×

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!

P2P and P2P Links Ruled Legal In Spain

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the pirate-friendly dept.

Piracy 265

Nieriko writes After three years of arduous litigation, Jesus Guerra Calderon, owner of both a small bar and the P2P link webpage 'elrincondejesus.com' has beaten the SGAE (something like the Spanish version of the RIAA). The historic ruling states not only the legality of link webpages, but also the legality of P2P file-sharing networks. Quoting the judge: 'P2P Networks as mere data transmision networks between individual internet users, do not breach any rights protected by the Intellectual Property Law.' Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

265 comments

MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (5, Funny)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519770)

I think my headline is a lot better.

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519894)

Jesus finally beat the Jews? Just in time for Easter!

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519932)

Everywhere there are lots of niggers, there is high crime and a bunch of bastard children. But they're equal, somehow.

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519942)

Mod parent flamebait or troll. This guy is giving a bad name for anonymous cowards.

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (0, Offtopic)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519976)

Yea and I worked so hard to build up my karma :(

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519990)

So did I, for the 20th time.

p.s. niggers.

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520172)

You sound like a faggot.

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (1, Funny)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520426)

Actually, for a racist AC troll, his comment was pretty funny.

I'm jewish (by race, not by religion) so it's OK for me to say this. ;-)

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520074)

Uh... Jesus was a Jew. The Romans wanted to beat the Jews. :P

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (1)

Benaiah (851593) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519980)

News just in.
Pirate bay gives up vagabond lifestyle to move to permanent home in Spain.

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (5, Informative)

xtracto (837672) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520134)

News just in.
Pirate bay gives up vagabond lifestyle to move to permanent home in Spain.

Just two relevant points:
First, it seems that one of the reasons why the court ruled in such a way is because the aforementioned web page does not have any kind of advertising (no profit):

el dueño de la página "no percibe cantidad alguna directa o indirectamente relacionada con el servicio que ofrece", que ni siquiera tiene publicidad, por lo que no hay ánimo de lucro, ni directo ni indirecto.
--
The owner of the page "does not perceive any quantity direct or indirect related with the service he is offering", he does not even has advertising, hence there is no absolutely n o profit, direct or indirect.

[Translation mine]

Thus it seems that it will be a prerequisite from other P2P web pages to avoid adding advertising if they want to come clean in the future.

Now, another snippet that got my attention was about the "pago del canon" or canon payment which is a "tax" that Spanish have to pay for each HDD or CD/DVD they buy which goes directly into the pockets of the RIAA:

3. Qué pasa con el pago del canon?
En la sentencia, el juez considera que estas copias, si son guardadas en un disco duro o en discos ópticos, "están gravados con el correspondiente canon o compensación equitativa del artículo 25 de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual", por lo que se estaría cumpliendo con el pago del canon.
--
3. what happens with the canon payment?
In the sentence, the judge considers that these copies [made by P2P], if they are saved in a hard disk or optic discs, "they are taxed with the corresponding 'canon' or compensation from article 25 of the IP Law", hence it would be complying with the canon payment.

[Translation mine]

In my opinion that is the first time the Judicial system has made sense. I know for example that In Canada people must pay a similar tax (please correct me if I am wrong). I want to applaud the guy for standing up for his rights.

Quotes Source: in spanish [expansion.com]

Mod parent Informative! (1, Offtopic)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520168)

I never know what to do with my mod points, and now that I find a very informative and insightful post with a score of only 1 (at the time of writing), I don't have any!

Re:Mod parent Informative! (0, Offtopic)

cbope (130292) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520608)

I agree totally and have donated one of my mod points to your cause!

Re:MAFIAA Loses to Jesus (0, Offtopic)

MistrX (1566617) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520282)

Is Jesus a pirate? Or what kind of movies does Jesus download?

All questions.

I would like to see this happen here (2, Insightful)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519772)

It would be nice if something like this happened here in America. As it stands now, it seems like Comcast is going to get to mold the internet as they see fit.

Be careful what you wish for (0, Troll)

icebike (68054) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519862)

Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy.

So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?

As long as you don't sell it, Music is free?

Collective use (what ever the hell that is) is also ok.

Are you sure this is what you want?

Re:Be careful what you wish for (4, Insightful)

Anarki2004 (1652007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519888)

I think that a system built on this principal can work in theory, but it requires individuals to be responsible for their actions and probably a rewriting of copyright law. As far as I'm concerned the major corporate media can crash and burn.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (5, Insightful)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519966)

I think in Spain they realized just how much the corporate superstructure of the media industry contributes to civilized society: Nothing.

