He has a whole team of lawyers, otherwise the settlement wouldn't nearly been as favorable for him, but they are currently working for free. The money you give him might encourage him to produce a lawsuit of his own for wasted time, harassment, and unwanted publicity. Email him at jordaj@rpi.edu
Haha, maybe tuition at your school is $2,000, but at Rensselaer, where Jesse goes, it is more than $27,000, including food and housing, which is required for freshmen.
The engine will have real results again in August/September. Remember, this was a college network, and it's now June, so there's no school, and thus, no computers to scan. Jesse did indeed have lawyers, but the cost of them defending his case plus the tuition for the school year he would have missed (the lawsuit's deadline was the week of final exams) was far greater than the settlement fee, but he's fighting this now on his own terms, and we should continue to support him.
Please please write an article like "Hamster Lover" suggested. I would love to see a mass-media newspaper like yours actually get something right about technology, instead of turning it into a human interest piece, or details about the lawsuit. Explain the technology, let/.ers helo you, discuss the legality of it all, and help people understand why he was sued, what he was doing, and how they can understand it by making analogies to the real world (phone books, stuff like that). I would greatly enjoy it and certainly buy a copy of the paper if you were to write such an article. Phynd is back up by the way.
Leaving "music" out of the "files of type" drop down only stops the morons from finding music (no insult to anyone reading this intended). What I mean is, by removing the built in music filter, all he is doing is making users type "metallica mp3" instead of just "metallica". It still works at finding mp3s, you just don't have a fancy filter to use.
The lawsuit was filed in April, the "by accessing phynd you give me permission" issue was added in January to comply with campus regulations on unauthorized computer access. The removal form was also included at that time. The RIAA collected their data and filed the suit after these changes were made to the system.
What do you mean? He was never tried, that's true, but my point is, there was no "trial" involved at all. In America, a civil case in court is called a "hearing," and any lawsuit can be "heard" multiple times.
Congratulations. I had oringally decided not to respond to "misinforment morons" as I mentioned in a previous post of mine. However, you are so stupid that I just had to post and correct you. using your own bank robbing analogy:
He did NOT provide guns and a getaway car, what he provided was an address for the bank. That's like suing Bell Telephones for sending out phone books, because they could be used to locate people and rob them or assault them or whatever. It sounds ridiculous because it IS (hey, I like that...new sig). Anyway, the phone book cannot be held responsible if someone uses it to find someone to rob or murder, because the people were there anyway, and all the phone book did was make it more convenient to find people and businesses. Bah, I'm not talking about this anymore with people like you. Go back to your hole and keep thinking your thoughts just like the TV tells you to. You're beyond hope. The person with the most money is not always right.
First of all, I'm glad to see that the replies to these posts are finally starting to make sense. The last article about Jesse was filled with misinformed morons waxing about how criminals were being put to justice.
Secondly, nice sig.
Thirdly, my point. The Phynd server never trafficked in, traded, or transmitted copyrighted works. It woked as a "phone book" of sorts. It was almost identical in operation to Google, except Google caches the files it finds, and Phynd does not. You search for a file on Phynd, and it gives you a link that will let your operating system (which has this network searcher built-in, by the way) connect directly to whoever it sharing the file. There is no way for Jesse to even track who downloaded what, because downloads do not go through his computer. If you search for something, all the site records is the text of your search. It isn't even used for anything aside from making fun of people who search for weird porn or playing practical jokes(I know, I'm friends with jesse). Now for the "engage in or sell" portion...Phynd is not for sale from Jesse, the core code is actually owned by the operator of www.phynd.net. There is also a clause that says something to the effect of "there must be reasonable effort made to lower the counts of copyright violation over the Phynd service." If you'll notice, Phynd no longer has "Music" in the "search for files of type:" box. That's a reasonable cut down on piracy, it doesn't filter results based on music filetypes anymore. However, if you type "metallica" into the search box, you will always get metallica mp3s, not that their new ones are worth listening to, but that's for a whole other post.
Before you get all sarcastic about the search engine being back up, consider the original article. The search engine was set up to search a large college network. What month is it? That's right, it's June. There's no school in June. The search engine wil lbe back up in August, and will be fully operational before the beginning of September. If the search engine worked right now, you'd be able to search for files in Jesse's house, and you wouldn't be able to download those files unless you were actually in his house.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.
