Slashdot Mirror
Music Publishers Sue Cox Communications Over Piracy
wabrandsma (2551008) writes with this excerpt from Ars Technica:
BMG Rights Management and Round Hill Music have sued Cox Communications for copyright infringement, arguing that the Internet service provider doesn't do enough to punish those who download music illegally.
Both BMG and Round Hill are clients of Rightscorp, a copyright enforcement agent whose business is based on threatening ISPs with a high-stakes lawsuit if they don't forward settlement notices to users that Rightscorp believes are "repeat infringers" of copyright. In their complaint (PDF), the music publishers also decided to publicly post IP addresses.
What do you suppose they think would be "enough" to punish copyright violaters? (Maybe they could start by using proper terminology?)
Copyright is supposed to be a first-party concern and rightsholders seem uniformly determined to make other people do their dirty work (without even getting paid).
They're doing this because Rightscorp's current "threaten to pay with no proof" business model has become too risky - they've heard the rumblings about class action suits. Of course, since Cox isn't hosting the files in question, their liability is the same as the phone company's when someone calls someone else to make a death threat. Common Carrier.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Take your extortion game and suck it.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
What's this, suicide by Slashdot comment?
Rightscorp can't claim the subscriber is actually infringing their customers copyright, as their software tool can simply see if the information is available from the host in question but it cannot tell anything else about it. They have no way to know that anyone other than their self has actually downloaded the information in question. They can only guess and I hate to say it but you can't sue over speculation.
54,000 claimed infringements over 64 days sounds like a lot, but it's basically just under once per second, and claiming each time is another incident of infringement. So basically their software is constantly checking the ip, and this could be argued constitutes theft of service since both Cox and the customer in question pays for the bandwidth.
As for them downloading the information themselves, since the tool and the company that runs it is authorized by the copyright holder to search for and access their copyrighted files one could easily argue that no actual infringement taking place.
I also think Cox should establish a reasonable handling charge for investigating and dealing with these automated complaints, I think 10$ per complaint sounds about right. So 54,000 x $10 = $540,000. Plus attorney fees and costs for this frivolous lawsuit.
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
Then how about you fire your lawyers and hire some TALENT instead of just T and A?
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
I'm seeding torrents of the latest releases of a couple of Linux distros right now. Not piracy. KFGY.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Sure, blame the man in the middle, not the guy downloading it or the guy uploading it...
It's a high time to block all BitTorrent traffic. Its main purpose is to facilitate piracy. World of Warcraft can find a new way to distribute patches.
It's high time for you to go jump off a freeway overpass into traffic.
Rightscorp is arguably afraid ISPs will refuse to cut off people under the DMCA unless a judge has ruled in a legitimate court proceeding that the person has infringed multiple times. They now propose to saddle ISPs with massive, expensive and interminable legal proceedings unless the ISP agrees to cut people off on mere accusation.
davecb@spamcop.net
it's high time you fucked off, bittorrent like any other tool is vulnerable to abuse, that doesn't mean it should be outlawed. Might as well outlaw cars, screwdrivers and hammers while you're at it since they've actually been used as offensive weapons to lethal effect on many occasions.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
People still download music?
Wrong. It's purpose is to distribute content. That it's alleged main purpose being is to facilitate piracy is only accurate to the extent that the content that people seem to actually want to distribute happens to be pirated. Before bitorrent, people were using ftp. Before that, they were downloading from dial-up bulletin boards. Before that, they were photocopying books and before that they were manually copying stuff by hand.
Piracy has been around for as long as copyright itself... it is not driven by the availability of tools that might accomplish it, it is driven by much more fundamental aspects of human nature.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
The #1 piracy tool
Does AOL exists today? Would you tell me the truth?
until they also download the content from the bit torrent users (they do) and then they run a hash check against the video / pay people in india about 3-5$ to compare the downloaded content against a licensed copy many many times (they do)
if (torrent copy seeded by let's say 7 users) x1 = x2 (verified content) then all 7 users have a pretty damning argument against them. adding a subcaption would change the hash against an original licensed copy, hence the outsourcing.