Art and entertainment have value. Paying suits huge amounts to "monetize" art is not only inefficient from the point of view of the economy as a whole (although it is lucrative to them) but undermines the art itself. These people actually end up eliminating the incentive for artists to practice art for art's sake, and replace it with a "make art that sells" incentive. The result is that we get art that does nothing more than appeals to populism, from artists who are only concerned with that agenda.

Exploration of niche areas of morality and challenging flaws in the social order are not serving to that agenda. Thus, we won't get art in the vein of James Joyce's writing, or Mozart's composition, or Shakespeare's plays. Instead, we get the trash that is modern music and cinema.

Thank you Spain, for moving to destroy the stranglehold that corporate interests have on the artistic output of society. Next on the agenda: kill all the fucking lawyers.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (3, Insightful)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520214)

It's pretty hard to have sympathy with Artists who despise the common people and spend their careers intentionally making art that excludes them.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520280)

I do not think this is a political statement or a social claim.

In Spain (most) people understand that murder, rape, robbery and those kind of things harming other people are bad things.
But other kind of laws and regulations are just to be bent, and taken more as suggestions than real obligations.
Compared with Germany, for instance, this makes Spain a mess in some sense, sure.

But people is more or less happy and they simply do what they want if they feel that nobody else is getting hurt (And companies do not count as 'somebody', neither lawyers)
They will not complain too much about bad regulations, they just simply will ignore them collectively.

People just have so low confidence in politicians, lawers, law-makers, and copyright lobbies that it is natural just to sistematically ignore them.
I am pretty sure irrational IP laws will always be bent until broken in Spain and everything will go on, as usual.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520342)

I think in Spain they realized just how much the corporate superstructure of the media industry contributes to civilized society: Nothing.

Nah, the reason is probably just the fact that the copyright legislation here in the Old World isn't as "progressive".as the one beyond the pond. Now that it turns out how much the digital revolution reshaped the costs of production and redistribution of creative works, some people are arriving at the conclusion that the old system isn't as bad as some might think. (And I wonder how much do draconian copyright laws and huge corporations help people who actually produce good music and reach for their audience by making fine concerts on their own.)

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520406)

Is this what you are saying: artists make trash these days because that way they can make money, so let's make it impossible for them to make any money at all and they will have to switch back to making real art purely for the sake of art (and starving)?

What is preventing those same artists (all the Joyces, Mozarts and Shakespeares who, according to you, are wasting their talents in a movie studio somewhere) from making real art now, of the kind that you approve of and vast majority of people dislike (hence it doesn't sell)? Do you really think it is the corrupting power of dollar signs in their eyes that prevents them from taking even a little bit of time away from frantically making as much trash as they can and make some genuine masterpieces? Does it occur to you that this is completely ridiculous?

Even if it wasn't, what right do you think you have to manipulate the system in a way that you think will make those artists more valuable to you and to what you think "society" needs, even though the artists themselves will end up being worse off, not to mention that most people will be deprived of the "trash" that they actually like?

I think that you and people like you are misunderstanding the world around you and the great era of plenty (when it comes to just about everything, including art) that you live in in a pretty spectacular way.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (4, Insightful)

GMThomas (1115405) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520482)

Do you really think it is the corrupting power of dollar signs in their eyes that prevents them from taking even a little bit of time away from frantically making as much trash as they can and make some genuine masterpieces? Does it occur to you that this is completely ridiculous?

How is this ridiculous at all? Society continuously beats into our head that money is equal to success, and success is the only thing worth striving for in life. What kind of musician wouldn't want to be famous, rich, and have a huge following of fans? The kinds that are greedy and want all of this badly ARE the ones that rise to the top. They are shoddy musicians next to some of the deep underground ones, and they are so popular BECAUSE of their drive for money.

even though the artists themselves will end up being worse off, not to mention that most people will be deprived of the 'trash' that they actually like?

Britney Spears, Snoop Dogg, and Miley Cyrus wont be obscenely rich. Cry me a river. Meanwhile, bands that care more about artistic integrity might find themselves with more fans, or maybe not, either way, I'm sure they don't mind (being one of them myself). And when it all collapses people will just sell their iPods and everything because there is no longer any music out there that they would like, which is incredibly far from the truth.

and the great era of plenty

Quality over quantity. That's all I have to say. Who cares about the sheer amount of it when it is completely bereft of quality?

