×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Usenet Group Sues Dutch RIAA

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the best-defense dept.

The Courts 90

eldavojohn writes "With the Pirate Bay trial, it's been easy to overlook similar struggles in other nations. A Dutch Usenet community named FTD is going on the offensive and suing BREIN (Bescherming Rechten Entertainment Industrie Nederland). You may remember BREIN (along with the IFPI & BPI) as the people who raided and cut out the heart of eDonkey. This is turning into a pretty familiar scenario; the FTD group makes software that allows its 450k members to easily find copyrighted content for free on Usenet. The shocking part is that FTD isn't waiting for BREIN to sue them. FTD is refusing to take down their file location reports, and is actually suing BREIN. Why the preemptive attack? FTD wants the courts to show that the act of downloading is not illegal in the Netherlands. (Both articles have the five points in English that FTD wants the courts to settle.) OSNews has a few more details on the story."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

90 comments

Hell yeah... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979269)

All RIAA spin offs needs to die.

Re:Hell yeah... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27981699)

I like the lyrics, but you can't dance to it.

Hooray! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979275)

These brave Dutch people will defend everyones rights against the sinister Italian menace. If only Americans had spines and would stop the Italians from poisoning our hot dogs with their silly Italin music-boxes that prevent real songs from being found in our hearts. One thousand red salutes to Chairman Mao!

Recollection (1, Insightful)

Norsefire (1494323) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979307)

I seem to recall MDY Industries taking pre-emptive legal action against Blizzard. It doesn't work [slashdot.org] as well as you might think.

Re:Recollection (4, Insightful)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979321)

Actually it does. If more groups start doing this, it will tie up all the RIAA legal resources defending themselves.

Re:Recollection (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979399)

thats a wonderful plan, but it fails to account for the money it costs the other sides.

Re:Recollection (2, Informative)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979493)

No one side can overwhelm the RIAA. However when you have hundreds of lawsuits from various people and organizations, that takes a strain on the RIAA's budget. If they lose a few cases then they lose money, that loss compounded with the crap they call music being promoted, and with them having to bribe lawmakers in order to be able to keep passing laws like the DMCA, it will hurt the RIAA.

Re:Recollection (3, Insightful)

charlieman (972526) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979853)

and of course, the lawyers always win

Re:Recollection (4, Insightful)

multisync (218450) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980593)

and of course, the lawyers always win

So lawyers make money. Big deal. So do doctors, and auto mechanics, and the geeks for chrissakes.

Imagine that, people who have specialized knowledge make money, even when idiots wreck their cars, bring disease upon themselves with their lifestyle choices or use litigation as a business model.

Many also do pro bono work for people who are in need of legal council but can not afford it. Despite this, nearly half of litigants in my country are forced to represent themselves, straining the court system and usually resulting in justice denied for those too poor to pay for an attorney.

But I'm sure organizations like the RIAA would welcome your lawyer bashing, and encourage you to continue spreading the myth that it's the lawyers - not the executives - who are at fault.

Re:Recollection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27981181)

I'd complain about doctors too, if said doctors were happily and routinely performing expensive and unnecessary tests and invasive procedures on perfectly healthy people to make some extra money. Even if the patients ask them to, they have a professional responsibility to behave ethically.

Re:Recollection (1)

dwandy (907337) | more than 4 years ago | (#27983005)

So lawyers make money. Big deal. So do doctors, and auto mechanics, and the geeks

I'll grant you your fairy world where people with knowledge get paid, but even in that fictitious world I disagree with you. Doctors produce healthy people (who in turn produce stuff), mechanics produce healthy cars (productivity in itself) and geeks (hopefully) increase people's productivity.
Lawyers are 100% drain on productive resources, and therefore economically don't deserve to get paid.
Their "productivity" is to decrease, drain or leach someone else's productivity.
They are at best a necessary evil, but an evil most definitely: Lawyers do not produce anything, but consume profits.
It is only because lawyers are in charge of writing laws that they are "required". If the law was reasonable (read: not corrupted) and accessible to the average person (read: not so f!ing convoluted and complicated) lawyers would be rare and for the most part not required. It becomes somewhat circular to argue that lawyers are required.
As for the execs, sure; they are trying to push for profit in the framework provided ... by lawyers and corruption. Companies should not have the standing that they do, but that is for another post...

Re:Recollection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27993225)

Thank you. It's about time someone said this - contrary to popular opinions, not all lawyers are bad.

It's just 99% of them that give the rest a bad name.

Re:Recollection (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980079)

Except that you seem to have missed the fact that FTD is not suing the RIAA, that the RIAA has no power in the Netherlands, and that the DMCA doesn't apply there.

Yes, they're all linked via the net and the global market of the record companies, but I suggest that the revenue available to the RIAA clones and the revenue available to those fighting them will go up and down pretty puch together according to jurisdiction. Adding another country to the ones fighting this adds the funding available from that country for fighting the IP people, but it also adds another country's worth of perceived lost revenue to make it worth the IP people's effort defending their position.

Re:Recollection (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980091)

They should attack the Breen, annoy the founders, but off the Vorta and any supply of ketracel white, and plan to become shapeshifters. Then, All shall be as it was intended...

Re:Recollection (1)

EddyGL (15300) | more than 4 years ago | (#27981215)

Or just send Odo back to the great link, to cure the founders, so they'll surrender.. I do believe it might just work!!!

