It's the same as getting a search warrant. They just need to show probable cause, which is pretty easy to do given there's no encryption in Kazaa. How do you expect anyone to prosecute a criminal if they need to convict him before they can collect evidence to convict him. That's a catch-22.
Why are you using Kazaa to transfer files between home and work? That's a silly couter-example that applies to 0.0000001% of actual cases involving Kazaa and copyrighted material. If you really want to use Kazaa, you can defend yourself in court, but a lot of other people probably would download your music after you made it available so you could transfer it, so you'd lose.
They're probably only going after those who make songs available for download. I believe the cnn article is in error on this point based on what I read at cnet. They want this guy because he's sharing 600 songs over a fat pipe, not because he downloaded 600 songs. You can't justify this even if you own the cds for all the songs.
It's called probable cause. They have a right to search you if you're trafficking in kiddy porn, even if you didn't know about it. It's hard to crack a box without leaving a trail, so you will most likely be aquitted. However, claiming the police do not have the right to investigate because you may be innocent it ridiculous.
From reading a similar article on CNET, I think CNN is mistaken in saying the person DOWNLOADED 600 songs in one day. I think it's more likely he UPLOADED 600 songs to various other people in one day, which is why the RIAA is interested in him.
They provide record contracts for artists, who would otherwise be stuck in day jobs. Without them, no one would hear the artists' work, so it's value to the average person would be $0. Now, people using Kazaa are essentially claiming the value of the music is $0, because that's what they're paying for it, to the detriment of the artists and the RIAA.
Explain to me why we have tax brackets then. They don't benefit the rich. The govt. want to please the middle class on most issues so they can get re-elected. On issues that the middle class doesn't care about, they then take the lobby money and vote in favor of companies. Of course, the general public doesn't care at all about most of the issues that concern the slashdot crowd, so it's no surprise the govt. sides with industry on these issues.
I think this is just a vocal minority complaining about how much FM radio suck. Although I agree, I also feel that if the niche markets were significant enough, independent commercial stations would exists to take advantage of these markets. My assumption is that not enough listeners are around to make anything other than the top six formats profitable. There's nothing stopping someone from starting a radio station that plays something different. Yet, in LA anyway, the article's decription of FM radio is pretty accurate.
CNET reported last week that they were concerned about stuff like Red Hat pointing to their libraries to use in running sw like Star-Office and then say, BTW, these libraries need to be licensed. nudge, nudge, wink, wink, implied?
Apparently, OPEC and Detroit car makers have done effective lobbying to prevent Segways from replacing cars for transportation. Wouldn't want Segways to save oil, reduce pollution over cars, and make the roads less crowded. If it worked in a liberal city like SF...
"Are they going to ban skateboards, roller blades, and inline electric scooters as well? Seaways are supposed to be safer then these things."
I think by safer they mean the Segway is safer to ride than skateboards, etc., since it's designed not to fall over. I doubt they mean it's safer for a pedestrian to get hit by a Segway than to get hit by a person on a skateboard.
You strongly implied it with your sarcasm. Rich people pay more total taxes than poor people, despite the fact that they're a minority. The have a right to more tax releif than anyone else. Bush cut taxes substantially for everyone anyway, not just corporations or rich people.
Try convincing a bank to lend you a million dollars to restore a film when you can't even tell them you have the exclusive right to the film your restoring.
DRM will expand the market for pcs because once it's in place, the RIAA/MPAA will release digital media for PCs. You'd have to be pretty stupid to ignore this market.
Isn't that why they want DRM? To provide a reasonable way to allow songs to be sold over the internet. Not surprising that there's so much objection to DRM. It takes away the rationalization that you can download music for free because the RIAA refuses to sell it to you in that format.
The consumer must bear the expense of lost sales due to piracy and the security to prevent further lost sales. This has been the case in shoplifting as well. I don't see anyone calling Walmart evil for putting electronic tags on their merchandise however. If you want to blame someone, blame the pirates.
Here's the real answer. People on slashdot are so consumer-biased, they can't even keep their arguements consistent, e.g. People should be able to share anything they want on p2p networks. oh wait, everyone except the RIAA/MPAA.
The problem is the average user doesn't even know the handle of even 1 friend he can really trust. At best, you'll end up with a bunch of small, ineffective, disjoint graphs.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the same as getting a search warrant. They just need to show probable cause, which is pretty easy to do given there's no encryption in Kazaa. How do you expect anyone to prosecute a criminal if they need to convict him before they can collect evidence to convict him. That's a catch-22.
