Slashdot Mirror


More Music File-Sharing Lawsuits in Europe

rfunches writes "The New York Times is reporting that 20,000 cases in 10 countries were brought against file-sharers in Europe, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). '...Users targeted for legal action included a Finnish lumberjack, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge,' according to the article. More than 70 computers were seized in Italy by authorities investigating illegal file-sharing. IFPI targeted both those who 'illicitly downloaded music' as well as uploaders serving copyrighted material on file-sharing networks. Total music sales were down 3% in 2005 according to the IFPI, with the decline in physical media (e.g. CDs) countered by 'soaring' digital music sales."

16 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. The War On Drugs = The War on Downloading by AudioEfex · · Score: 5, Insightful
    No one is ever going to win. Governments and private corporations are going to spend billions. The only people who are going to get hurt are those who missed last week's episode of "Vernoica Mars" and downloads it instead so they don't get behind.

    If the assholes would just realize the problem is them charging $20 for a CD that 20 years ago they promised would eventually be cheaper than cassettes and vinyl ever were. If CD's cost something more commesurate with their value and production cost downloading wouldn't be an issue beyond the fringe.

    AE

    1. Re:The War On Drugs = The War on Downloading by Tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No one is ever going to win.

      You assume "they" are interested in winning.

      I propose that they aren't. Many more involved parties profit more from the ongoing conflict than from its resolution. That includes especially the lawyers, but also law enforcement, a large number of institutes, think-tanks, industry associations, etc. and of course the media which gets a fairly reliable source of news every now and then.

      That's true for both, the war on drugs and the copyright war.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    2. Re:The War On Drugs = The War on Downloading by voice_of_all_reason · · Score: 4, Insightful

      +1 (Truthful)

      War on drugs, war on terror, war on downloading -- it's just a boot, stomping on the face of humanity. Forever.

  2. feh by kv9 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    FTBlurb

    IFPI targeted both those who 'illicitly downloaded music' as well as uploaders serving copyrighted material on file-sharing networks.

    FTA

    The IFPI's legal proceedings were aimed not at people who illicitly downloaded music but ``uploaders'' who put copyrighted music onto file-sharing networks.

    so which is it?

    1. Re:feh by ThePhilips · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Since this is FUD campaign, they of course try to scare downloaders - so they use "downloaders" since it's much broader term.

      As copyright law concerned, it's uploaders who are infriging. Uploading is distribution. If you want to distribute something - you have to acquire a permission from copyright holder.

      Case for downloader is much simpler: downloader has acquired something for personal use. As long as file in question isn't used for anything what's prohibited by copyright law - downloader is clear. "Listening to mp3" is not there. "Distributing" and "profiting" is there.

      I probably oversimplify the situation, but that the view I have formed after reading Lessig's blog - http://lessig.org/blog/ And c'mon - it's slashdot ;-)

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    2. Re:feh by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Interesting
      AFAIK, the only way the record company could know what you're downloading is if you're downloading it from them. OTOH, they can know what you're uploading by asking your P2P server 'so, got a copy of LatestBritneyShite.mp3?'

      And if the record company set up a P2P app full of their music and sue whoever attempts to download it, they're on shaky ground. The music is, after all, theirs to distribute. They put it on P2P themselves. Surely there's no infringement of copyright when the copyright holder themselves is putting the stuff online?

      Things might be different with BitTorrent, though. With that, if you're downloading something you're also making it, or parts of it, available to upload as you do so. In that case you're visible to the record company or their grasses.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  3. Full Text (no login) by Onymous+Hero · · Score: 5, Informative

    Music Industry Unleashes More Lawsuits in Europe

    By REUTERS
    Published: April 4, 2006


    LONDON (Reuters) - The music industry launched a new wave of lawsuits and criminal proceedings against file-sharers across Europe on Tuesday, part of its drive to curb online piracy and encourage the use of legal music services.

    About 2,000 cases were launched in 10 countries, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry said, bringing the total to 5,500 people in 18 countries.

    That figure does not include the United States, covered by its sister group the Recording Industry Association of America, which has filed about 18,000 lawsuits.

    Among the countries targeted was Portugal, where sales of physical formats like CDs have slumped by 40 percent in the past four years amid heavy file-sharing usage, especially by college students.

    Other users targeted for legal action included a Finnish carpenter, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge, the IFPI said.

    ``A large number of cases involve men aged between 20 and 35 and parents who have not heeded successive education and warning campaigns,'' it stated.

    In Italy authorities have seized more than 70 computers in the search for evidence of illegal file-sharing.

    The IFPI's legal proceedings were aimed not at people who illicitly downloaded music but ``uploaders'' who put copyrighted music onto file-sharing networks.

    The IFPI said last week that digital music sales soared in 2005, but not enough to make up for a continuing decline in physical formats like CDs, sending total sales down 3 percent.

    1. Re:Full Text (no login) by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Careful there, you're about to get into trouble for copyright infringement. :(

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. That would be by Spad · · Score: 4, Informative

    2,000, not 20,000.

    The summary is remarkably incorrect, even for a Slashdot story.

  5. This is silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Copyright was not designed to handle file sharing networks. Most of it was based on the idea of criminals ripping off records and making large numbers of copies and selling them. Not ordinary people sharing for free. The sheer number of people doing this indicates that people simply don't see anything wrong with it. Laws that the vast majority disagree with are not usually a good thing.

    1. Re:This is silly by Ilex · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Laws that the vast majority disagree with are not usually a good thing.


      And the act of passing such laws which criminalize a large section of the population is usually called "Oppression"
  6. Re:Seriously... by Pogue+Mahone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No. But then murder is wrong. Copyright infringement is merely illegal.

    --
    Every bloody emperor has his hand up history's skirt [Peter Hammill/VdGG]
  7. All together now! take 2 with formatting!! by Timberwolf0122 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay
    I sleep all night and download all day

    IFPI: He's a lumberjack and he's not okay
    were going to sue him like the RIAA

    I pirate songs, I eat my lunch
    I go to the Lavatory.
    On Wednessday I got summonsed
    for my acts of pi-rac-ie

    IFPI:He pirate songs, He eats his lunch
    He goes to the Lavatory.
    On Wednessday he got summonsed
    for his acts of pi-rac-ie

    Chorus: He's a lumberjack and he's not okay
    were going to sue him like the RIAA ..............

    --
    In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
  8. Careful now! by PinkyDead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The law is a dangerous tool to play with.

    At the moment there is a lot of grey area with copyright and the internet (IANAL) - which is why 'legal' music sites like allofmp3.com have disclaimers regarding local laws rather than concrete advice. In my own local jurisdiction the law appears to be clear about importing copyrighted material (and it's quite similiar in most other places) - i.e it's ok for personal/domestic use.

    When the rights organisations test these laws the outcome might not be the one they want - and it will send a message to the mainstream users, who up to this point have been terrorised into not downloading music, that it is actually safe to do so.

    They are playing with fire - and their time would be far better served coming up with a better business model than trying to defend an outdated one.

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  9. A lumberjack by KeensMustard · · Score: 5, Funny
    Users targeted for legal action included a Finnish lumberjack, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge,

    I can understand arresting the postman, the manager and the judge. But the finnish chap, he's a lumberjack, and he's ok. For sure that was a mistake.

  10. I-F-P-I... by shigelojoe · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Users targeted for legal action included a Finnish lumberjack, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge,'

    All we need is a Spanish construction worker and we'll have the Euro-Village People!