Neither of the NetBSD 6.1.5 torrents I'm seeding (for the last several days) is "pirated". Torrents are an accepted distribution practice for a wide range of software.
Then how about you fire your lawyers and hire some TALENT instead of just T and A?
Yeah, the music industry and record stores were run by hip, visionary geniuses from 1925 to 1998, then alla sudden everyone got stoopid.
Problem is any actor with money who wants it is able to extract a more or less complete picture of activity occurring on bit torrent.
The system as it exists today is simply too open and too transparent creating a lightning rod from intelligence being wielded to justify all manner of legislative unpleasantries.
If exposure issues are not fixed in bit torrent eventually we will see legislative reality that harms everyone more than any illegal activity.
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Profit!!!
I didn't see any IP addresses in the PDF.
Also, I was a little shocked by some of the listings in Exhibit A. Bruno "are you sure this isn't the Police?" Mars, sure. But Stone Sour? When did the music industry start giving a shit about rock bands again?
Hey, what's wrong with T & A?
there is a metric crap-tonne of such material still being posted to usenet and you never hear about them going after that source.
Cox Communications shouldn't be doing anything about people who download copyrighted material without permission. They are an ISP, they provide internet connections.
Does banks tell car companies to police the people that buy their cars because cars are used as get away vehicles? No.
Does stores tell clothing manufactures to police the people that buy their clothes because you can hide stuff you shoplift in clothes? No.
You get my point?
It's not Cox's job. The Copyright Cartels need to police their own shit, since they own the copyright, it's their problem, no one elses.
Be seeing you...
nah they are run by the mob, didn't you see that documentary series "The Godfather" 1, 2 and 3?
Torrents are an accepted distribution practice
Not only that, torrents are the technically superior distribution method for large files.
.: Semper Absurda
"Cox subscriber having IP address 24.252.149.211 engaged in 39,432 acts of copyright infringement over 189 days."
What constitutes an act of infringement?
Replicating a full copy of said work?
A partial transfer? A byte, megabyte, or more?
What works were infringed upon?
How do they know the file is indeed a copyrighted work?
Was a method other that checking the file name employed?
How many times did Rightscorp transfer items from the suspect IP?
There should be a burden of proof and an abundance of evidence before just requests like this are considered. Otherwise it's just GUILTY before being proved INNOCENT.
Until courts will stop rewarding RIAA for suing every backwater bar, video game streamer, internet provider, or anyone who plays their music at a party, they'll keep suing everyone. Hey, the music industry isn't as profitable as it was before the free transmission of information, so lets sue anyone who allows free transmission of information. If those buggy whip makers only were as sue happy then as the RIAA is now, maybe some people would still be using horse drawn carriages because cars could have been sued away before they gained ground.
God spoke to me
Actually, "alla sudden" there were a bunch of new distribution methods which destroyed the artificial scarcity model of business in the entertainment industry. Things are heading back to the way they were before the 1920's in a lot of ways...
.: Semper Absurda
Well, if it's because it's designed to transfer files, then you'd better kill FTP, HTTP, and all other protocols for transfering files. In case you didn't know, before bittorrent, that's what pirates used. Before the internet they used others that you've probably never even heard of. The violators of copyrights will tend to use the most efficient methods of transfering the files. Heck, at one time that was sneakernet. (AKA putting it on a disk or tape, and having someone run it over to the recipient, often literally.)
If you've looked at some of the files Rightscorp has claimed were their copyrighted files in some of their claims, you'd know they don't actually download and verify very often if at all, and are probably just using simple keyword scripts for finding potential victims.
Rightscorp is on their last leg and they've already admitted that they cannot afford to take people to court. This is a bluff and Cox should call them on it, but hey, if they do decide to take it to court let them because they'll be bankrupt long before any trial ends.
In the early days, they had almost total control over the entire industry from the radio playlists to the record store. (Research Payola.)
