Slashdot Mirror
RealNetworks Sues Dutch Webmaster Over Hyperlink To Freeware
An anonymous reader writes "In the ever lasting contest for the most idiotic lawsuit, RealNetworks has sued a Dutch man for posting a link to a competing freeware program that allegedly infringes on RealNetworks' intellectual property. The company also secretly obtained a court order that resulted in confiscation of all computers belonging to the man and his family. The 26-year-old has already incurred over €66,000 in legal fees and if he loses the case, he's facing €210,000 in fines. Where are the Anonymous when you need them?"
... that RealNetworks is still in business.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
"Blame US laws, not RealNetworks." -> Since this took place in The Netherlands, I'd rather blame Dutch laws.
Yeah what a looser!
Real Alternative.
As you might have noticed, US or US companies don't seem to have any problems at forcing their laws down other nationals.
Yeah, except the Real Alternative package is NOT actually freeware, but basically distributes the *actual* Real Player DLLs that it uses to decode with a wrapper. That's pretty clearly a copyright infringement (criminal one in fact, as it was willful and widely distributed, which generally counts as "commercial").
Real Networks IMO is a total bottom feeder company and I'd personally never install their software, but one thing I hate more than d-bag companies like Real is blatant misinformation, and this article is full of it...
If in doubt, use booth.
Putting aside for the moment that it would be Dutch law in question here, NO. Just because Real's actions are not explicitly illegal, that doesn't get them off the ethical hook. They are dirty bastards and their attack lawyers need a public flogging.
I would answer each legal document starting with 20 or 50 pages blank with a "buffering" in the middle.... and throw some in the middle too.
I'd paste random ads over the documents which make utterly impossible to see what is written while I'm at it.
If justice is so obviously corrupted, it is no longer justice. And people will go back to doing what they were doing before there was a functioning justice system in place.
It worked on my 386 back in the day. It was the first live audio stream I ever heard on my computer.
They went downhill from there. Their nice tidy player got rewritten and then the whole thing went spammy.
So, by your own logic, when you mention to your friend to "take care" around that drug den down the road, you should be put in jail for aiding and abetting the drug trade. We see links to goatse here all the time. The image itself is morally wrong, but the links are not. *IF* Real Alternative is in fact breaking the law then Real Alternative should be held accountable - Not some poor schmuck who simply says "look at this" via a link.
What you are advocating is akin to thought crime. If you don't conform and think the way "we" tell you too, you should be punished. The problem is just who gets to decide what is "right". In every single instance or situation. What happens when this so called "right" does not align with your own personal views? Do you bend over and let them spank you until you see the light? Sorry, but I'm sure glad I don't live in your world and can make up my own mind what links I'll visit, what software I'll install, or even what I'll have for lunch today.
But said software isn't illegal in Europe, Real Networks are suing a European over alleged patent rights, those patents aren't valid in Europe.
You can even say "fuck" like a child if you wish.
Really?! fuuuuck. fucky fucky fuck fuck poop.
You had to bring German porn into it, didn't you?
Now, this dates back /years/ ago but at some point I was really happy with the RealPlayer that I decided to license it. It was simply awesome; I started it up and could view just about anything. From US news broadcasts to Japanese TV series right down to stuff from India and Germany. (this was "pre-Youtube" time so to speak).
Then other solutions emerged (and my interest slowly waned) but guess what? Next time I started the app. (a few years later) I was greeted with "you should upgrade!", which I didn't do. Why? I was happy with the way it was.
Add another few months and this time I wasn't able to run the program anymore period. "You need to upgrade" was all which was said, of course without any options for a real upgrade. I could pick another "free" player and that was basically it. My paid for enhancements were gone. Heck; my whole player was gone.
DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT... Just set your disdain aside for a moment and look at the realplayer product page. Question: do you see anything there which hints at upgrade options for existing users ? Well, there aren't any.
Realplayer was the best learning experience for me (and all in all not /that/ expensive fortunately) to never buy anything from Real networks again.
The article title is a bit disingenuous. RealAlternative is NOT freeware. It is simply Real's codecs, repackaged without the adware crap and player software. Now on the scale of copyright infringement this is pretty insignificant, but the codecs are still Real's property and it is their prerogative to decide the terms under which the software is distributed. I'm pretty sure the terms forbid repackaging and redistribution of the codecs.
On the other hand, it's also incredulous that linking is deemed illegal. That's just bullshit. They should go after whoever distributed the repackaged codecs, not people who link to said site.
Actually, I'm not sure RealAlternative is even needed anymore. VLC/ffdshow/ffmpeg support all the RealVideo codecs, and also RealAudio with the single exception of the SIPR codec.
They may well have thought that, but there is a duty to perform basic fact checking AND attempt an amicable resolution before taking anything to court. If they had done that, they could have saved a great deal of embarrassment and avoided creating a lot of difficulty for Edskes. They clearly decided to sue first and ask questions later. In doing that, they demonstrated a callous disregard for everyone but themselves.
They should be forced to pay a lot more than just the legal fees in compensation since the man's computers have all been seized without just cause. I don't know what Dutch law does about that.
If you link to a web page that contains illegal content, you are abetting in a crime.
This is a fair suggestion, but in this case nothing has been proven to be illegal about this content. RealNetworks claim patent infringement, but has this been proven in a court of law? Until it has, how is anyone supposed to know if it's illegal or not? If I lay claim to patents on iPods, does that mean the entire internet has to sit up, take notice, and stop linking to Apple's website?
Besides that, it is unreasonable to demand that every website owner to be fully acquainted to the legal status of the software they may link to. If it appears to be genuine freeware, how are they supposed to know?
Lastly, and this really should be taken into consideration; RealNetworks were giving their software away for free, with an entirely reasonable business model financed in other ways. All they had to do was ensure their end-users liked it and found it useful. But instead they turned it into a sucky, monstrously bloated, intrusive piece of crap that people (and their computers) hated. They only have themselves to blame if users sought out an alternative.