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520522)

Making statements like "let's make it impossible for them to make any money at all" just shows you don't know what you're talking about. Nowadays, artists are making more money than they ever have. It just doesn't come mostly from selling physical copies of their work anymore.

Furthermore, allowing non-profit making of copies for private use doesn't take a single penny from artists (specially not when everyone is already paying a levy for those copies, even if they don't make any copy, and even in cases where the law says they shouldn't pay, such as in blank CD's bought by a business company which obviously won't be used to copy music or movies), and in fact has been proven to make them earn more money.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (5, Informative)

Inconexo (1401585) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520526)

Well, it isn't exactly as good as it sounds. First of all, private copy is quite old. I think it comes when all people recorded tapes to his friends. Legislators thought that it would be easier to provide a legal way of doing this, than turn half of the citizens into criminals. So, copy of copyrighted products is legal in Spain (and many other countries as France) provided two conditions: don't make money with it, and don't publish it. In exchange, a canon was applied: for every tape bought, copyright holders would receive a little compensation. What judges say with this sentence is first, that p2p is a way of private copy, as it works peer to peer, and second, publishing links to a work, is not publishing the work. But the panorama isn't good at all in Spain. The author organizations still try to criminalize the copy, and lobby aggressively for it. Government is quite near this position, and last legal reforms hardens things a little. Also, government tried to legalize a way of closing websites without judges intervention (so a sentence like this one cannot prevent the closure). In mass media, this powers spread continually the message that copying and downloading is immoral and illegal (which is not true), comparable to terrorism or person traffic. US government is also making high pressure to make countries adopt a stronger copyright police. And no one wants to say no to Obama.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (5, Insightful)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519902)

copyright isn't an inalienable right, the community is the one providing the protection to copyright holder, and they can dictate the rules as they see fit.

I hardly think digital transmission of data destroys anything.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520088)

and the copyright holder can pack up their bags and tell the thieves to fuck off too. hence no more singleplayer PC games these days, unless they are tied to an online service.
Taking everything that gets made and paying fuck all just means people dont make anything for you any more. Bit of a hollow victory there kiddies...

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520146)

what retarded nonsense is that? there's 100's of single player games. bio shock a massive hit, is single player, moron.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

physicsdot (530505) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520210)

The parent makes the point that artists might choose to no longer make content if they can't get paid for it. Some evidence is provided: (perhaps) we are seeing this already in that more and more games are tied to an online service. Why is this a troll? Because some people disagree?

Re:Be careful what you wish for (4, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520182)

I wish you were right, but check Article 27.2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. You'll find that copyright, or at least something that offers that same basic principles is in fact a fundamental right. Where copyright does stray is in things like transfer of ownership- that's not covered as a fundamental right.

Now, I really have to agree I'm not sure this is something that should sit alongside things like the right to privacy, the right to fair trial and so forth, but unfortunately, as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is currently written, it does.

The real debate is in determining how far above and beyond the basic rights granted by the declaration go if at all. I would say that right now, copyright strays well too far above and beyond those rights granted in the declaration.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520248)

as the law is, you can't even look at modern sculptures or buildings in public places without infringing copyrights (yeah they're copyrighting even building design now)

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520594)

It doesnt matter what a law says when enough people think the law is broken it will no longer be enforcable. Thing is no matter how many guns you have if your entire population disagrees with you your screwed.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520274)


copyright isn't an inalienable right, the community is the one providing the protection to copyright holder, and they can dictate the rules as they see fit.

The right to own land isn't an inalienable right, the community is the one providing the protection to land owners, and they can dictate the rules as they see fit.

Waiting for the uprear now ....

angel'o'sphere

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520478)

I hardly think digital transmission of data destroys anything.

Ah, this is an easy trap to fall into. Information can be very powerful. This is, in fact, the main reason why we enshrine free speech, as a weapon against corruption. To say that the mere stream of bits, or the vibrations of air molecules could destroy a person, or even a large group of people, seems counter-intuitive, but it can happen, and it has happened before. So, in general, don't underestimate the the transmission of data! It's a good thing the founding fathers didn't make the same mistake!

In this case, the digital transmission of data, in certain circumstances, will destroy the profits of these artists and these companies, and will make it less likely that there will be data worth transmitting in the future. Their existence is dependent upon their providing data to those who wouldn't otherwise have it, and the people paying them back for it. Taking without paying does them nothing but harm. So yeah, the GP got it pretty much right. If P2P of copyrighted files is allowed, then all artists in Spain using copyright are pretty much fucked.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (5, Interesting)

f3r (1653221) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520068)

It's called social rebellion, coming from an anarchist extra lobe in spaniards' hearts. They fuck you, you fuck them. Once equilibrium is restored, we can go back and reopen discussion with media, to plan what the future should be like. At the moment we have to be pirates (soft pirates, we don't go around with a knife in the mouth assaulting SGAE yelling "for Tutatis") in order to compensate for revolutionary tax that they have imposed on CDs and other materials.