Re:Recollection (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980401)

If the court system has something similar to Rule 11 sanctions it can cost the lawsuit initiator.

Re:Recollection (2, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979353)

I seem to recall MDY Industries taking pre-emptive legal action against Blizzard. It doesn't work [slashdot.org] as well as you might think.

Um, I'm not a lawyer and the only information I have on this topic are these two issues but I would wager that FTD is suing the BREIN over ideas right now, not money.

What's the difference? Well, if they wait for BREIN to sue them for one hundred million billion gajillion Euros, they have to now put their ideals up against that ... not to say their ideals aren't sound but I am saying that the common populace and judge may not agree with them. So we have this sort of testing the waters lawsuit over some simple take down demands and if it turns out the court agrees then let BREIN try to sue them; the five golden points (or 2/5 or whatever the court agreed with) have been upheld by the court and everyone's hand is being shown. No risk of money involved.

Re:Recollection (2, Insightful)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979793)

It does work--at least it works better than the alternatives. Take two assumptions that are pertinent here: (1) You want to keep doing what you are doing; and (2) You are headed for a showdown with the MAFIAA if you proceed.

In this scenario, you are going to court (that's the given). It is often better to file your lawsuit BEFORE you damage your opponent, because that way the trial stakes are not so high for you. It is important to remember that a trial is always a HUGE uncertainty because juries can be wild or stupid. Anything you can do to minimize your financial exposure is a good thing. Remember that you are not (strategically, at least) going after anybody for money in either the preemptive situation or the responsive situation--you want a ruling enabling you to do what you want to do!!

If you have already bet the company and you have already caused your opponent damages, then it probably doesn't matter, because the stakes are high either way. That appears to be the Blizzard situation. Also, the Blizzard situation failed for the developer because he was flamingly, obviously, in the wrong and he was a fool to fuck with the big bear. If you're wrong, who cares whether you're preemptive or responsive--you're doomed anyway.

When you haven't done anything to hurt your opponent yet and you can afford to wait--that's the paradigm optimal situation for a preemptive attack.

Re:Recollection (1)

AI0867 (868277) | more than 4 years ago | (#27981549)

It is important to remember that a trial is always a HUGE uncertainty because juries can be wild or stupid.

Which is why we don't have juries in the Netherlands, we have judges.

Re:Recollection (1)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 4 years ago | (#27985901)

Which is why we don't have juries in the Netherlands, we have judges.

Who can also be wild and stupid.

Re:Recollection (1)

AI0867 (868277) | more than 4 years ago | (#27986217)

But they can at least be expected to know the law and are also required to write down their reasoning in the verdict. This means that courts at least have to keep up a pretense of sanity.

Not Without My Court-Ordered Injunction (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979329)

Not Without My Court-Ordered Injunction To Reinsert The Feeding Tube

Tom Delay followed the orderly through the halls of the hospice. He was more than a little nervous at the idea of meeting Terri: hospitals made him a bit egdy. Nevertheless, he believed this to be a big item for his constituents, and he marched proudly to see this wonderful dying woman.

Eventually they reached the room and he asked the orderly to leave him alone with her for some 'personal prayer time.' The orderly obliged and left him there. Tom noticed that the lights were somewhat dim. Why not, he thought. It's not like this vegetable will need them. Tired after a long day with some of the fundamentalists outside the hospice he threw himself into a chair and began to think the situation over. He knew he'd already won big points with the religious crowd, but he hoped to find a way to score even bigger. Leaving the hospice and claiming that Terri had spoken to him through prayer was one idea that came to mind, but he immediately dismissed it as a little too outlandish. He needed something simple.

Heh, she's certainly livelier than my wife is, he thought to himself bitterly. He cast his eyes over at the faintly stirring Terri, who was staring at the ceiling with those lovely dark eyes and drooling quietly to herself. I have to admit, she was a beautiful woman once. But now she's just old. Terri here, though... the lack of intelligence notwithstanding, she has a simple charm to her. A simple charm that a down home Texan like myself might appreciate.

Tom quietly chastised himself for such thoughts. Granted, he may have become bitter after years of loveless marriage, and the semi-private hospital room did afford him some freedom to exercise thoughts that might otherwise accidentally slip out in public... but. But what? Tom took a moment to wrestle with his conscience. Lord, I know this to be wrong, but....

'It's a crying shame that such a lovely young lady might suffer such a painful death without a few final... comforts,' he said to himself, slightly surprised that he'd managed to work up the courage to entertain the notion. Still, was it not his duty as a good Christian to ease the suffering of this woman? He was, after all, only trying to elicit some sort of response. She would not respond as much as some women would, but then, Tom liked them that way. 'I suppose, my dear, that your last worldly affair might save me some rohypnol.'

Tom stood and checked to be sure that the door was closed and latched before he unbuckled his belt as quietly as possible... not an easy task with the giant buckle he had that complied with all Texas rules and regulations for belt buckle sizes. Without letting his pants slip he moved to sit beside her on the bed. Terri still didn't respond. Tom tentatively reached out a hand to fondle her breasts through the flimsy hospital gown, immediately feeling his member stiffen as he did so. He gently found her nipples through the gown and pinched them, though he got no response from her. Good...

He slowly removed what he could of the gown, though he was too busy keeping his pants on to do a proper job of turning her over to remove the whole thing. Instead he managed to get most of the front of her uncovered and let his hands wander and explore her, pausing a moment as he came across the hole where her feeding tube was missing. Idle thoughts flitted through his mind as he fingered it, but they fled and he continued his searching, until he found her surprisingly neatly trimmed bush.

