because of it. This is primarily because BitTorrent requires you to upload back to the swarm, while others do not.

    And a BitTorrent author only pays less for bandwidth if there are a large number of continually connected seeds and peers. If not, the