Slashdot Mirror
MP3.com named in copyright lawsuit
cybrthng writes "Check out the news on CNET's News.Com about how PlayMedia is now taking its lawsuit against NullSoft after MP3.COM also. " The article talks about the fact that MP3.com doesn't know all that much either-although it appears that PlayMedia is targeting them because they have determined that MP3.com was the biggest distributor. Either that, or they want a chunk of the 115$US million MP3 is hoping to raise in their IPO.
My best guess is that the creator of AMP is rather miffed that he didn't market his code well enough to profit from it, that he didn't get into business arrangements that would make him a partner(*cough* why was Nitrane even necessary), and now has been courted by lawyers who think they can wring large chunks of money out of the equation.
The MOST interesting part of the equation is Winamp licensing an engine from FFH. FFH will, IMHO, flip around and bend Playmedia over the proverbial legal bar questioning their chutzpah demanding legal protection over something that they ostensibly "stole" from FFH in the first place.
My "off the cuff" legal analysis of this situation will be that the judge will throw the entire case out, noting that Playmedia(and FFH) lost their claim over the *large* period of time they allowed WinAMP to spread. The Nullsoft guys will successfully argue that Playmedia knowingly allowed the code to be used, that any similarities in code were those that would be expected (by anybody, even Playmedia) from somebody who had seen the source code legally and had recreated it in a new technical system, and that to accept Playmedia's claim would be to usher in a new era of Contagion Litigation.
Contagion Litigation, related to submarine patents, occur when a given technology is allowed to spread contagiously, and when enough parties are infected, the legal nature of the product is reasserted and everybody is forced to pay. It's a form of fraud, obviously, since if each receptor of the "diseased code" had known the legal implication of using the technology before integrating into their systems they would have chosen an alternate route.
There's an element of beauty in all of this. Luckily, the autocratic nature of most courtrooms should cut through the BS rather quickly. I'm sure there's significant precedent against stuff like this.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://doxpara.netpedia.net
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend.
Last time I looked, Winamp wasn't the only free MP3 player that MP3.COM offered so I don't see how they can backup the claim that MP3.COM was reliant on Winamp. Plus I don't see how MP3.COM knew about any code being used from AMP before the lawsuit, thus I think any reasonable judge will throw out the case since they are a unknowing third party.
Nitrane(TM) is copyright protected and is the property of Nullsoft, Inc. This software may be used freely only with Winamp(TM), and may not be copied, sold, distributed or used for any other purpose without the prior written consent of Nullsoft, Inc.
The prior was taken from the README.TXT from version 2.10. Nitrane is under a separate copyright from Winamp. Winamp is just a shell to different modules. It would be easy to write a plugin for Winamp that uses XAudio instead of FFH or Nitrane. Nitrane on the other hand is provided free, though it must be used with Winamp. I'm no legal scholar, so I don't know if the AMP license would allow for this resriction, but Nitrane has always been distributed for free and Nullsoft has never collected any money for Nitrane.
I think PlayMedia is just looking to make money. By going after distributors, even though it will never hold, they are just wasting everybody's time and showing how incredibly stupid and selfish they are. Winamp is the best mp3 player. Peter Gogas