As he gently tickled her glorious labia he found it impossible to resist rubbing himself through his clothes. All the while he was watching her face intently, hoping for some sign of life. But not too much life, he cautioned himself. Persistently vegetative women tell no tales.... Fortunately she was still contentedly drooling... from both sets of lips! He brought his fingers to his nose and took a good whiff of the acrid goodness thereupon.

Suddenly he heard a few sets of footsteps outside! With all the quickness he could muster he re-buckled his belt and tried to rearrange Terri's gown to hide their activities. He quickly knelt at the bedside and pretended to pray as the door opened. Mary Schindler, Terri's mother, stepped in, leading a small girl behind her. 'Hello Tom,' she said quietly. 'This is little Elizabeth, she's the daughter of one of our church friends and she wanted to meet Terri. I have to go attend to the rally, but could you handle the introduction?' With a weak smile she shoved Elizabeth into the room and closed the door behind her.

Elizabeth managed a meek 'hi' and stood staring at Terri's lifeless corpse. Did I say lifeless? I meant life-filled corpse.

Tom made a brief introduction and asked Elizabeth her name. 'I'm only 8,' she replied meekly again, as she scratched at her elbow through the sleeve of a nice church dress. 'What's wrong with her?'

'She's sick, Elizabeth. Her brain is hurting, and she needs Jesus's love to heal her.' Suddenly a wicked idea occurred to Tom. 'She needs your love too, Elizabeth.'

'My love?'

'Yes, my dear! The love of a small girl is... very special!' He quietly whispered his plan to Elizabeth, who was visibly upset at the notion.

'But... but mommy says good Christians don't touch each other there! And and and girls aren't supposed to do that to girls especially!'

'Oh Elizabeth, that's so wonderful that your mommy taught you that! But you remember how Jesus died for our sins? Well if you do this, you'll be like Jesus... you'll be sinning to save Terri, and your life will be as glorious as our savior's was.'

Elizabeth had some difficulty with the conflicting stories she had heard and began to cry, but slowly moved to Terri's bedside and began to reach under the gown. 'Will this really save Terri?' she asked between sobs.

'Oh yes, my dear, of course it will!' Tom slowly stood and unbuckled his belt again. 'You know, Elizabeth, that's a lovely dress. Why don't you take it off? We certainly wouldn't want it to get dirty.'

Elizabeth removed her dress and went back to peeking under Terri's gown, looking for the hidden treasures therein. Tom helped her remove the gown again and instructed Elizabeth to touch Terri's breasts, then to explore Terri's pussy. Terri continued to drool.

'This smells funny,' complained Elizabeth. 'Do I really have to taste it? And why are you holding your wee wee? Did you hurt it?'

'Yes, Liz, I hurt it. Get your face in there or Jesus will be sad.' Tom was busy stroking his member furiously. Terri had been attractive to him, but Elizabeth's unspoiled body, still a little chubby with baby fat, had him hornier than he had been in years. He breasts had not begin to bud yet, and her tiny pussy lips were unbearably adorable.

He instructed Liz to lay on top of Terri, but just as Elizabeth was moving to the side of the bed, Terri moaned and began to stir again. Elizabeth, though she was keen to help Terri recover, screamed, grabbed her dress, and ran from the room. Tom quickly put his dick back in his pants and put Terri's gown back, knowing that trouble would not be far behind.

As he'd predicted, it wasn't long before footsteps came pounding from down the hall. This time his visitor was Jeb Bush, who was clearly winded and sweaty as he stuck his head in. 'What the hell just happened in here?'

Tom thought fast. 'Terri began to, uh, speak, and the child, who was acting like all small children and showing me her panties... yes, that's it. She became terrified and fled!'

Jeb looked at Tom suspiciously. 'You were molesting them, weren't you Tom?'

'I most certainly was not!'

'Oh, really? That's a shame. I was thinking I'd join you...' With that, Jeb dropped his pants, revealing his enormous five inch cock. Tom, with understanding and love in his heart, removed his pants as well and reached out to give Jeb's wang a gentle tug. 'Lets give the old girl one last farewell,' suggested Jeb.

Tom moved to the head of the bed and tapped the end of his penis against Terri's forehead. She didn't seem to notice, so he slipped it into her mouth slowly. The excess drool made for the perfect lubrication and he had no difficulty sliding it deep into her throat. Fortunately she had lost her gag reflex, so he was able to fit all four inches down her throat with ease, and began to pound her face, balls slapping against her cheek.

Jeb, meanwhile, had positioned himself between her legs and was gleefully thrusting his member into her yawning vagina. As he fucked the mindless warm body, he spotted the unused feeding tube and a bag connected to the floor. 'Hey Tom,' he called, 'lets give her a stay of execution!' He quickly, and ineptly, reinserted one end of the tube into the feeding hole in her stomach, then tore open the top of the empty bag and began to pee into it. The yellow liquid quickly found its way into her stomach. 'Yeah, you like that, don't you bitch?'

Tom found himself nearing orgasm and grabbed the bag away from Jeb. 'I hear, my lovely woman, that you're unable to swallow. Lets see if we can't find a way around that.' Tom pounded his cock furiously as he aimed for the feed bag, spraying his hot cum into it and watching it dribble down into Terri's stomach. He then collapsed in post coital bliss.