Indeed, double jeopardy applies to the same offense. If I were to drive over to your house and kill you (example situation ONLY), and I were found innocent, I could then do whatever I wished in regards to your murder and not be re-tried and found guilty. However, in Jesse's case, it is a civil one, and the RIAA can sue as many times as they have lawywers and money for (infinite). Basically, until a judge gets sick of it and legally bans the RIAA from suing Jesse, he can be sued once a day for the rest of his life. There are no laws against lawsuit flooding or scare tactics, because not until now has that been a major problem in America. The RIAA's current case(s) against the college students is just another example of corporate America running the show anyway they want without any regard for individuals. We seem to be approaching some sort of critical mass though, and hopefully there will be an explosion in this situation, and the key things will change that need to change. I just hope Jesse and other innocent people don't get caught in the middle.
Yes, I said "innocent" back there. Before you even start flaming me, read the past articles and his website. Jesse never broke a law, all he did was set up a search engine that allowed you to find files on a local network (like the one built into all operating systems). This search engine would crawl through the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's network, indexing available shares. When you performed a search, it would search through the list of shares, and display the results in the form of direct links to the other person's computer. Jesse did not archive any actual files, he did nothing but provide a "phone book" of sorts, where you could look upthe file you wanted, and he would tell you which subnet and computer the file resided on. The system is actually quite brilliant, and very useful for finding legal and illegal files. Unfortunately, the RIAA decided that Jesse could not continue running this perfectly legal entity, and sued to have him shut down. Suing 4 college students for massive amounts of money during finals is pretty low, but then going after a student after he has settled is even lower. The RIAA needs to be shown that we will not tolerate this kind of behavior, and they need to realize that the world has changed thanks to computers, and they need to change their business model to reflect the popularity of the largest data distribution medium the world has ever seen.
I just wanted to post my two cents in here, mostly because I don't want to be forced to moderate this discussion. I think most people on SlashDot will agree that the current trend that the music industry is taking is very stupid. From ridiculous "copy protection" that destroys computers and CD drives to prosecuting music fans, to now trying to continue forcing customers to buy 10 shitty songs along with the 1 that they want...the music industry in general is isolating their true fans. The people that they could make money from are the hardcore music fans. People who mass-download shit off P2P networks, find artists that they enjoy, and support them. When I download music by a rare artist that I heard was good, I try to find a way to send them money without going through the label. If they have a website, I paypal money to their contact address, or I click their donate link if the have one. If there isn't any way to give them money, I buy their new album when it comes out. There's no way to get fans if no one hears your music. Clear Channel radio won't play anything that no one knows about, and no one wants to pay $20 for music that they don't know they will like or not.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.
Damn...good point. What happens in that situation? I would assume that since the first company (the manufacturer) doesn't have a storefront or an agent in CA, then the law does not apply, since there's no way to track resellings. What happens if you sell your CDs to a pawn shop and then someone accesses your address book or something? The law is very vague and not well thought out.
Another thing that bothers me about this is the "account number" thing. What happens if you're at a Blockbuster and your account number is PRINTED ON THE RECIEPT and someone looks at it. If that is what constitutes "interception of unencrypted data" then I fear for the future. Of course, with the current laws outlawing honeypots and VPNs, now we have a law that forces us to report intruders, and another law forbiding us to detect or protect against intruders. Fantastic. God bless America. Time to move.
You're right, he was infringing on copyrights. However, the original lawsuit was worded in such a way that they were suing him for putting up a search engine and "oh, by the way, he may or may not be sharing files." The RIAA has no proof that he was sharing files, they need to download a copy of an infringed work from someone and prove that the computer in question is owned and operated by that person before they can win a lawsuit. The RIAA didn't do this, they simply sued for the "facilitation of copyright infringement" and then when Jesse and the others fought back, they dropped that case all together and forced a settlement so that there was not another suit brought against them for sharing these files. This is a case of "The RIAA sues Google for Providing search services but realizes it will lose so forces Google to settle by threatening them with further suits concerning the music on company machines" I agree with you on the ClearChannel thing, the air should be free, and it's not. That's bull.