By the way, I don't see any real discussion of future plans on how the arts business should be managed in an ideal society. Example: have you ever heard anyone talking about a science-like management of artists? they would receive fellowships/short-term-contracts and fight for resources just like scientists do. Only the good ones survive this sieve, and end up having a merit-based stable job. People now will come with the argument that art cannot be judged on absolute values....bullshit. Talk to real understanders of arts and they will tell that good art can be distinguished from bad art.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (4, Interesting)

c-reus (852386) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520094)

As demonstrated by Nine Inch Nails with their "Ghosts I-IV" album, giving away music for free can result in significant financial gain.

Look at it this way: in most music shops there's a section where you can listen to a CD before you buy it (at least here in Estonia). I can listen to an album without paying for it and then decide whether I want to buy it or not. It's the same thing with downloading music - I download it, give it a listen and if I deem it to be good enough, I'll buy it. I buy 4-5 albums a year this way. Of course, this comes down to my being responsible enough to actually buy the albums I like. That's not something you can write into law, though (since I can decide that I don't like a particular album). How is my behavior destroying copyright? Would strict enforcement of copyright (not allowing me to listen before buying) increase or decrease the number of albums I buy?

Overall, I see the ruling as accepting the current public opinion. If a government has a priori knowledge that most people under a certain age download music and movies via P2P networks, would it make sense to start prosecuting as many of them as possible, hoping that the public opinion regarding P2P will change? Sure, if you beat a man enough, you can make him say there are five lights instead of four - but would that work on a large scale? I mean, there has to be something terribly wrong if a large part of population (I'd love to cite some statistics here but couldn't find anything recent) is considered to actively participate in criminal/illegal activities. The people want their horseless carriages and no matter how hard you try to outlaw them (for example, by requiring the drivers to disassemble those carriages whenever seeing horses down the road), the public has already made up their mind about it.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (2, Insightful)

delinear (991444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520180)

Strangely, a "try-before-you-buy" system might be the only niche where DRM could be effective. If I could have an album via a free, or at most nominal (a few pence per download) price for a couple of weeks to decide if I like it, after that the album disappears and I buy the non-DRM version, or not depending on my opinion of the trial.

Of course this terrifies labels because they can't rely on their old fashioned model of having two songs out of 8 worth listening to and hyping the hell out of them in order to sell the album, which is why we're unlikely to ever see it despite it being pretty much a no brainer in terms of the right fit of technology and marketing.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520196)

"I mean, there has to be something terribly wrong if a large part of population (I'd love to cite some statistics here but couldn't find anything recent) is considered to actively participate in criminal/illegal activities."

Obvious example [prisonplanet.com]

RIAA troll, RIAA troll (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520098)

Seems to be they have money nowadays to infiltrate Slashdot :-)

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520112)

Breaking News:
      P2P file sharing is also legal everywhere else as well ...

Using it to upload copyrighted material however .....

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

Vayra (1744282) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520218)

Is only legal in Spain.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

Inconexo (1401585) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520534)

False. p2p of not copyrighted material is legal everywhere, I think. Also, p2p downloading of copyrighted material is legal not only in Spain, but in many countries, as France. In reality, private copy is extended on developed countries, except for anglosaxon ones.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520130)

We also pay an unavoidable fee everytime we purchase blank media - including jard disk drives and mp3 players. This moneys is given to the SGAE to "compensate" any copying. So while downloading for personal use is "illegal", the SGAE has made sure it is not "free".

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

cgomezr (1074699) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520132)

There is copyright in Spain. When you buy a CD, DVD, iPod, HDD, DSL line, etc. you have to pay a tax to the SGAE as a "compensatory tax" for copying music.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (3, Insightful)

delinear (991444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520154)

Just because the courts have ruled that it's not illegal under current law, that doesn't prevent the labels lobbying/buying up politicians until there are enough to pass a new, more stringent law.

In the meantime it will be a useful experiment, if music sales in Spain don't suddenly drop off a huge cliff then this could be a strong message of support to people worldwide who have been saying downloading != actual loss for a long time (having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if the labels played it dirty, slashing marketing spend and raising prices to give the opposite result and an excuse for exactly those strict laws).