What changed is the internet and people suddenly discovering that there was another way to obtain, share, or sell their music.
Riaa wants to go back to the old days where everyone was their bitch, and that's not going to ever happen.
Comcast sends me an email every week, mentioning that I shared "some copyrighted work". For example, "mother daughter exchange club 22".
So all I do is stop sharing said file, and the emails stop.
Technically nothing, but it's not music. Oh, and Miley Cyrus definitely doesn't have either.
Did you forget the first rule of usenet?
"A 'person' is smart. 'People' are dumb, panicky animals and you know that."
Trite Auto-tune
Yes I know it wasn't a good joke ...
youtube should be put entirely out of business.
Agreed, except - this isn't even about people who download copyrighted material without permission. This is about allegations that people are downloading copyrighted material without permission. That's all - allegations. There was nothing proven in a court of law - just some scum bag outfit like John Steele & Co. called "Rightscorp" pointing their fingers at IP addresses that may or may not connect with people they are accusing of downloading.
don't talk about Usenet?
The DMCA contains no language calling for ISPs to "terminate" their subscribers over copyright claims. It's a lie.
I don't know if you're reading the same DMCA I'm reading, but 17 USC 512(i)(1)(A) applies the safe harbor only to service providers with "a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network who are repeat infringers".
Many authors choose to transfer or exclusively license copyright in their respective works to "rightsholders" who represent these authors in the market. So how are these suits at least in theory not on these authors' behalf?
I'm seeding torrents of the latest releases of a couple of Linux distros right now. Not piracy.
Almost. Some popular packages included in Linux distributions might infringe, though in practice you're unlikely to get busted for these.
If Rightscorp has "overwhelming evidence" of repeat infringers (or really, any infringers), they need to sue the offender directly or f**k off. If they don't actually have evidence, then they need to f**k off, then die in a fire, then go f**k off again.
It's not Cox's job to enforce Rightscorp's allegations as if they were court orders.
Judging from the complaint, Cox must feel like it has staked out a secure legal position:
Sounds like Rightscorp didn't like getting the finger, and now they've asked for a *jury* trial. LOL good luck with that, assholes.
so mabey as a worker under capitalism, he just supports the working class, and against exploitment from ownership. His views seem pretty consistant without you mangling the debate by adding terms when it suits you.
Cox is a HighWay. The RIAA needs to pay MORE TAXES to pay the FBI to enforce. Don't use my TAX Monies for the FBI to enforce. Use the Music Industries Monies to pay the FBI to enforce.
Nobody would really have a problem at this point.
Seeing as they're greedy fucking pigs that just want more than their share; fuck em.
And why are they having communications over piracy?
Well to be fair before digital there was actual scarcity since it cost serious $$$ to have a record master cut, have a mold made from that cut, and then have it printed, same with 8-tracks and cassettes.
What digital has done is free both the artists AND the consumer from these high costs, because i have heard bands with CDs they paid at most $3k for at a local studio that frankly sound better than *.A.A CDs (no loudness war pumping) and because these bands aren't getting screwed by getting a 50K loan up front and then having to pay 5000% interest to the record company they can sell their CDs cheap and still make a decent profit. My last band we sold our for $10 a pop, $15 if you wanted 'em signed and we we making roughly double what they cost. Of course we didn't care about P2P either because hey, that is why we also had shirts and keyrings.
But we found that if you sell at a low price most will just buy instead of pirate, something the *.A.As might want to consider.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The Flying Wallenda's would never usenet.
I wish I could still use Archie to Gopher Veronica!
How much would it cost to ship a container of thumb drives full of data?
Yeah, the music industry and record stores were run by hip, visionary geniuses from 1925 to 1998, then alla sudden everyone got stoopid.
There are bands from the 60s and 70s that still get airplay today. Meanwhile, just about everyone from ten years ago is now yesterday's news. Is there even one singer or band today who will still be relevant in 2054?
