No one has yet addressed the question of how RIAA can tell whether files on my computer are licensed or unlicensed by listening. Lineres' said *** The RIAA also listens to the downloaded music files from these users in order to confirm that they are, indeed, illegal copies of sound recordings whose copyrights are owned RIAA members.*** (para. 15) and ***The RIAA downloaded and listened to a representative sample of the music files being offered for download by each Defendant and was able to confirm that the files each Defendant was offering for distribution were illegal copies of sound recordings whose copyrights are owned by RIAA members. *** (para. 18)
Is there anyone with technical credentials who can say that Lineres was lying since it is impossible to distinguish between licensed sound files and unlicensed ("illegal") copies by listening?
A copyright owner's exclusive right to distribution is found in Secs. 109(b)(1)(A) and 109(b)(4) of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C., which prohibits a person in possession of a copy of a computer program or phonorecord from disposing of possession by rental, lease, or lending (collectively referred to as "distributing" in Sec. 109(b)(4)) "for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage."
Does anyone think even intentional file sharing is distribution for commercial advantage?
The record companies did not show the files were "likely to have been illegally trafficked." The only copying they showed was legal since the record companies' agents were the only ones who made the copies and, of course, those agents were authorized and even instructed by the record companies who own the copyrights. The record companies did not allege that the music files on the defendants' computers were illegal. They did not even allege that the individuals knew that it was possible for others to copy their music files without their permission, nor did they allege that the individuals gave anyone permission to copy.
Slashdot Mirror
No one has yet addressed the question of how RIAA can tell whether files on my computer are licensed or unlicensed by listening. Lineres' said *** The RIAA also listens to the downloaded music files from these users in order to confirm that they are, indeed, illegal copies of sound recordings whose copyrights are owned RIAA members.*** (para. 15) and ***The RIAA downloaded and listened to a representative sample of the music files being offered for download by each Defendant and was able to confirm that the files each Defendant was offering for distribution were illegal copies of sound recordings whose copyrights are owned by RIAA members. *** (para. 18) Is there anyone with technical credentials who can say that Lineres was lying since it is impossible to distinguish between licensed sound files and unlicensed ("illegal") copies by listening?
A copyright owner's exclusive right to distribution is found in Secs. 109(b)(1)(A) and 109(b)(4) of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C., which prohibits a person in possession of a copy of a computer program or phonorecord from disposing of possession by rental, lease, or lending (collectively referred to as "distributing" in Sec. 109(b)(4)) "for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage." Does anyone think even intentional file sharing is distribution for commercial advantage?
The record companies did not show the files were "likely to have been illegally trafficked." The only copying they showed was legal since the record companies' agents were the only ones who made the copies and, of course, those agents were authorized and even instructed by the record companies who own the copyrights. The record companies did not allege that the music files on the defendants' computers were illegal. They did not even allege that the individuals knew that it was possible for others to copy their music files without their permission, nor did they allege that the individuals gave anyone permission to copy.