Re:Be careful what you wish for (3, Informative)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520186)

Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy.

So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?

No it doesn't. It just makes (or keeps) file-sharing legal.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

ubersoldat2k7 (1557119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520240)

Even when so many people download movies, last year was a record year for movie theaters. Also, in Spain we don't have services like Hulu or Netflix, and pretty much every video rental store is closing. The fair copying is only applied to music, movies and books. Software is not in the same page here. Oh! And the SGAE Tax is being run through many legal instances to study its legality, this tax is paid on every appliance capable of storing and reproducing copyrighted material, even printers and photocopiers, even if you use them for your own stuff... This guys are making millions out of this deal.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520288)

Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy.,

So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?

No, it does not. If I can extrapolate from the Czech state of affairs, they have probably a clause that allows an individual to make a copy of a copyrighted material for the sole personal use, and it covers all cases of fair use (that is, what is considered fair use by the local legislation), for example taking notes in classrooms, excerpting from books, taping radio songs, downloading web contents etc. It's just that the fair use scope is considered broader. It certainly does not destroy the basic tenet that the author of the copyrighted work is allowed to decide who can redistribute (which in most cases meand "to sell" here) his copyrighted works - modulo certain copyright law provisions such as this, among other things (we have some provisions for free licenses for schools and churches under circumstances I can't recall right now).

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520372)

Actually, spain has something called a "canon", it is a tax on blank media and copying devices that goes (in theory) to the author's pockets to compensate for the lost sales produced by the legal copies that could be made with said media.

Re:Be careful what you wish for (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520386)

Answers (from Spain):

So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?

Nope. Copyright laws are unchanged. It just say that you can use a generic program like p2p (o a usb, or anything) for share information in private with others, as long as you are ok with copyright laws in Spain: no lucrative or collective use.

As long as you don't sell it, Music is free?

Yes. This is so in Spain, not in USA or Japan, where private copy is not permited.
Private copy is a strange freedom and a long story. Copyright is a right (authors gains some rights to have better chances to make good bussines, and everybody loses freedom). But spanish constitution (1976) defends the right of access to "culture"... So now we have to pay a "canon" (something like a tax to a private corporation called SGAE), in compensation for the right to private copy. You can learn more here: http://www.filmica.com/david_bravo/

Collective use (what ever the hell that is) is also ok.

No. in example I cant put it on my webpage, it would be a collective use, and it is forbiden. Also i cant share it at work with every other employer, unless it is shared with a password (so it is not a collective use). The very important thing here is than the p2p has been not considered "collective use".

Are you sure this is what you want?

No. I want more. I am sure of that.
Copyright: As it is now, it is not good. Too much power to SGAEs and RIASSs, and a very bad situation for users.
I think it will work perfectly if only Creative Commons licenses (and similar ones) would be legal. That is, it shouldnt be legal to someone to forbid me make a copy unless i make bussines of that.
No canon. Mainly because it does not go to the authors. Instead it goes to some old freaking corrupted guys. Here it is what we pay: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_por_copia_privada_(Espa%C3%B1a)

Re:Be careful what you wish for (1)

tick-tock-atona (1145909) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520600)

Downloading a file (from a P2P network) for private use is perfectly legal as long as there is no lucrative or collective use of the downloaded copy.

So this pretty much destroys copyright in Spain, right?

No.

As long as you don't sell it, Music is free?

No. You have to pay to see live music, you have to pay to buy a CD, you have to pay to buy guaranteed quality music from iTunes. You just don't have to pay to share music you like with other people, ensuring it gets the widest possible audience.

Collective use (what ever the hell that is) is also ok.

Are you sure this is what you want?

Yes. This has (at least) the following positive benefits:

- Killing recording industry (not musician's) profits (I want to help [flickr.com])

- As a side effect of the point above, helping independent music get an equal footing with artists backed by the big four [wikipedia.org] (this could lead to music on the radio which isn't homogeneous shite!!)

- Increasing creativity and artistic output by allowing people to share things they like with each other.

I certainly hope that this can help make sure artists are celebrated on their artistic merits, rather than how much money they can bring in through aggressive, ubiquitous marketing campaigns.

Exactly how much talent did britney spears have, anyway?

MODS DITCH THE POPUP ADS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519794)

I have adblock disabled for slashdot and just recently got a notice for a blocked popup ad here. I assume this is a fuckup from your advertisers, as normally the ads here are unobtrusive, but unless this is fixed I'm blocking ads on slashdot.

