> How is this really relevant to the Napster discussion? Napster is just a way to connect users. It doesn't require you to offer copyrighted tunes to gain access or pay off studio gophers to lift demo tapes. > Nah. The RIAA is a consortium of record companies, not some watchdog group looking out for artists. Ask any recording artist about the RIAA stance on work-for-hire amendments and you'll see steam come out of their ears. This is more about protecting a distribution network than it is about protecting intellectual property rights. Sure there are a large number of Napster users transferring illegal material. But then people are also illegally selling guns in the street. I'd like to see Judge Patel tell Smith & Wesson how they've created a "monster" that they have to deal with that was clearly intended to kill people. Hey, let's at least be consistent in this society. I'd encourage the Judge to re-read the Supreme Court case in favor of Sony re: Betamax that mentions a technology only needs to have the "potential" for significant non-infringing use.
Slashdot Mirror
> How is this really relevant to the Napster discussion? Napster is just a way to connect users. It doesn't require you to offer copyrighted tunes to gain access or pay off studio gophers to lift demo tapes. > Nah. The RIAA is a consortium of record companies, not some watchdog group looking out for artists. Ask any recording artist about the RIAA stance on work-for-hire amendments and you'll see steam come out of their ears. This is more about protecting a distribution network than it is about protecting intellectual property rights. Sure there are a large number of Napster users transferring illegal material. But then people are also illegally selling guns in the street. I'd like to see Judge Patel tell Smith & Wesson how they've created a "monster" that they have to deal with that was clearly intended to kill people. Hey, let's at least be consistent in this society. I'd encourage the Judge to re-read the Supreme Court case in favor of Sony re: Betamax that mentions a technology only needs to have the "potential" for significant non-infringing use.