Well no matter how you slice it, purchasing music gives money to the RIAA somehow. Mom and Pop stores are dead or dying. I'm sorry to say it, but it's true. Anyway, the RIAA always gets money, that's not what I was trying to say. WHat I was trying to say is, if you buy a CD at Best Buy, you pay $16 for it. When you buy it from Apple, you pay $9. Even including shipping, pressing, printing, and Best Buy's markup, that all doesn't equal $7 per CD. Apple must be giving less of a percentage to the RIAA. However, I think that by supporting the Apple store, we can show ARTISTS that we use online music stores. This will allow artists to record their own music, and produce an album and sell it over Apple's service and get 65% of the cost instead of 5%. It benefits the artists and the customers.
I agree with the other response. You people come in and just post whatever you decide to post without even reading the damn articles. Shut up unless you have something educated to say.
"Nike Sued Because Woman Tripped and Fell While Wearing Nike Shoes"
Slashdot Anonymous Coward: NIKE SHOULD BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS BECAUSE THEIR CEO TRIPPED THAT LADIE LOLKTHX!!!
Read, think, post.
Good god man, do you actually read? Read the news and the sites that apply to this. Here we have a kid sued by the RIAA for writing a search engine that other people used to steal music. He doesn't have any money other or any way to fight the RIAA's gigantic team of lawyers. He did nothing wrong (aside from having a few MP3s on his own computer, like most people) and he settled because finishing out the lawsuit and winning would cost him more money. We are all pitching in a little bit of money to help someone who has been sued by a corporation that we all hate. I'd be happy to give $5 to an artist every time I buy a CD, but the sad fact is, when I pay $18 for a new CD, less than $1 goes to the actual artist. It's business practices like that that we are fighting against. If you don't want to donate money, then don't, but don't come to us when the same thing happens to you, because it might. You never know who they will randomly select next.
He is still fighting. He is putting the search engine back up and defying the RIAA as soon as he is sure he is legally protected. We are all threatened by this kind of behavior by large corporations, so we should try to support the individuals that have been singled out. This could easily have been you that is being sued. If you download music using any technology, you are trackable, and the RIAA may one day randomly select you for prosecution. Don't say it can't happen, because they have already privately messaged thousands of music traders. This means that they can find you, and they can prosecute you. We need to help the people who are being prosecuted, and we all need to join together to make sure that even though the RIAA temporarily shuts down music finding services such as Phynd, we will all join together to pay their settlements and continue on the way we were, legally.
Sorry, that was a bit of insider information. The RIAA used bots to crawl the Phynd service (which will soon be up at phynd.chewplastic.com) and they download a shitload of files, some of which were by artists that aren't a part of the RIAA. Shhh...don't tell anyone.
He has no car and he's attending this school on a scholarship. How about if you pay the money? You seem to think it's not a big deal. Having money in the future doesn't mean that he has it now. I'll probably make $1million sometime in the next 15 years, but that doesn't mean I can pay you that same amount of money now. If you don't want to give him any money to help him fight this bullshit, then just shut up and let other people do it who are better than you.
Slashdot Mirror
He has a whole team of lawyers, otherwise the settlement wouldn't nearly been as favorable for him, but they are currently working for free. The money you give him might encourage him to produce a lawsuit of his own for wasted time, harassment, and unwanted publicity. Email him at jordaj@rpi.edu
Haha, maybe tuition at your school is $2,000, but at Rensselaer, where Jesse goes, it is more than $27,000, including food and housing, which is required for freshmen.
The engine will have real results again in August/September. Remember, this was a college network, and it's now June, so there's no school, and thus, no computers to scan. Jesse did indeed have lawyers, but the cost of them defending his case plus the tuition for the school year he would have missed (the lawsuit's deadline was the week of final exams) was far greater than the settlement fee, but he's fighting this now on his own terms, and we should continue to support him.
Please please write an article like "Hamster Lover" suggested. I would love to see a mass-media newspaper like yours actually get something right about technology, instead of turning it into a human interest piece, or details about the lawsuit. Explain the technology, let /.ers helo you, discuss the legality of it all, and help people understand why he was sued, what he was doing, and how they can understand it by making analogies to the real world (phone books, stuff like that). I would greatly enjoy it and certainly buy a copy of the paper if you were to write such an article. Phynd is back up by the way.