Re:MODS DITCH THE POPUP ADS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519860)

Remember to check the "Post Anonymously" checkbox each time you link to XKCD [goatkcd.com] and you will stop seeing any ad.

Re:MODS DITCH THE POPUP ADS (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519918)

Do you work alone or is there a whole team of you asshats? Or are you "legion" or something equally faggy?

Time for regimechange (4, Funny)

Dionysus (12737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519818)

Spain needs to be liberated from those evil pirates. And aren't they run by a socialist (read: Communist) government, anyways?

And if Obama won't do it, then he's just a weak socalist loving communist out to destroy the American way

Re:Time for regimechange (2, Informative)

damburger (981828) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519838)

Wasn't the US tacitly involved in 'liberating' Spain from (democratically elected) socialists about 80 years ago as well?

Re:Time for regimechange (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520032)

I don't know, but after thar they also liberated Germany form a (democratically elected) leader. Being democratically elected is not that hard. Those "democratically elected" socialists in Spain 80 years ago also were the last genocydes in Spain killing 10.000 cathollics in 3 years (kids and nuns included, hardly dangerous).

Re:Time for regimechange (3, Informative)

damburger (981828) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520136)

Franco apologetics gets modded interesting? If you want to know why the republicans attacked the catholic church, perhaps you should look at the churches intimate involvement with the Fascists. The Internet is replete with pictures of catholic bishops in spain giving roman/Nazi salutes.

Re:Time for regimechange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520246)

Attacking fascists makes those who are in front of them non-fascists? Attacking Hitler makes Stalin a good guy? I will never defend Franco but I will never say that against him were democratic people.

Re:Time for regimechange (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520284)

Well, now that you explain it that way, genocide based on religion is perfectly OK!

Re:Time for regimechange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520366)

C'mon! Killing people is not OK. Nonetheless GP point was that those killings were in a civil war where the Spanish church aligned with the ones who started the war and often broke confession secret to point who to kill. For that they were latter retributed by the other side.

If we have to pick the side who genocided more than the other I would say it was the wining one (specially after they won), but you know what happens in a war: people die.

Re:Time for regimechange (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520352)

Franco committed mass murder. The bodies were dumped / buried alongside roads. The bodies are continually being revealed by roadworks. The Franco apologists are the ones saying 'the past is past, move on'.

Re:Time for regimechange (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520504)

Hehe, gotcha, but thanks to the UN mass killing because of ideology is not genocide, but based on religion is. I suppose that the UN took that definition because it was full of lefty dictators.

Re:Time for regimechange (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520072)

Those socialists in Spain are on the side of the national RIAA, and they are paying ads saying that copying is like killing or beating your wife.

Spain (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519846)

You know, I read a lot. Especially about things that have to do with history. I find that shit fascinating. Here's a fact, I don't know if you know or not, Spaniards were spawned by niggers.

It's a fact. You see, Spaniards have black blood pumpin' through their hearts. If you don't believe me, you can look it up. Hundreds and hundreds of years ago, you see, the Moors conquered Spain. And Moors are niggers.

So you see, way back then, uh, Spaniards were like, uh, wops from Northern Portugal. Ah, they all had blonde hair and blue eyes, but, uh, well, then the Moors moved in there, and uh, well, they changed the whole country. They did so much fuckin' with Spanish women, huh? That they changed the whole bloodline forever. That's why blonde hair and blue eyes became black hair and dark skin. You know, it's absolutely amazing to me to think that to this day, hundreds of years later, that, uh, that Spaniards still carry that nigger gene.

Re:Spain (0, Offtopic)

Inconexo (1401585) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520592)

Moors weren't nigger, as in that time, black tribes of South and Central Africa hadn't merge with them. Many of the moors in this time had red of blonde hair. Spaniards are a mixture of a lot of races (iberian, celts, berbers, roman, visigoths, arabian, sirian, ...), so sure we have "nigger genes". What's the deal. Anyway, mankind was possibly originated, so all of us come from Africa.

Hmm.. (4, Funny)

ZDRuX (1010435) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519852)

I was going to write a long reply but realized I won't have time before my plane leaves for Spain.. see you guys!

Well, that settles it (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31519866)

Forget holiday reading, I'll be taking holiday hard-drives to Europe this summer! [And please, feel free to insert an obligatory pun about 'Hard drives' in the context of beautiful Spanish women at this point...]

In Hungary, too (4, Interesting)

little1973 (467075) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519968)

In Hungary, downloading is legal, but uploading not. So, P2P is in a grey area. However, there is a levy on all recordable media, even on pendrives and memory cards. So, clueful hungarians buy their recordable media from Slovakia where there is no such levy.