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
Rightscorp would have to overcome the wide open ""in appropriate circumstances" clause in the DMCA
Due to the "case or controversy" limit in the Constitution, U.S. federal courts do not issue advisory opinions. This means you can't just ask a judge what "appropriate" or "reasonable" means under a hypothetical set of facts; you have to sue someone. Perhaps getting a definition of "appropriate circumstances" on the case law books is Rightscorp's strategy with this lawsuit so that it can build a set of best practices for its publisher clients. Righthaven already got "Copyright owner must be named as a plaintiff", and though failure to do so caused Righthaven's downfall, Rightscorp is benefiting from that clarification.
17 USC 512(i)(A) clearly says a service provider is only eligible for the safe harbor provisions if they have a program to "terminate". Nice try on the assertion, but go read the law
Unfortunately rightsholders (rather than copyright holders) have this mental defect in their brains that prevent them to understand anything regarding lowering the price of their products.
This extends to the inability to understand how doing such can actually increase their overall revenue since they'll assume that they could have sold just as much material at the higher cost and see the difference as "lost profits".
So no, we'll never see the end of attack on humanity by these people.
Despite how many bands they've destroyed over the decades both before and after the digital age, you could at least justify their existence prior to it since the scarcity was, as you say, real scarcity. It didn't become artificial scarcity until digital delivery systems were introduced and they rushed to find a way to limit them so as to justify increasing the costs back to the earlier days.
>Before the internet they used others that you've probably never even heard of.
ZMODEM!
Cox has actually gone the opposite way of what the RIAA want. About 10 years ago, we got a temporary shut-off from someone (not me!) downloading a movie (ok, yeah, it was me) but as soon as we said "it's gone" the net came back up. Then again about 3 years ago (different account, still Cox), "someone" was downloading The Colbert Report BUT all Cox did is send a letter, saying something about "you have a business account so yes you can legally share your wifi BUT someone downloaded this" but nothing happened, I called them and they told me their "current" policy towards business accounts basically puts my business in the "common carrier" class or such. So Cox has actively moved AWAY from cutting off the net.
I'm seeding torrents of the latest releases of a couple of Linux distros right now. Not piracy. KFGY.
I'm pretty sure BitTorrent's main purpose is still to facilitate piracy. Those Linux distros could as well be copied cheaply and efficiently using cloud hosting.
Might as well outlaw cars, screwdrivers and hammers while you're at it since they've actually been used as offensive weapons to lethal effect on many occasions.
Cars, screwdrivers and hammers are not typically used for violence. BitTorrent, on the other hand, is typically used for piracy.
Why don't you ask them yourself?
Since many had their I.P. addresses posted without asking,
I've decided to post their OPEN contact information here for the people who most likely have questions, comments,complaints,criticism, remarks, analogies, wisdom to offer, demands, commands, quotes and anything else you'd like to stuff their in-box full of.
Just in case there is a language barrier, here is the "fish" so you can send multiple messages in many poorly translated languages.
http://babblefish.com/language...
Let them know how you feel about their antics, policies, personal grooming, heredity, sexuality, current events, historical occurences, ice cream, politics, religion, car wax, etc. Sometimes it's nice just to let someone know you care...