Why are you using Kazaa to transfer files between home and work? That's a silly couter-example that applies to 0.0000001% of actual cases involving Kazaa and copyrighted material. If you really want to use Kazaa, you can defend yourself in court, but a lot of other people probably would download your music after you made it available so you could transfer it, so you'd lose.
They're probably only going after those who make songs available for download. I believe the cnn article is in error on this point based on what I read at cnet. They want this guy because he's sharing 600 songs over a fat pipe, not because he downloaded 600 songs. You can't justify this even if you own the cds for all the songs.
It's called probable cause. They have a right to search you if you're trafficking in kiddy porn, even if you didn't know about it. It's hard to crack a box without leaving a trail, so you will most likely be aquitted. However, claiming the police do not have the right to investigate because you may be innocent it ridiculous.
From reading a similar article on CNET, I think CNN is mistaken in saying the person DOWNLOADED 600 songs in one day. I think it's more likely he UPLOADED 600 songs to various other people in one day, which is why the RIAA is interested in him.
They provide record contracts for artists, who would otherwise be stuck in day jobs. Without them, no one would hear the artists' work, so it's value to the average person would be $0. Now, people using Kazaa are essentially claiming the value of the music is $0, because that's what they're paying for it, to the detriment of the artists and the RIAA.
Explain to me why we have tax brackets then. They don't benefit the rich. The govt. want to please the middle class on most issues so they can get re-elected. On issues that the middle class doesn't care about, they then take the lobby money and vote in favor of companies. Of course, the general public doesn't care at all about most of the issues that concern the slashdot crowd, so it's no surprise the govt. sides with industry on these issues.
I think this is just a vocal minority complaining about how much FM radio suck. Although I agree, I also feel that if the niche markets were significant enough, independent commercial stations would exists to take advantage of these markets. My assumption is that not enough listeners are around to make anything other than the top six formats profitable. There's nothing stopping someone from starting a radio station that plays something different. Yet, in LA anyway, the article's decription of FM radio is pretty accurate.
CNET reported last week that they were concerned about stuff like Red Hat pointing to their libraries to use in running sw like Star-Office and then say, BTW, these libraries need to be licensed. nudge, nudge, wink, wink, implied?
"And also is it access to ALL the source code, or just the security-related bits?"
According to CNET, Russia demanded to see all the source code, and MS agreed.
Apparently, OPEC and Detroit car makers have done effective lobbying to prevent Segways from replacing cars for transportation. Wouldn't want Segways to save oil, reduce pollution over cars, and make the roads less crowded. If it worked in a liberal city like SF...
"Are they going to ban skateboards, roller blades, and inline electric scooters as well? Seaways are supposed to be safer then these things."
I think by safer they mean the Segway is safer to ride than skateboards, etc., since it's designed not to fall over. I doubt they mean it's safer for a pedestrian to get hit by a Segway than to get hit by a person on a skateboard.
You strongly implied it with your sarcasm. Rich people pay more total taxes than poor people, despite the fact that they're a minority. The have a right to more tax releif than anyone else. Bush cut taxes substantially for everyone anyway, not just corporations or rich people.
Try convincing a bank to lend you a million dollars to restore a film when you can't even tell them you have the exclusive right to the film your restoring.
DRM will expand the market for pcs because once it's in place, the RIAA/MPAA will release digital media for PCs. You'd have to be pretty stupid to ignore this market.
Isn't Henry Rollins a LIAR!!! I'm a LIAR!!!
Isn't that why they want DRM? To provide a reasonable way to allow songs to be sold over the internet. Not surprising that there's so much objection to DRM. It takes away the rationalization that you can download music for free because the RIAA refuses to sell it to you in that format.
How do you define a flawed or nonsense file? They could simply put in a commercial for the song and call it perfectly valid.
The consumer must bear the expense of lost sales due to piracy and the security to prevent further lost sales. This has been the case in shoplifting as well. I don't see anyone calling Walmart evil for putting electronic tags on their merchandise however. If you want to blame someone, blame the pirates.
Here's the real answer. People on slashdot are so consumer-biased, they can't even keep their arguements consistent, e.g. People should be able to share anything they want on p2p networks. oh wait, everyone except the RIAA/MPAA.
They don't need justification to share files p2p anymore than you do.
That's bs. They offered a file. You asked them to give you the file. They did. End of story.
RTFA
When I was using morpheus, it did the same thing.
The problem is the average user doesn't even know the handle of even 1 friend he can really trust. At best, you'll end up with a bunch of small, ineffective, disjoint graphs.