Re:In Hungary, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520122)

Sorry to disappoint you but there is such a levy in Slovakia too. It's paid to Autorský fond (Author fund) managed by SOZA - Slovak version of RIAA. And the levy is paid on cd/dvd/bluray media, memory cards, hard disks and cd/dvd writers .... Usually you don't know you pay it because it's part of the retail price, but for example on the invoice from wholesalers the whole price is divided in 3 chunks, price of product, Author fund levy, recyclation levy (aplies to electronics not to media).

Re:In Hungary, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520162)

The same levy is applied to recordable media in Spain, too. Clueful Spaniards either buy them online or in Andorra.

Re:In Hungary, too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520380)

There is a levy in Slovakia too (3% I think). It's already included in the price.

Re:In Hungary, too (1)

HopefulIntern (1759406) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520456)

This is more or less true in the UK as well. Downloading may not be legal, but legal ramifications only happen because of uploading, not downloading. This is why users of P2P and especially Bit Torrent get caught. Downloading with BT automatically means you start uploading. This is why services such as Rapidshare are becoming hugely popular here. No uploading means no culpability. And it's faster.

Oh, noes! (1)

zmollusc (763634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31519996)

Oh FFS! We are in a global war on terror, and those crazy Spaniards pull something like this? It is Thursday morning here in Europe, by Monday all of Spain's society will have collapsed and we will have another Iraq, right on our doorstep. Tuesday, tops.

Re:Oh, noes! (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520212)

Oh FFS! We are in a global war on terror, and those crazy Spaniards pull something like this? It is Thursday morning here in Europe, by Monday all of Spain's society will have collapsed and we will have another Iraq, right on our doorstep. Tuesday, tops.

On the plus side, we should make some excellent headway with reducing global warming [wikipedia.org].

Piratebay/Mininova moves to Spain (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520006)

On the internet nobody knows you're a dog or where you host your torrent links........

Spanish system description (4, Informative)

Tei (520358) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520018)

Heres is a poorly idea of the spanish system:
  - you are allowed to make copys of the music you own. Call it backups
  - wen you buy a HD, a USB pendrive, a printer, a escaner, etc.. you pay something like a tax. It could be $3 for a $50 multimedia thingie. Its supposed that you are paying with this tax, the money lost by music creators for making this copy.
  - totally unrelated, but you can also download music, is not illegal, yet. That can change, but don't get in love with it.
  - the govern tell people with ads campaings that downloading music is illegal. and is not true. So some money of our taxes is directed to help a campaing to propagate the ideas of our local MAFIAA.
  - the govern is in bed with the people that want to fight piracy. Mostly the POP music industry, and the movie industry... the movie industry is moslty pseudo-intelectual fagots that get money from the govern to make pseudo-intelectual movies no one want to watch other than some old people.
  - there are some rich people that own some medias, ..think the italian president, but seems a no-factor
  - the big ISP's fight any anti-p2p thing, but are of course salivating with the idea of destroying net neutrality. So are your friend now, but can change the idea on the future and backstab the users. Data retention and big fat routers and such stuff cost money, anyway

Is not a good system, since even Bar's have to pay for having a TV (a TV can be used to ear music)... everyone is getting screwed. But Is probably a better system than the USA one, where you commits something illegal, if you download stuff. And maybe slighty better than UK, where you have to pay for owning TV machines.

Re:Spanish system description (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520158)

Hey, English isn't a pro-drop language! ;) But I guess that the situation you are describing pretty much fits the rest of EU as well. Sometimes I wonder whether it is better to have a rigid and inflexible bureaucracy that slows down changes from this peculiar state of affairs both for the better and for the worse, or whether it would be better to allow for faster changes and risk the rather undesirable US influence finding its way into our structures.

Re:Spanish system description (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520238)

the big ISP's fight any anti-p2p thing, but are of course salivating with the idea of destroying net neutrality.

The ISPs might publicly be on board with P2P because none of them wants to frighten away customers by being the first to say they want to kill P2P, but in reality their dream would be a world where the government outlaws this completely. People would still need the net for email, business, shopping, socialising, gaming, etc but these are all generally low bandwidth, high profit services for ISPs - it's a win-win for them, if a law gets passed they can play the good guys unwillingly complying with a draconian government while seeing a likely increase in their profits.

Re:Spanish system description (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520332)

>>Its supposed that you are paying with this tax, the money lost by record labels for making this copy.