SANDRA THIEM Vice President Masters Royalties & Administration
Sandra Thiem Phone +49 (30) 300 133 300 sandra.thiem@bmg.com
FRANZISKA GIERTH Senior Director Global Royalty Processing Services
Phone +49 (30) 300 133 300 Fax +49 (30) 300 133 333 franziska.gierth@bmg.com
PERRIE JONES Senior Director Royalty Services BMG Chrysalis US
Phone +1 (212) 561 3000 perrie.jones@bmgchrysalis.com
AIDAN KENNY Director Royalty Services BMG Chrysalis UK
Phone +44 (203) 214 1312 aidan.kenny@bmgchrysalis.com
DIRK LÜTHJE Director Royalties Accounting GSA / Benelux / Italy / Spain / France
Phone +49 (30) 300 133 300 Fax +49 (30) 300 133 333 dirk.lüthje@bmg.com
HANS MARX Manager Rights Administration BMG Talpa Music
Phone + 31 (35) 67700 57 hans.marx@bmgtalpamusic.com
GUADALUPE LUNA Manager Royalty Services BMG Spain
Phone +34 (91) 59683 09 guadalupe.luna@bmg.com
GIORGIA TEMPERA Manager Royalty Services & Inc. Tracking BMG Italy
Phone +39 (02) 776773 29 giorgia.tempera@bmg.com
MARIA CARLEBERG Manager Royalty Services BMG Chrysalis Scandinavia
Phone +46 (8) 459 1932 maria.carleberg@bmgchrysalis.com
GABY URBAN Senior Vice President Strategic Projects & Global Copyright Services
Gaby Urban Phone +49 (30) 300 133 300 Fax +49 (30) 300 133 333 gaby.urban@bmg.com
ROBERT STEGMÜLLER Vice President Group Copyright & Sub-Publishing Administration
Robert Stegmüller Phone +49 (30 )300 133 454 Fax +49 (30) 300 133 333 robert.stegmueller@bmg.com
HILDEGARD WADEH Director International Copyright Administration
Phone +49 (30) 300 133 319 Fax +49 (30) 300 133 333 hildegard.wadeh@bmg.com
PETER KREMP Senior Manager Copyright Germany
Phone +49 (30) 300 133 322 Fax +49 (30) 300 133 333 peter.kremp@bmg.com
STEVEN CAUCHI Director Copyright Admin BMG Chrysalis US
Phone +1 (212) 561 3737 steven.cauchi@bmgchrysalis.com
ANDY GODFREY Vice President Copyright BMG Chrysalis UK
Phone +44 (203) 214 1270 andy.godfrey@bmgchrysalis.com
HANS MARX Manager Rights Administration BMG Talpa Music BeNeLux
Phone + 31 (35) 677 00 57 hans.marx@bmg.com
NAWEL HAYANI Manager Copyright / Contract Admin BMG France
Phone +33 (1) 5321 8533 Nawel.Hayani@bmg.com
DENISE BARONI Manager Copyright BMG Italy
Phone +39 (02) 776 773 22 Denise.Baroni@bmg.com
KARIN WELDEN Copyright Manager BMG Chrysalis Scandinavia
Phone +46 (8) 459 19 24 karin.welden@bmgchrysalis.com
ESTHER REGATERO Manager Copyright BMG Spain
Phone +34 (91) 596 83 08 esther.regatero@bmg.com
THOMAS SCHERER EVP International Writer Services
Thomas Scherer thomas.scherer@bmg.com
MARIAN WOLF Manager International Writer Services
Marian Wolf marian.wolf@bmg.com
FRED CASIMIR EVP International Repertoire
Fred Casimir Phone +49 (30) 300 133 480 Fred.Casimir@bmg.com
DOMINIQUE KULLING Vice President Artist Services
Dominique Kulling Phone +49 (30) 300 133 332 Dominique.Kulling@bmg.com
JASON HRADIL Vice President Artist Services US & CA
Phone +1 (212) 561 3039 jason.hradil@bmgchrysa
This looks like the hurt locker again.. Crappy music not selling, but people are interested enough to listen on their computer. Kid Rock, some indie bands I've never heard of, some low popularity metal bands.
I don't think 50,000 people downloaded any of them.
I'd like to see their piracy dashboard site. Anybody from cox could post a link on here?
Its main purpose is to facilitate piracy.
That's not only wrong, pirates would also not give a fuck about it. Piracy was alive and prosper well before Bittorrent was invented and *any* fast content delivery system can (and will, if needed) be used for piracy. People pirated video games on floppy disks and tapes.
If you want to stop piracy, you need to close the Internet (i.e., prohibit TCP/IP connections except those by content providers) and strictly prohibit all mass storage media like hard disks, USB sticks, CDs and DVDs, and Blueray. But if you really want to make sure, it's probably best to also prohibit computers because people will always look for a way to transfer files.
