Judge: File-swapping tools are legal

[sbp]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/905306.asp
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/5720326.htm

April 25 — A federal judge in Los Angeles has handed a stunning court victory to file-swapping services Streamcast Networks and Grokster, dismissing much of the record industry and movie studios’ lawsuit against the two companies.

IN AN ALMOST complete reversal of previous victories for the record labels and movie studios, federal court Judge Stephen Wilson ruled that Streamcast — parent of the Morpheus software — and Grokster were not liable for copyright infringements that took place using their software. The ruling does not directly affect Kazaa, software distributed by Sharman Networks that has also been targeted by the entertainment industry.

------------
Finally a court with common sense.

If the RIAA and company had their way all P2P programs would be shut down.

Absolutely P2P programs are perfectly legal. P2P makers are no more responsible for misuse of the product than hammer or gun manufacturers.

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Business/ap20030426_867.html
"Businesses that intentionally facilitate massive piracy should not be able to evade responsibility for their actions," said Hilary Rosen, chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America

changed to:

"Businesses that intentionally facilitate price fixing should not be able to evade responsibility for their actions," said Hilary Rosen, chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America :angel2:

[marqmajere]

Now THAT is the best news I've read all day. P2P is as strong now as it ever was yet the record industry isn't taking a hit. I'm glad that someone finally realized this and acted upon it. Kudos to that judge. :)

[vampireuk]

I read this the other day, its about damn time some common sense was injected into the court system. This will also help for future rulings since they have something to point back to:cool:

[DaveW]

YAY! ... I bet the Judge is a Kazaa user himself though :)

[Son Goku]

It's a bit of a victory against the RIAA's insanity...but who wants to bet the RIAA tries to appeal this now. The people have won a battle against these monopolists, but a battle isn't the whole war...

Microsoft also inidially lost the DOJ trial...but on appeal the appelete judge basically said, and to paraphrase "Microsoft is as guilty as hell. However Microsoft can't be peanalized for their wrong doing which this court acknowledges they did. Oh I know, let Microsoft decide their own sentence for themselves..." the new consent decree that will be no more effective in the end I bet, then the one in 1994 was, especially as it didn't take a look at WPA, Palladium, and a whole bunch of newer stuff that Microsoft is building up to.

Whereas some people might want to break out the champaign to celebrate their victory, they should be prepared to have to carry on in an appeal as well.

[1stFlight]

You know on it's face suing Napster, Morpheus, or <insert P2P client here> makes no sense.

I'ts like someone phones in a bomb threat but rather than go after the caller, you sue the phone company.

Yeah, doesn't make a lot of sense does it?

[madthumbs]

Originally posted by 1stFlight
You know on it's face suing Napster, Morpheus, or <insert P2P client here> makes no sense.

I'ts like someone phones in a bomb threat but rather than go after the caller, you sue the phone company.

Yeah, doesn't make a lot of sense does it?

-I agree. Infact, I think this will push the RIAA to test the waters at suing filesharer's directly. I think they're hesitating because they feel it would be a PR nightmare, but I don't think they could have it much worse than they already do. It wouldn't matter to me much if they won the case against p2p because there would still be IRC, but now we may all have to worry... not just the p2p software developers.

[PsychoSy]

In the end, the RIAA will have to suck it up and leave the traditional CD business. Their best bet is to offer CD quality stereo MP3 files of their artists through a fair priced (5 cents an album) through P2P technology. Give the user absolute freedom on what to do with those MP3s, too. It's not their bread and butter anymore.

No, what they need to do is adopt MP3s and P2P technology as a way of weening people onto the next big technology and it's right under their nose. They aren't even pushing this technology and they need to!

The next big thing is none other than 5.1 Surround Sound DVD-Audio.

By shifting their business model to 5.1 DTS on DVDs and telling their artists to make use of all 5 of them speakers when their recording and mixing their material, they could come out winners. Sicne DVDs hold almost 5GBs of data, the idea of filesharing them is time consuming (not to mention many of the current broadband ISPs won't tolerate users using that much bandwidth).