Fix'd.

Reporting from Spain... (5, Informative)

OpenSourced (323149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520030)

That really happened, but...

That's the law in Spain, up to now. It has always been. If you aren't profiting by copyright infringement (other than getting the copied thing, that is), then you are in the clear. In any case the current (left leaning) government has drafted a new law that makes illegal all that the SGAE wants to be illegal .Well, not all, they would like individual users to be punishable too, and the government said no thanks; and they wanted the webs to be closed without judicial intervention, and the government initially complied but then changed it to need judicial intervention, but with the new law judges should put them down, anyway). So from now on (I'm not sure about if it's fully operative now but should be soon) it should be fairly easy to put down a "links" site. At least when it's hosted in Spain.

Anyway the situation in Spain is, I think, not too bad. Individual users are protected if they just download things for themselves or others, or even if they make a thousand photocopies of a book and give them away, as long as they get no profit from it. But that will surely change in the future too. When two groups fight for something, and one (the SGAE) has a clear financial objective, and the other (the file sharers) a vague convenience one, the first group will in the end prevail, against all reason, logic or fairness.

Re:Reporting from Spain... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520140)

This is precisely the same law already applied in Portgual.

Re:Reporting from Spain... (1)

twisteddk (201366) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520152)

Or as the article itself puts it:

In the country, file-sharing is pretty much legal

That'd be along the lines of "if I kill someone he might only be 'slightly dead', so maybe I cant be punished ?"
It'd be so much easier to determine the meaning of the ruling, if the article at least would mention the prudent facts and legislation, as you have.

Re:Reporting from Spain... (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520174)

...and give them away, as long as they get no profit from it.

Are you sure about this? That is, the redistribution thing? I would find this peculiar and uncommon.

Re:Reporting from Spain... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520348)

As it is written, the law makes it illegal to make copies and give them away, even for free (the right to distribute copies is given solely to the author). However, the part of the law that describes "private copying" (that is, the making of copies for private use without profit, something that's legal) does not make it mandatory that the person making the copy has to be the one that keeps it, so it'd seem it's actually legal for someone to make a private copy for someone else. I think it's a matter of scale: you can't go around with bags full of copies giving them away, but you can make the occasional copy for friends and family.

finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520254)

finally, a judge with some sense. and less riaa dollars.

How long before CORRUPT politicians... (1)

viraltus (1102365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520292)

get bribed and twist the law to favor corporations? I am very happy with this sentence but I believe politicians are now dancing the dance of happiness thinking in all the money SGAE (RIAA) is going to place in their pockets to overturn this sentence.

Ruled Legal is not correct... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520322)

Just to point out some cultural differences...
Say more that this judge ruled that FOR THIS CASE, P2P is legal. We use the Roman Law (Natural law you say?), so, a judge ruling do not creates jurisdiction. Tomorrow other judge can rule the opposite and be perfectly Okay.
Laws are interpreted, but not changed by a trial result.
This ambiguity will remain until the senate raises a law saying "P2P is legal for non lucrative uses".

WTF no link in summary? (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520338)

In the summary the text is shown as elrincondejesus.com [elrincondejesus.com] with no hyperlink! WTF? Does Slashdot or its parent company have a policy against linking to sites containing infringing material? (right there on the front page is a link to "American Playboy")

Re:WTF no link in summary? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520586)

I don't know about Slashdot's policy, but that site does not contain any infringing material. That's one of the reasons why the judge ruled its owner to be innocent.

Thank ye, Jesus! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520470)

A data transmission network is now not inherently illegal, nor does it breach copyright regulation per se.

That we feel the need to celebrate Spain ruling the internet legal shows how far these RIAA clusterfuck clones have brought us, however, fairplay to you Jesus, Sir, I'll be saying one for you on Sunday. Commonsense has (at least for now) descended and is indeed amongst us, may it one day finally shine it all its Glory. Our Day Will Come.

What the hell is Jolly Roger doing in this news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31520506)

We're talking P2P here.
Slashdot is stating that P2P equals piracy. Wrong!
Take that awful Jolly Roger picture off this news!
- Ignacio Agulló

such a pity... (3, Interesting)

advocate_one (662832) | more than 4 years ago | (#31520596)

because when ACTA is rammed down everybody's throat... they'll have anti-porn filtering riding on the back of it... and by law, ISPs will have to block sites deemed to be distributing extreme and/or kiddie porn... what's the bets Pirate bay and other popular sites and their trackers get included on the filters then...
Load More 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...