As long as the majority of the world population does not have enough money to buy the content anyway, piracy will always exist.
"To terminate" and "termination" are forms of the same verb: one an infinitive and the other one a derived noun. A sentence using one form can be reworded to use the other without changing the meaning. If a policy "provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances", then it calls for the provider "to terminate" service if "appropriate circumstances" have been met. OCILLA requires ISPs "to terminate" by requiring them to have "a policy that provides for [such] termination" and to follow this policy. The disagreement between the publishers and the ISPs is over what constitutes "appropriate circumstances" in such a policy.
...from my IP course that we had to take at uni. It's the rightsholders problem to enforce their copyright. If they don't it was one of the grounds for copyright vacation.
Cox isn't a rightsholder, and this pseudo legal mafia group seems like they need more than just whining about some random IP address, as we know just knowing an IP address doesn't equate to knowing who it is or even where IIRC from prior legal cases in the last decade. Sounds to me like Cox is perfectly fine.
The DMCA has gone WAY too far and needs to be severely rolled back, as it's even sounding more and more like fair use is heading to be entirely neutered which would be a VERY BAD thing(TM), along with BS like and just encrypting something trumping reverse engineering, etc.
IANAL
I think it's time to play the [citation needed] card. See, raise, or fold--up to you, mate.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
STOP BUYING THEIR MUSIC!
Stop downloading their music.
Ignore their entire existence.
I don't care if you /like/ it. If you buy it or download it, you are giving them monetary and mindshare resources to continue to punish their customers and act improperly.
When they are penniless, perhaps they will see the error of their ways. Probably not, but then no one will give a fuck about them any more, and they can do no more harm.
In short, STOP feeding the monster.
INSTEAD, buy/download music from GOOD actors in the market. Support them in spite of the BAD actors. Support the artists directly. Never support any labels unless they eschew being part of organizations like RIAA and ASCAP.
I have done this for over twenty years. I am very happy with the music that is available to me, and also very happy that I don't support the bad actors in any way, shape or form. Indeed, I do all I can to put them out of business.
You can do it, too. ALL of you.
Take a stand. Make a difference.
-SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
And if the US Supreme Court has its head so far up its arse that it can't see that allowing copyright/exclusivity of APIs is a death sentence for the US software industry, so be it. I live in Europe.
But how many expats from the US can the European software industry absorb?
My IP's not listed! Thanks uTorrent!
people got together and downloaded only what they already own, to tie-up courts with those cases, and try and get judgments against these firms ?
Personally, if Cox and other ISPs continue to say they aren't "common carriers", then I say this lawsuit should go through and Cox should be held responsible for everything that LOOKS like an MP3 or AVI that traversed their network and be charged with a separate count of criminal copyright infringement for each file. They are facilitating piracy after all, they even directly control the speeds at which it flows through their network.
Unfortunately rightsholders (rather than copyright holders) have this mental defect in their brains that prevent them to understand anything regarding lowering the price of their products.
Don't know what you've seen, but I pay less for a music album now (either a physical CD or itunes/amazon full album download) than I did in the 90s, far less if you account for inflation. Same for DVDs, same for video games. Video games in particular are far cheaper than they've ever been.
ISP's are not the police or the courts. They have no right to punish. If the whole legal argument is based on ISP's failing to punish then it'll get thrown right out of court.
That scarcity was for commercial production. Most people borrowed a friend's LP and copied it on their stereo's cassette deck. Or they sat there all night listening to the radio and pressed play and record on their tape recorder when their song came on, hoping the DJ wouldn't talk over it.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
No. No. No.
How many times do we need to repeat these facts?
* Copyright Infringements are not theft !!!
* ISPs are not a police department despite their three-letter acronym 'ISP' !!!
Hopefully some court will slap those stupid publishers with a massive fine for contempt in wasting the courts time and for harassment of random people using evil blackmail tactics.
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
I haven't really engaged in heavy duty copyright violation. A little bit but I never shared it out. That said I'm happy that Cox essentially told Rightsorp to go get fucked.