Leaving "music" out of the "files of type" drop down only stops the morons from finding music (no insult to anyone reading this intended). What I mean is, by removing the built in music filter, all he is doing is making users type "metallica mp3" instead of just "metallica". It still works at finding mp3s, you just don't have a fancy filter to use.
The lawsuit was filed in April, the "by accessing phynd you give me permission" issue was added in January to comply with campus regulations on unauthorized computer access. The removal form was also included at that time. The RIAA collected their data and filed the suit after these changes were made to the system.
What do you mean? He was never tried, that's true, but my point is, there was no "trial" involved at all. In America, a civil case in court is called a "hearing," and any lawsuit can be "heard" multiple times.
Phynd is the property of the owner of www.phynd.net Contact him for a public release of the software.
Congratulations. I had oringally decided not to respond to "misinforment morons" as I mentioned in a previous post of mine. However, you are so stupid that I just had to post and correct you. using your own bank robbing analogy:
He did NOT provide guns and a getaway car, what he provided was an address for the bank. That's like suing Bell Telephones for sending out phone books, because they could be used to locate people and rob them or assault them or whatever. It sounds ridiculous because it IS (hey, I like that...new sig). Anyway, the phone book cannot be held responsible if someone uses it to find someone to rob or murder, because the people were there anyway, and all the phone book did was make it more convenient to find people and businesses. Bah, I'm not talking about this anymore with people like you. Go back to your hole and keep thinking your thoughts just like the TV tells you to. You're beyond hope. The person with the most money is not always right.
First of all, I'm glad to see that the replies to these posts are finally starting to make sense. The last article about Jesse was filled with misinformed morons waxing about how criminals were being put to justice.
Secondly, nice sig.
Thirdly, my point. The Phynd server never trafficked in, traded, or transmitted copyrighted works. It woked as a "phone book" of sorts. It was almost identical in operation to Google, except Google caches the files it finds, and Phynd does not. You search for a file on Phynd, and it gives you a link that will let your operating system (which has this network searcher built-in, by the way) connect directly to whoever it sharing the file. There is no way for Jesse to even track who downloaded what, because downloads do not go through his computer. If you search for something, all the site records is the text of your search. It isn't even used for anything aside from making fun of people who search for weird porn or playing practical jokes(I know, I'm friends with jesse). Now for the "engage in or sell" portion...Phynd is not for sale from Jesse, the core code is actually owned by the operator of www.phynd.net. There is also a clause that says something to the effect of "there must be reasonable effort made to lower the counts of copyright violation over the Phynd service." If you'll notice, Phynd no longer has "Music" in the "search for files of type:" box. That's a reasonable cut down on piracy, it doesn't filter results based on music filetypes anymore. However, if you type "metallica" into the search box, you will always get metallica mp3s, not that their new ones are worth listening to, but that's for a whole other post.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.
Yes, I said "innocent" back there. Before you even start flaming me, read the past articles and his website. Jesse never broke a law, all he did was set up a search engine that allowed you to find files on a local network (like the one built into all operating systems). This search engine would crawl through the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's network, indexing available shares. When you performed a search, it would search through the list of shares, and display the results in the form of direct links to the other person's computer. Jesse did not archive any actual files, he did nothing but provide a "phone book" of sorts, where you could look upthe file you wanted, and he would tell you which subnet and computer the file resided on. The system is actually quite brilliant, and very useful for finding legal and illegal files. Unfortunately, the RIAA decided that Jesse could not continue running this perfectly legal entity, and sued to have him shut down. Suing 4 college students for massive amounts of money during finals is pretty low, but then going after a student after he has settled is even lower. The RIAA needs to be shown that we will not tolerate this kind of behavior, and they need to realize that the world has changed thanks to computers, and they need to change their business model to reflect the popularity of the largest data distribution medium the world has ever seen.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.
Damn...good point. What happens in that situation? I would assume that since the first company (the manufacturer) doesn't have a storefront or an agent in CA, then the law does not apply, since there's no way to track resellings. What happens if you sell your CDs to a pawn shop and then someone accesses your address book or something? The law is very vague and not well thought out.
