The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Napster, Limewire and Kaza... still legal?!
Old 16th November 2007
  #1
Lives for gear
 
juniorhifikit's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Napster, Limewire and Kaza... still legal?!

I wanted to ask your opinions on why Limewire and Kaza are sill legal, when Napster was ruled illegal (aside from the technicality that they hosted the contraband no their actual servers). Aren't they all the "runners" of illegal contraband? Drug runners get sent to prison just like the kingpin and the user. Transporting stolen goods...

I just don't understand why these softwares are not "illegal".

Wouldn't it be much simpler to rule that they are, in fact, illegal; police the internet for these types of software packages (one guy in an office with a laptop oughtta do it); and return to a healthy entertainment industry?

We'll never stop the 1 to 1 "here dude, I burned you a copy" type of piracy, but that's existed since cassettes and never threatened the industry. If I put 1 copy of my buddy's band's album up on the internet with Limewire and 10,000 people download it, that's 10,000 albums he won't sell - I've just ruined him. It's just not fair.

What is stopping the legislation against it? First ammendment stuff? Anybody know?
Old 19th November 2007
  #2
Peter Wells, SVP Operations, Customer Advocate - Tunecore
 
PeterTuneCore's Avatar
 

I have to start by saying I'm not a lawyer. I don't even own a suit. But here are some facts:

1) Napster (the Napster of old, the file-sharing hub) was ruled illegal in America and shut down; it has to settle and pay damages. Even now it's not illegal in the U.S. to download music, but it is illegal to distribute it without the proper permissions.

2) As a general rule, the courts try to move slowly in regards to rulings around situations created by new tech--they want to be careful not to stifle something,
so they move very slowly.

3) The location of the company dictates what countries laws apply. In law, territory and juristiction is everything. Kazaa was based in Australia, so Austrlian law applied. I'm an American who's not a lawyer, I'm even less of an Australian lawyer! But there are still examples: one extreme Allofmp3.com, the Russian-based company selling music for a couple of pennies, within Russian copyright law but accesible in the U.S. and all over the world via the Internet. It took the US threatening with the World Trade organization to get Russia to act on it, finally! And hey, Kazaa was ruled illegal by an Australian court, finally.

5) Lime Wire was also ruled illegal. Lime Wire is launching a legitimate service that sells music and has a subscription-based model (seems to be all the rage).

6) Courts need to be able to enforce their rulings, and for so many of these sites, what these sites do, specifically, is not illegal: they allow people to pass informatoin to each other, and that information (who has what song, etc.) isn't itself illegal. Splitting hairs? Maybe, but it's the law. If I personally allow copyrighted material to be traded to someone else, who should be liable? Tech like bittorrent confuses things even more, as it takes one copyright-protected piece of work and splits it into tens of thousands little pieces distributed onto thousands of computers around the world, without a central server of any sort

Given all this, I can see why the courts are loath to move fast. And until they do, the grey areas are wide indeed.

--Peter
peter@tunecore.com
Old 19th November 2007
  #3
Lives for gear
 
juniorhifikit's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Thanks Peter - super helpfulthumbsup

Quote:
Courts need to be able to enforce their rulings, and for so many of these sites, what these sites do, specifically, is not illegal: they allow people to pass informatoin to each other, and that information (who has what song, etc.) isn't itself illegal. Splitting hairs? Maybe, but it's the law. If I personally allow copyrighted material to be traded to someone else, who should be liable?
It's interesting that with some illegal activities where contraband is involved, like drug trafficing, all parties are guilty; the pusher, the runnuer and the buyer. In counterfit goods here in france, the buyer is held as responsible as the maker (not sure if the penalties are the same).

Quote:
Even now it's not illegal in the U.S. to download music, but it is illegal to distribute it without the proper permissions.
Not sure what you mean exactly here. Obviously downloading something you've paid for the rights to is not illegal, but I find it interesting that it may not be classified as illegal to download something you don't have the rights to. I personally don't see the difference between that and shoplifting.
Loading mentioned products ...
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
djui5 / High end
15
XHipHop / Low End Theory
2
I play in a ban / Gear free zone - shoot the breeze!
0
maskedman72 / Music Computers
13

Forum Jump