Slashdot Mirror


EMI Says Online File Storage Is Illegal

WiglyWorm writes "MP3tunes CEO Michael Robertson sent out an email to all users of the online music backup and place-shifting service MP3tunes.com, asking them to help publicize EMI's ridiculous and ignorant lawsuit against the company. EMI believes that consumers aren't allowed to store their music files online, and that MP3tunes is violating copyright law by providing a backup service."

6 of 405 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Well, piracy hurts real people. by thsths · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > As a record store owner, My business faces ruin.

    Tough. The pervasive use of automotive vehicles has put a lot of blacksmiths out of business. But would the world really be a better place if we had stuck to using horse drawn carts?

  2. Re:Well, piracy hurts real people. by electrictroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An oldie, but a goodie.

    >>>"People aren't buying half as many CDs as they did just a year ago."

    Well then, supplement your CDs with sales of MP3 singles. The singles market is going through the roof, and if you provided your customers with a place to buy and download MP3 singles, you'd probably be a popular stop for the teen and 20-something market.

    ADJUST to the needs of your customers.
    If they are demanding singles, don't hand them CDs.
    Give them singles; give them what they want.

    --
    The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
  3. Re:It probably is illegal by daveime · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is run into in the nature of the service being offered. This isn't merely storage, they are distributing the works.

    They are NOT distributing it !!!

    Distribute - verb (used with object), -uted, -uting.

    1. to divide and give out in shares; deal out; allot.
    2. to disperse through a space or over an area; spread; scatter.
    3. to promote, sell, and ship or deliver (an item or line of merchandise) to individual customers, esp. in a specified region or area.
    4. to pass out or deliver (mail, newspapers, etc.) to intended recipients.
    5. to divide into distinct phases: The process was distributed into three stages.
    6. to divide into classes: These plants are distributed into 22 classes.

    They are not dividing the file into pieces, nor sharing it amongst any other parties. They are merely serving it back to the original owner when requested. I would imagine that definitions 3 and 4 could apply, but ONLY in the context of the original owner ... no plurals involved.

    Your argument is like accusing a bank of "distributing" your money when you pay a cheque into the bank and then use an ATM at a different branch to withdraw the SAME money that BELONGS TO YOU !!!

    The way it seems to run, this isn't a common carrier thing that is being run in good faith, like say any random hosting company, this is a company that is advertising that it will distribute copies of music that you bought from someone else to you on any device you want.

    There's that word again :-( You really don't get it do you ?

    That changes the rules, they can't do that without a license, even if you have 5000 copies at home.

    When I purchase a CD, fair use says I may make backup copies for my own personal use. It does not dictate that those backup copies MUST remain within my own home, otherwise anyone with a cassette tape in their car that they copied from a CD they own would also be "breaking the law" everytime the car left the driveway.

    If I choose to put my copies in a bank, they remain my property, and the bank does not "distribute" them to ANY third party. Likewise if I choose to store my data in an online file storage repository, and said repository ONLY returns that data to me when I supply MY username and password, it is exactly the same thing.

    Don't let your shortsightedness blind you to the reality ... a URL with "mp3" in it does not automatically equate to "file sharing".

  4. Re:Well, piracy hurts real people. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, they can earn a great deal of money playing live shows, but do you honestly realize how hard it is on a person to tour? People have left bands that were earning them millions of dollars because they missed their wives! These are human beings, not some commodity to be used at your discretion. Then Fishermen going out to sea for many days or weeks, risking their lives ARE commodity? Are we allowed to use them at our discretion? Maybe they miss their family too, but with no million dollar bank accounts, they have to keep on working.

    And what about people working very hard at off-shore oil platforms? Can we use them? I'm pretty sure that their wage is somewhat lower than the average artist on tour, but they have to do it anyway.

    Not to mention the military, far from home months on end. And don't get me started on the average wage here.

    So poor artists with their luxury hotel rooms, first-class plane seats, 50 foot long limousines and multi million dollar contracts can't stand tour pressure? Too bad. Makes me cry.

  5. Re:Well, piracy hurts real people. by Gerzel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Their own product?

    Oh how many musicians sell their own music out of their own store?

    Please. Music store owners don't make the music they sell; they are a retailer of another person's product.

    The smart ones diversify or change to a different product.

    How many butchers went out of business when the ability for frozen pre-cut meat came on the market?

    Seriously. Look at the number of butchers in your town and then figure out the numbers there were years ago before refrigeration.

    People want to listen to the music and are willing to pay for their own copy of that music. The only fact that has changed is that we no longer need the bits of plastic to physically carry the copy.

  6. Re:There's One Technicality Noone's Posted About.. by Kintar1900 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If I were coding this site... Call me an old fashioned developer but despite 20 cent per gig storage, I still refuse to waste it on unneeded duplication of files.

    Then not only are you an old-fashioned developer, you're a lousy old-fashioned developer with no knowledge of the wider world your software is operating within. Security and legal concerns (especially legal concerns) trump the $0.00078 savings, by your estimated storage price, per copy of "Toxic". This is especially true when the architecture you're discussing would cost more time and money to implement than the safer version, what with the necessity of acoustic fingerprinting or some other technology to make sure that User1's "Britney Spears - Toxic.mp3" is the same as User2's "Toxic - Britney Spears (ub3r h0t ch1ck).mp3" is the same as User3's "251 - BS - TOXIC.mp3".

    So, almost certainly their backup service is a massive shared folder that all their backup service users have access to.

    Please, by all that's holy, tell me you're just over-simplifying for the masses. Actually, don't tell me that, because there's only two options here:

    1. 1. You're over simplifying a complicated technology, just like the idiots at EMI/SonyBMG/ do to confuse the non-technical people judging a case, or
    2. 2. You're not even a developer (or are someone who's written a half-dozen PHP scripts for their buddy's website and thinks they're a developer) and are just blowing smoke on this topic.
    Either way, this absurd and technically inappropriate answer isn't doing anything except to muddy the waters. Please leave that to the professionals at EMI.