Another thing that bothers me about this is the "account number" thing. What happens if you're at a Blockbuster and your account number is PRINTED ON THE RECIEPT and someone looks at it. If that is what constitutes "interception of unencrypted data" then I fear for the future. Of course, with the current laws outlawing honeypots and VPNs, now we have a law that forces us to report intruders, and another law forbiding us to detect or protect against intruders. Fantastic. God bless America. Time to move.
You're right, he was infringing on copyrights. However, the original lawsuit was worded in such a way that they were suing him for putting up a search engine and "oh, by the way, he may or may not be sharing files." The RIAA has no proof that he was sharing files, they need to download a copy of an infringed work from someone and prove that the computer in question is owned and operated by that person before they can win a lawsuit. The RIAA didn't do this, they simply sued for the "facilitation of copyright infringement" and then when Jesse and the others fought back, they dropped that case all together and forced a settlement so that there was not another suit brought against them for sharing these files. This is a case of "The RIAA sues Google for Providing search services but realizes it will lose so forces Google to settle by threatening them with further suits concerning the music on company machines" I agree with you on the ClearChannel thing, the air should be free, and it's not. That's bull.
Well no matter how you slice it, purchasing music gives money to the RIAA somehow. Mom and Pop stores are dead or dying. I'm sorry to say it, but it's true. Anyway, the RIAA always gets money, that's not what I was trying to say. WHat I was trying to say is, if you buy a CD at Best Buy, you pay $16 for it. When you buy it from Apple, you pay $9. Even including shipping, pressing, printing, and Best Buy's markup, that all doesn't equal $7 per CD. Apple must be giving less of a percentage to the RIAA. However, I think that by supporting the Apple store, we can show ARTISTS that we use online music stores. This will allow artists to record their own music, and produce an album and sell it over Apple's service and get 65% of the cost instead of 5%. It benefits the artists and the customers.
I'd rather the RIAA got 65% than the 95% they get from the music now.
I agree with the other response. You people come in and just post whatever you decide to post without even reading the damn articles. Shut up unless you have something educated to say. "Nike Sued Because Woman Tripped and Fell While Wearing Nike Shoes" Slashdot Anonymous Coward: NIKE SHOULD BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS BECAUSE THEIR CEO TRIPPED THAT LADIE LOLKTHX!!! Read, think, post.
Good god man, do you actually read? Read the news and the sites that apply to this. Here we have a kid sued by the RIAA for writing a search engine that other people used to steal music. He doesn't have any money other or any way to fight the RIAA's gigantic team of lawyers. He did nothing wrong (aside from having a few MP3s on his own computer, like most people) and he settled because finishing out the lawsuit and winning would cost him more money. We are all pitching in a little bit of money to help someone who has been sued by a corporation that we all hate. I'd be happy to give $5 to an artist every time I buy a CD, but the sad fact is, when I pay $18 for a new CD, less than $1 goes to the actual artist. It's business practices like that that we are fighting against. If you don't want to donate money, then don't, but don't come to us when the same thing happens to you, because it might. You never know who they will randomly select next.
He is still fighting. He is putting the search engine back up and defying the RIAA as soon as he is sure he is legally protected. We are all threatened by this kind of behavior by large corporations, so we should try to support the individuals that have been singled out. This could easily have been you that is being sued. If you download music using any technology, you are trackable, and the RIAA may one day randomly select you for prosecution. Don't say it can't happen, because they have already privately messaged thousands of music traders. This means that they can find you, and they can prosecute you. We need to help the people who are being prosecuted, and we all need to join together to make sure that even though the RIAA temporarily shuts down music finding services such as Phynd, we will all join together to pay their settlements and continue on the way we were, legally.
Yep, he's paying out of his own pocket, his parents aren't paying anything. Help him out by going to the site and donating. chewplastic.com
Sorry, that was a bit of insider information. The RIAA used bots to crawl the Phynd service (which will soon be up at phynd.chewplastic.com) and they download a shitload of files, some of which were by artists that aren't a part of the RIAA. Shhh...don't tell anyone.
He has no car and he's attending this school on a scholarship. How about if you pay the money? You seem to think it's not a big deal. Having money in the future doesn't mean that he has it now. I'll probably make $1million sometime in the next 15 years, but that doesn't mean I can pay you that same amount of money now. If you don't want to give him any money to help him fight this bullshit, then just shut up and let other people do it who are better than you.
"double jeopardy" applies to criminal cases only.