The MP3 craze of today coudn't have began without affordable broadband internet access entering the market - don't know about you, but I sure as well wasn't tinkering with MP3s in my 56K days. Made my arteries harden!!

By moving to DVD Audio, the scenario one again reduces the pirates to that relatively small group of fat, rich upper 1% cats that can afford their own dedicated OC3. I can't speak for anyone else, but I sure as hell won't be using my 1Mbit connection to leach 5.1 DVD Audio songs that weigh in 300-400MBs a peice. Too much trouble, too much wait, too much work just like downloading new Voodoo drivers 5 years ago drove me bat***** on my 3.1k per second 56K connection.

Besides, I doubt ISPs will tolerate such exhorbant bandwidth usage either.

By offering traditional two-channel stereo MP3s on a subscription service, the RIAA could sweeten the pot in the marketing department by simply saying, "You're missing out on the TRUE audio experiance of this track in 5.1 DTS Surround Sound on DVD-Audio!" and the differances between the listening experiance would be night and day!

I've got Queen's "A Night At The Opera" on DVD-Audio. One of the best albums ever recorded. It cost me a pretty penty but I'm telling you...I literally can not stand to listen to my original CD anymore. The way Roy Thomas Baker and Brian May re-mixed and remastered it in 5.1 makes the old two-channel CD sound like a friggin' 8-track! Now, imagine if ALL the music CDs on the store shelves were like that?

I'm convinced that if Sony, Aiwa, and the other leading stereo equipment manufacturers started offering 5.1 DTS DVD-audio home steroes (which are backward compatible with regular CDs, too) for a decent price ($199-299) and the recording industry embraced DVD-Audio as the next big thing while still offering 2-channel MP3s through subscription based P2P networks to ween us, they could make a damndable ammount of money.

And the piracy & filesharing issues of those DVD-Audio tracks wouldn't be a major issue until the typical minimum wage flunky (and the ISP) can afford his or her own dedicated backbone. I seriously believe the majority of the people wouldn't be swapping 400MB 5-minute songs unless the download/upload rates offered by ISPs skyrocket to like 2-6MBs a second at the same monthly price we are currently paying now for our 200-300k a second Cable/DSL connections.

[madthumbs]

DTS/ AC3 and 5.1 audio disks are already being shared. There are many available as well.

[sytaylor]

nor forgetting MP3 is a compression technique anyways, by default what you are hearing is not the origional.

[vampireuk]

I can't see anybody really spotting the difference between a well ripped mp3 and the cd track. Downloading a 400mb audio file would be nuts:D and also pretty pointless :cool: Until the record industry wakes up and starts using this new technology I'll bash them at every chance I get:D

[madthumbs]

Downloading a 400mb audio file would be nuts

-Then I'm nuts. I've downloaded some dts audio cd's well over that. I have the bandwidth... is it nuts to use it? :confused:

[1stFlight]

Sorry, but I'd sooner rip at 320Kbs, and product a 9MB mp3, than care about a 400MB 5.1 audio file... that's like going from a nice Lexus to a Rolls Royce when all you have to do is drive to the corner store. Sure it's a nice ride, just not a lot of point to it.

[PsychoSy]

DTS/ AC3 and 5.1 audio disks are already being shared. There are many available as well. I've downloaded some dts audio cd's well over that. I have the bandwidth... is it nuts to use it?:confused:

You only prove my point, madthumbs.

Of course there's tons of AC3 and 5.1 audio files being shared. However, the only people sharing them are those select few who, like you said, have the bandwidth to do so. And they obviously have nice salary jobs to support it, too. Hell, for all intents and purposes, if such people have enough money to afford the bandwidth, then they by far have the funds to actually purchase these files legitamately and in no way can a $25 DVD set these people so far back financially (if so, they apparently have the money management skills of a bingo-addict on welfare).

But do they?

Nope - they chose not to.

They're not stealing because they cant afford it.
They're not stealing because they want to steal it.
They're not stealing to send a message to someone.