Jeb, nearing climax himself, instead ripped the tube out of her stomach and inserted his cock into the hole. Although he felt the slight tingle of the stomach acid on the head of his mighty dick, he still found it pleasurable enough to continue thrusting until it erupted, spraying semen directly into her. With his energy spent, he moved across the floor to cuddle with Tom, kissing him gently, and managing to mutter an 'I love you' before he fell asleep, happier than he'd been in a long time.

To me it looks like FTD... (4, Funny)

leathered (780018) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979389)

..have broken the first rule of Usenet.

Re:To me it looks like FTD... (4, Funny)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979909)

Hey, all bets off now that somebody mentioned alt.binaries.erotica.slashdot

Re:To me it looks like FTD... (1)

dwandy (907337) | more than 4 years ago | (#27983065)

I just d/l oldhack_collection-jpeg.nzb from alt.binaries.erotica.slashdot ... and all I can say is eeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwww!.

Better to check the recent uploads of Taco. ...and I don't mean him. [google.ca]

Re:To me it looks like FTD... (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 4 years ago | (#27983431)

My ISP (Zen) have just announced they're stopping their binary news feed. Considering I pay £35/month for them, which I feel is a lot, I think it's time to vote with my feet. Anyone else recommend a good ISP with binary newsgroups in the UK for less than that?

RIAA??!!! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979397)

How the hell is BREIN the "Dutch RIAA"? They have no links to each other, no affiliation, no hard relation whatsover.

Calling them the "Dutch RIAA" is inflammatory and deceiving. This is slashdot sensationalism at its finest.

Re:RIAA??!!! (5, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979503)

But most Americans, even many /.ers have no clue about the rest of the world. The main lobby group for music and copyright in the USA is the RIAA. In the Netherlands they have BREIN. They both have the same essential functions. Its like calling the English Parliament the congress of England, sure, its not correct, but its something that most Americans can identify with.

Re:RIAA??!!! (4, Informative)

joe545 (871599) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979769)

Its like calling the English Parliament the congress of England

It's doubly incorrect as England, unlike its parters in the UK (Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) has no parliament of any kind.

Re:RIAA??!!! (1)

vivaelamor (1418031) | more than 4 years ago | (#27981251)

How'd this get modded informative? I can't tell if you're being bizarrely pedantic or are just uninformed. Technically you could argue that the parliament based in London represents the UK as a whole and not England specifically but it is still the parliament that governs England.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27993289)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_parliament
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_Parliament
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Parliament

RIAA, MPAA, BSA, rolled into one (sort of) (2, Informative)

Animaether (411575) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979965)

Just to note... BREIN is more like the RIAA (music), MPAA (movies(/TV?)) and whatever software interest group in U.S. exists for entertainment titles (so not the BSA, as that's all business such as Photoshop, AutoCAD, Office, etc.) rolled into one.

Each of those do have their actual equivalents (RIAA = BUMA/STEMRA, MPAA = NVPI, ???? = B.I.G.), but BREIN can be seen as the 'parent' organization, but without many of the legal things tying them together.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979971)

Most Americans have no clue about the rest of the world because the world essentially revolves around the USA.

The United States of America is the world's lone superpower and its really contingent on the rest of the world to know and learn about the US, not the other way around. When you're the richest, mightiest, most powerful country in the world, why do you need to have a clue about the lesser world?

I'm not justifying it, but that's the way the world works. The world belongs to whoever is the dominant global power and right now, the the US of A.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27980253)

Most Americans have no clue about the rest of the world because the world essentially revolves around the USA.

Only to some americans.

why do you need to have a clue about the lesser world?

So you dont come across as the typical dumb ignorant american the rest of the world usually sees.

When you're the richest, mightiest, most powerful country in the world

Mightiest/Most powerful.. in what way? There are 8 other nations (known) with nuclear weapons including one with more weapons than the US. Any one ofthose countries is capable of reducing most of the continent to radioactive wasteland. The united states has the 2nd largest army (8th if you include reserves & paramilitary forces). Many countries posess chemical and biological weapons capable of destroying any other country or possibly all life. I'm not disagreeing with you, just trying to point out that it really makes no difference who is the most powerful when any number of countries could change that with the press of a button.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27985271)

There are 8 other nations (known) with nuclear weapons

The only one which poses a credible first strike threat is France. This is one reason why several U.S. administrations have been very cosy with France despite the latter working its own foreign policy often in ways inimical to the U.S. interests normally prioritized by the administration.

France has (a) an entirely self-developed nuclear arsenal (force de frappe) from secured supplies of Uranium ore to the ultimate delivery systems (notably their strategic missile Rédoutable submarine platform and the M-45/M-45bis/preM-51 missiles themselves) (b) noteworthy successes in counterespionage (c) an effectively official policy of nihilism in the decision and authorization chains (d) a frequently re-declared escalation policy that underlines their (official) willingness to undertake a nuclear first strike (e) a no-negotiation/no-admission policy with respect to target pre-selection, since France is small and has few obvious targets (Paris, Brest, the rest...).

All the other declared nuclear powers have agreed protocols with respect to target pre-selection; the Russians aren't aiming at U.S. installations, the Chinese aren't aiming at Russian installations, the Americans and Brits according to the latest Mutual Defence Agreement won't aim at anyone without mutual agreement and both have agreed to aim at nobody for now (incidentally the Americans may be able to enforce this in the Brits because the latter use so many U.S.-sourced components in their strategic weapons delivery platforms, despite building warheads themselves, and there are occasionally public arguments about the lack of information sharing in the U.S.->U.K. direction that probably has something to do with the U.K. supplying France with nuclear weapon expertise initially in the 60s and subsequently over the years, and the strength of the entente cordiale). The French don't play this game: they have at least 64 warheads in the water at any time in range of a variety of targets in declared nuclear states, probable nuclear states, and non-nuclear states, "so don't get any funny ideas about a state-sponsored terror attack on Paris".

The French strategic nuclear arsenal is the most recently tested (cf. the Rainbow Warrior incident -- ne fuckez pas avec les Français); the missiles have fully global ballistic range (they recently showed off a 6500 nautical mile [kls2.com] precision track); their 2 deployed strategic submarines are the stealthiest nuclear-powered platforms and the forthcoming ones (if they don't have problems, which they may) are even more fit for the designed purpose.

The only declared nuclear state more likely to do a first strike in anger is the USA and that's only because it already did that in the 1940s.

Note that 64-ish warheads is insufficient to totally destroy the USA, but it would certainly wreck the economic and military might of the country even if the targeting policy avoided major metropolitan areas not colocated with military assets. (A trade of Paris or Brest (or the rest) for the top twenty or thirty U.S. downtowns might appeal to the French decisionmakers though).

You just have to remember that the French attitude towards MAD was always different than that of the two superpowers. It is much more aligned with the longstanding Swedish policy of inflicting the maximum possible damage in the face of an overwhelming invasion or an attack against which there is no possible defence (e.g. a surprise!); the French just have a longer list of likely attackers than Sweden (and there is some overlap...), which lacks overseas territories for example, and France has never flirted seriously with "official neutrality".

"Go out with a bang" -- much more a Western European, and especially French, thing than a Russian or Chinese one.

Consequently, the French are America's close, probably closest, and most important allies. Reasonably reliable ones too, once a decision to act together has been arrived at. The UK, by comparison, is much more of a lapdog who will readily agree to strongly support whatever decision is taken in Washington, but who are somewhat flaky and prone to occasional double-crossing (in both directions). At least with the French you know where you stand, socialist or gaullist or royalist or revolutionary.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled show, Mock the Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkies.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27981285)

Russia proved that this is no longer true in Albania recently.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27982585)

"Its like calling the English Parliament the congress of England, sure, its not correct, but its something that most Americans can identify with."

Or even the British Parliament the congress of Britain?

Yes RIAA! (1)

coretx (529515) | more than 4 years ago | (#27985191)

I was about to proof that BREIN indeed is RIAA/MPAA./IFPI etc. But i get the message "Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters" So instead, i will just type some names of company's that started the BREIN foundation. WIch can be confirmed by the dutch pirate party. - IFPI - UNIVERSAL - Buena Vista Home Entertainment - Disney - Microsoft - MPAA And so the list goes on .. and on and one..

Re:RIAA??!!! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979569)

How the hell is BREIN the "Dutch RIAA"? They have no links to each other, no affiliation, no hard relation whatsover.

Calling them the "Dutch RIAA" is inflammatory and deceiving. This is slashdot sensationalism at its finest.

Buma/stemra is the organisation that is responsible for defening the rights of artists when it comes to copyright/IP. Brein is the foundation that goes on their behalf after pirates. Your right that it was not put there correctly, that it is sensationalism is a bit of an exageration because practically their doing the same thing.

Re:RIAA??!!! (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979603)

shut up

Re:RIAA??!!! (4, Insightful)

kripkenstein (913150) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979615)

How the hell is BREIN the "Dutch RIAA"? They have no links to each other, no affiliation, no hard relation whatsover.

"Dutch RIAA" doesn't mean they are affiliated with the (US) RIAA or that they have any relationship. All the phrase means is that they are the equivalent of the RIAA, in the Netherlands. In other words, that they have a similar purpose and so forth.

WRONG (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979825)

When the headline calls BREIN the Dutch RIAA without quotes or any context, slashdot is calling them an arm of the RIAA, not the equivalent, not having similiar purposes, etc.

You are wrong, and so is the headline. Does anybody take English or grammar lessons anymore?

Re:WRONG (1)

coretx (529515) | more than 4 years ago | (#27985219)

Why are astroturfers always posting as a Anonymous coward @ slashdot ? I love the moderator system over here :)

Re:WRONG (1)

rant64 (1148751) | more than 4 years ago | (#27986467)

A lot of commenters in this thread are bound to be native Dutch speakers, doing quite a good job at expressing themselves in English. Now, I would like to see YOU try in any other foreign languague, mister Coward, preferably Dutch. See how well your grammar sticks.

Re:RIAA??!!! (1)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979897)

"Dutch RIAA" doesn't mean they are affiliated with the (US) RIAA or that they have any relationship. All the phrase means is that they are the equivalent of the RIAA, in the Netherlands. In other words, that they have a similar purpose and so forth.

Sorry, but "Dutch RIAA" is ambiguous.

If the article submitter meant "the Dutch equivalent of the RIAA", he could have written words.

Words have meaning. Being too lazy to use them, or using them incorrectly narrows your audience to those who have trouble reading, lack critical thinking abilities, or otherwise make assumptions that just happen to coincide with yours. That, and an invitation for everyone to question whether you're a moron or simply illiterate who possibly has something to say.

Then again, if efforts to be meaningful and accurate (especially in a written medium) are just too much work, WTF does that say about the level of discourse here?

It's a headline; give them a break (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980489)

If the article submitter meant "the Dutch equivalent of the RIAA", he could have written words.

"Dutch RIAA" doesn't appear in the summary, and the article does call BREIN "the Dutch variant of the RIAA". Headlines are supposed to be short, not necessarily precise.

Re:RIAA??!!! (1)

coretx (529515) | more than 4 years ago | (#27985205)

But they are. Check the chamber of commerce records. Just for the record, are you and your mods astroturfers ?

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27980111)

How the hell is BREIN the "Dutch RIAA"

He's right! They don't even have the same letters!!

Re:RIAA??!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27980525)

"echo is batch's print command."

Is that inflammatory and deceiving? They're completely different, but, they serve the exact same function.

(Please don't mod me up & don't mod parent down, we're both where we belong, in the gutter.)

The defendent is guilty ... even if he's not (4, Interesting)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979417)

It's in the mind of the people.

When someone is tried, he's at least "sorta" guilty, right? Else, hey, nobody gets arrested without some reason, right? At least there's suspicion that he MIGHT have done it. When he is tried, there's a reason, right? Hey, they wouldn't go to court if what the defendent does isn't at least "sorta" illegal...

This isn't how the justice system works, but this is how people think. Nobody is dragged to court without at least some kinda reason. So suing instead of waiting to be sued is, from the PR point of view, quite sensible.

Re:The defendent is guilty ... even if he's not (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 4 years ago | (#27981085)

This isn't how the justice system works, but this is how people think. Nobody is dragged to court without at least some kinda reason. So suing instead of waiting to be sued is, from the PR point of view, quite sensible.

Except this isn't an innocent or guilty kinda case.
The law says X, BREIN keeps saying Y, so FTD is getting a Judge to tell BREIN what the law is.

It's better this way, because BREIN can't muck up the proceedings with extraneous issues.

Re:The defendent is guilty ... even if he's not (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 4 years ago | (#27985475)

The general public doesn't really care for such "minor" differences like criminal or personal case. They don't really care why someone is "dragged to the court". But yes, as you point out, there is an important side effect, too: They can't just "drop" the case should they find out the verdict won't be what they want. They can't settle if the accuser doesn't want to.

What's the point (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979445)

Even if they win and prove it isn't illegal, all they;ll get is a bunch of new laws making sure it is.

The RIAA has a big name, more expensive suits and money to spend on politicians. Politicians aren't going to listen to a bunch of people who run something called 'Usenet' which is full of scruffy hacker/hippie types who go on and on about how things should be 'free' (as in freedom, not beer!!)

Re:What's the point (2, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979473)

But whenever you have a place where real democracy can happen and not one thats locked down into two parties, you start to have politicizations who answer to the people. Might I remind you about the Pirate Bay and how Sweden is heading towards some pirate party representation? Sure, this won't happen overnight, but whenever you get a few members in the EU parliament that listen to the people, well, a revolution is sure to happen.

Re:What's the point (1)

mrvan (973822) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979501)

but whenever you get a few members in the EU parliament that listen to the people, well, a revolution is sure to happen.

Hehe :-)

EP =/= congress, quite far from it. I would aim at the Assemblee Nationale and the Bundestag, and maybe the British Parliament, but the EP...

Re:What's the point (2, Insightful)

mmaniaci (1200061) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979535)

But here we are discussing it, hating it, and wishing for change. Eventually the straw will break the camel's back.

Re:What's the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27980285)

Except BREIN isn't similar to the RIAA. They don't make their own policy or push for new laws to close in gaps.

They execute the policy.

This makes sense (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979485)

Downloading, in essence, should not be illegal. The fact that someone is in possession of materials that they do not have the copyright to should be the focus of the legal procedures. There are plenty of reasons why someone who has the rights to a piece of information (i.e. someone who pays for cable in order to have the right to view an episode of a televisions show wanting to download said television show) would access them digitally.

A company should have to prove that an individual does not have a license for materials that they possess. I see this as a simple issue of due process of the law.

a criminal suit vs a civil suit (4, Interesting)

QX-Mat (460729) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979495)

There are two sides to the story. The criminal aspect, and the civil aspect.

I'm not sure about dutch law, however, a lot of the recent UK law (which I am more familiar with) has been enshrined here via EU directives aimed at legal harmonisation. So don't take what I say too seriously...

The civil aspect covers the violation of the copyright license associated with the works. You are not criminally liable for merely breaking a license. The criminal aspect only comes into play when you break something enacted in statue.

Consider, The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (1998) here in the UK -

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_5#pt1-ch6-pb5-l1g107 [opsi.gov.uk]

s.107 covers the criminal offense (Criminal liability for making or dealing with infringing articles). It limits criminal acts to those performed in the course of a business, in terms of sale, and those performed other than for "his private and domestic use".

The civil issue is different. Merely obtaining something does not mean you agree to a license. But common law has long established that using something, in a certain manner - often in accordance to normal use - can imply a factual agreement to contract.

Therefore, one should assume that aquiring a copyrighted work does not mean you have to assume the terms of its license, but once you decide to use the product in a non-domestic, public or commerical manner, it is implied you accept the incorporated restrictions (which will prohibit such use). You will then be liable.

So there is this big grey area that needs testing!

Re:a criminal suit vs a civil suit (1)

mmaniaci (1200061) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979567)

You're right, but the gray area seems incredibly advantageous for legal team of the RIAA and gang. Their able to use holes in law like the one you described to render grandmas and children guilty, probably because the judge and jury just don't know any better.

I do like the s.107 text and wish more laws were constructed in this way: do whatever you want in private, but in public you must give compensation on par with the value you received from using the copyrighted product. It seems much more reasonable to enforce, also.

Re:a criminal suit vs a civil suit (3, Funny)

AnalPerfume (1356177) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979681)

So now we're onto suits? Not the usual two or three piece ones either, it has to be some fancy criminal or civil suits. Why can't we just wear jeans and a t-shirt?

Or is a criminal suit just another term for prison issue jump suit? Come to think of it, are jump suits allowed to be given to those on suicide watch? Seems like an encouragement of their intentions to me. Will there be law suits if that happens, and if so, where do we buy these law suits? Can we rent them?

Or is this like some WWE match with two blokes in suits trash talking each other before poking each other with pens and smacking each other with filofaxes? Spivmatch.....maybe I should sell the concept of that reality show to some TV network, where the audience are comprised of people the spivs have robbed with ponzi schemes over the years. The winner gets a quick death, the loser gets ripped apart by the audience......slowly.

Re:a criminal suit vs a civil suit (2, Informative)

Arnoud Engelfriet (566876) | more than 4 years ago | (#27985935)

I'm one of the lawyers for FTD. The case we started is purely civil law: we ask the court to confirm that downloading for personal use is legal, and that FTD is doing nothing wrong by letting people identify materials available on Usenet that others may want to download. The criminal aspect relates to a statement by BREIN that FTD is engaging in "criminal activities" by offering their platform. We consider this a form of defamation. But acting against defamation is also a civil action.

All power to 'em (2, Informative)

mmaniaci (1200061) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979523)

Win or lose, its another story in the news about how flawed the music, movie, and print industry is and how unwilling the players are to modify their business model. They do seem to have a decent legal base, so lets hope for a win!

From the article,

So, supported by two Dutch copyright lawyers and IT experts, FTD have filed a lawsuit against BREIN in which they request the court clarifies these points;

  1. That downloading is legal in the Netherlands, even if the uploader committed copyright infringement when he uploaded the material.
  2. That directing users to content on Usenet via FTD is legal, even if the material was put there without permission of the copyright holders.
  3. That FTD is acting within the law, considering the above.
  4. That there is no need for FTD to filter any of the reports its users create which refer to the location of content on the Internet
  5. That FTD does not have to remove any of these reports, unless BREIN makes a correct and formal complaint.

Government agencies must go through a series of checks before they prosecute a citizen--the whole "innocent first, prove guilty" thing. For some reason these rules no longer apply when the agency is backed by large, private corporations...

Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (4, Insightful)

hkz (1266066) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979539)

A small difference with, say, the USA is that downloading music and films is legal in the Netherlands, but uploading is not. So even if BREIN's assertion that FTD is aiding and abetting downloading is correct, that does not in itself mean that anything illegal is going on. In fact, the reason FTD is suing BREIN is because they are fed up with the slander against them; BREIN has publically accused them of illegal behavior, and now FTD wants to get a legal ruling that tells them to go piss up a rope.

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979795)

So if I have a sizeable hard drive filled with movies and music, and I put it into an FTP server, it's all legal? Since I didn't "upload" it.

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (2, Interesting)

hkz (1266066) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979869)

No; servers who "publish" the material are illegal, but clients who access the material are not. It's like the Dutch marihuana regulations: growing is illegal, but posession for private use is not. This allows the government to go after the big cartels who run distribution networks (talking both drugs and music piracy here), but leaves joe average alone. As we Dutch say with a little rhyme, "don't ask how it's possible, but benefit from it".

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979991)

Yeah, sure downloading is not illegal. Placing links to copyright material on some website is not illegal either and still the Pirate Bay was convicted. The problem is that the usenet people facilitate illegal activities: uploading of copyrighted material. So it is not that easy.

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (1)

hkz (1266066) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980093)

That's basically BREIN's argument, and that's why the courts are now involved to form a legal opinion. The Pirate Bay may have been convicted for lesser crimes, but I doubt Swedish jurisprudence carries much weight in Holland.

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27980505)

Except that FTD is not a program used by uploaders. It's a place for Downloaders to mention what they found on usenet, making it a large index, or a user-powered search engine.

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27982629)

FTD is just a searchable index. To search for a file name you need to use an nzb search engine, such as Binsearch or Newleech.

There are several sites like FTD.

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27980579)

This allows the government to go after the big cartels who run distribution networks (talking both drugs and music piracy here), but leaves joe average alone.

What will they do about http://www.joeaveragedrugcartel.co.nl/ [joeaverage...rtel.co.nl] ???

Re:Downloading is legal in the Netherlands (5, Insightful)

Twisted Willie (1035374) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979829)

It's not just that they are fed up with the slander.

The FTD software used to have what they called an 'NZB Button'. On the page with the information about the content you were looking for (filenames, size, description, etc.), there'd be a button which if clicked on directed you to an external usenet search engine, with the correct search terms already filled in. After talks between FTD and BREIN, FTD decided to remove this button, and to not allow their users to post direct links to nzb files, or nzb search engines. FTD did this to prevent BREIN from coming after them, they are not linking to any content whatsoever anymore. There's just users telling you what filenames to look for in which newsgroups.

So, here's FTD talking to BREIN, agreeing on taking these actions, taking away any shred of doubt that what they're doing is completely legal under Dutch law, when Tim Kuik comes along and happily continues to call them criminals.

In all fairness, there are third party plugins to the FTD software that re-enable this NZB button, but those are beyond FTD's control.

Downloading software is not (1)

Animaether (411575) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979931)

to respond to the parent:
No they're not - disable the plugin path that allows this.

"But then people will just hack it about!"
yes, but then certainly their software was hacked and they're clearly not just allowing this.

as for the grandparent and point of the subject:
even with music and movies out of the way, there's still software downloads as well.. BREIN 'represents' its members there as well, and downloading software that is being distributed by somebody other than the person(s) or group(s) allowed to distribute it, is illegal - so BREIN still have a case even if a judge were to definitively declare that downloading music and software is legal.

Note that I mention 'definitively declare'. The law is slightly ambiguous about this and a lower court ruled some time ago that if the source is illegal, so is downloading from that source. I.e. in NL, you're not allowed to upload, as per GP, so how is one supposed to 'download' if nobody 'uploads'?

I don't recall if they appealed that decision or not, but the law simply isn't too clear on this, and I'm guessing that eventually it will get cleared up - and I don't expect it to be cleared up in favor of the pirates (arrrrr!)

Pebbles (1)

symes (835608) | more than 4 years ago | (#27979559)

If everyone involved flicked a pebble at the RIAA and their cousins around the world they'd very quickly become buried under a mountain.

wow, FTD is branching out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#27979617)

So now they'll take your order for flowers for Mothers day, and show you where to get Clint Eastwood warez for Fathers day.

FTD is a plague on Usenet (4, Interesting)

sakusha (441986) | more than 4 years ago | (#27980783)

FTD is doing horrible things to usenet, they're a plague on any newsgroup they descend upon. FTD makes software so people can use Usenet as a P2P system without ever interacting with the newsgroup. This has not been popular with most newsgroups that have standards for posting. FTD does things their way, and when massive complaints from newsgroup participants are posted, the FTDers never see them. I've seen newsgroups destroyed by floods of FTD posts. The regular participants (the most valuable members of the newsgroup) have their contributions buried by massive floods of off-topic posts. And there's nothing you can do to stop them.

On most usenet groups, FTD is commonly parsed as "Fuck The Dutch." They want to exploit Usenet for their own ends without participating in Usenet culture. Fuck em.

Re:FTD is a plague on Usenet (1)

isBandGeek() (1369017) | more than 4 years ago | (#27983411)

It took you quite a few words just to say that- "Usenet is experiencing an Eternal September (v2) [wikipedia.org] because of FTD."

Re:FTD is a plague on Usenet (2, Informative)

sakusha (441986) | more than 3 years ago | (#27989055)

A useful analogy, but it's worse than that. It's kind of like someone building a superhighway through your backyard. Let me give a specific example.

I used to participate in an alt.binaries group, we traded fairly obscure music (mostly out of print) and it was a low traffic newsgroup (not in the mp3 hierarchy), so even the top Usenet ISPs wouldn't give it much storage space. So we had a generally agreed-upon posting method, no flooding and each person would restrict their posts to about 500Mb per day. We judged that most of the top ISPs gave the newsgroup about 5Gb of file space, so files never expired from old age, they were always pushed off the server. When we limited flooding, posts would last about a month on the server, when everyone posted faster, they expired in about a week. That seemed adequate, everyone was happy, and if files expired early, most users were happy to repost on request (although more slowly a second time).

So after a few go-rounds with FTDers dumping 1Gb floods, and everybody getting pissed off, some FTD asshole starts a 10Gb flood. Regular users are posting a few albums of maybe a dozen files, and their first file is pushed off the server before the last one is even done posting. The FTD idiot isn't even aware that he is flooding off his OWN files, the first 5Gb is being pushed off the server by the last 5Gb. Now THAT is really goddam stupid.

Obviously the FTDers are not aware of common Usenet limitations. They think a Usenet nntp server has unlimited resources, but it doesn't. In an ideal world, every nntp server would have infinite storage space, that is impossible, but it's a basic assumption of the FTD system. They treat Usenet as an infinite resource, they can dump an infinite amount of files anywhere and they expect the system to handle it. I've seen even worse abuses, some FTD asshole will pick some obscure binaries group and use it to dump off-topic files. It doesn't matter where you post an FTD file, you could post mp3s in alt.bestiality.hamster.duct-tape and the FTD servers would locate it just as easily as if it was in alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.* since their system is designed to handle locating the files. It's indexed on their servers, not under topic categories by newsgroup. They'll dump files anywhere they like, and are answerable to no-one. This has ruined several newsgroups and driven people away from Usenet.

Fuck The Dutch.

holy crap, it's the Dominion (1)

MoFoQ (584566) | more than 4 years ago | (#27981339)

yea...pun is "intended" as the entire copyright lobby would be analogous to the Dominion and the consumer (Joe Smoe and everyone else under the sun) would be the Federation and its allies (I'm sure there are those who are already adorning their Klingon looks).

but yea...hopefully FTD's gamble pays off...or we'll be in a frozen wasteland (another DS9/Breen reference).

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...