No, they're stealing because they're bored!! :p

Will all that bandwidth at their disposal, they figure, "Why not? Not hurting anyone!"

Such folks, by definition, have no idea of showing self-restraint. They have absolutely no respect do they have a conscience. In their grandiose sense of Clinton-esque entitlement, they feel that their ability to afford the kick ass electronic luxaries and their phat connection to the internet automatically gives them a free license and justification for their actions without taking any personal responsibility for them. In other words, even if the RIAA pulled their heads out of their asses, sucked it up and offered a pristine solution for us all, those folks with the uber-bandwidth would still remain pirates and thieves because they simply don't care.

Therefore, if the RIAA and electronic companies uniformly adopt 5.1 DVD Audio and manufacture fairly priced low-end 5.1 home audio equipment in the $199-299 range to enjoy these DVD-Audio discs on while totally divorcing themselves from traditional CDs, the only people - at least for a period of time - they would have to really worry about in terms of filesharing piracy and theft are...no offense, bud...but people like you! :POKE: :angel:

I hate to be so condemning (none of us are saints) but it's the only logical conclusion I can come up with. A manuever such as this would lessen the incentive for most people on 1Megabit or less broadband connections to share 5.1 audio files because they're time consuming and too much work. People have crap for attention spans in this day in age.

Those with the uber-bandwidth, though, would be greenlighted by the industry as the target pirate - the real thief - just like they were when Napster came out (which sucked ass with anything less than ISDN or a T1).

[madthumbs]

I'm not on a "uber" connection. I'm on a standard cable modem. Maybe the difference is that it's on 24/7. I find that other people's upload speeds are what affect my download anyway... not my bandwidth.. but theirs. As far as music goes.. I'm really not all that into it. I hear enough of the crap on the radio to convince me not to buy it (or download it) 99.9999% of the time. DVD's on the otherhand should be cheaper than VHS, and for that matter, I tend to only watch movies once, so $20 for a DVD is hardly worth it to me as well. Even $5 is too much. Rental prices vary from place to place... It's nearly $4 just to rent a movie around here, not taking into account the cost of pick up and return and late charges if you don't have it back by 6p the next day! We also never know when the movie is gonna be released on HBO or some other cable channel. Sure, the P2P community has it's faults, but so does the entertainment industry... and it always will.

[PsychoSy]

DVD's on the otherhand should be cheaper than VHS, and for that matter, I tend to only watch movies once, so $20 for a DVD is hardly worth it to me as well. Even $5 is too much. Rental prices vary from place to place... It's nearly $4 just to rent a movie around here, not taking into account the cost of pick up and return and late charges if you don't have it back by 6p the next day! We also never know when the movie is gonna be released on HBO or some other cable channel.

I agree that DVDs should be cheaper than VHS. I hardly buy DVDs either - I'm not a movie collector at all but I can indulge on buying DVDs of the "cult classics" that I know I'd drag out from time to time (e.g. "Evil Dead" series, "Highlander", etc.). Otherwise, once is enough for me.

Renting DVD movies is a pain in my ass, too. BlockBuster's policy with late charges on DVD movies Vs. games is always a thorn in my side. "Okay, the movie is due back Wednesday by Noon and the games are not due till Sunday." Of course, I'm always late and fees for movies are like $3 a day as opposed to games where they'll just charge you another $6 and tell you to keep it another week. No matter what, every time I visit BlockBuster, about $30 will leave my wallet - 75% of which covers those late charges. :(

You got digital cable and InDemand PPV?

It's pretty decent - beats waiting for HBO because whenever new movies come out on DVD or VHS, odds are InDemand is airing it, too and it may be cheaper than a rental. The only trouble with buying movies over the old cable box is they can take a while to show up on the bill, especially with Charter! They don't poll the coverter box as often as they should and it's not uncommon to see a movie you ordered and saw months ago suddenly pop up on the bill some two or three months down the road.

Drives me nuts! :banghead: