Beta
×

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!

Spanish Court Rules In Favor of P2P Engineer

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the no-fine-for-you dept.

Piracy 365

Sir Mal Fet writes "In line with previous rulings discussed here, a judge in Spain has ruled that P2P technologies are 'completely neutral' (original in Spanish ; Google translation ), thus dismissing a lawsuit originated in 2008 from the Spanish Association of Musical Producers (Promusicae), Warner, EMI, and Sony suing Pablo Soto, a Spanish man who created the Blubster, MP2P y Piolet programs to share files. The labels demanded 13 million euros in damages arguing that the mere existence and distribution of P2P technologies violated copyright, but the ruling stated the technology itself was neutral, so the creator could not be held responsible for how the software was used, and demanded that they pay for legal expenses. Promusicae said it was going to appeal the ruling."

cancel ×

365 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

That is like suing Ford (5, Insightful)

slackware 3.6 (2524328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456802)

because a deranged criminal killed a pedestrian with a stolen car. Wow the judge did his job no story here. Unless the story is about judges doing their jobs, in which case we have a winner.

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Insightful)

Lisias (447563) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456840)

You know, it's good to hear that there're judges doing their jobs nowadays.

If by no other reason, it make us hope that some of them live on America.

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Insightful)

InterestingFella (2537066) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457164)

Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Funny)

dredwerker (757816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457316)

Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

No rappers do.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457340)

Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

No rappers do.

Actually, yes, rappers do kill people too. Or did you forget a comma?

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457396)

Commas doesn't kill people, a lack of them do.

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457348)

Yes, technology itself isn't bad. Like they say "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".

"If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars make people drive drunk, and spoons make you fat." -- Unknown

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Insightful)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457514)

"If guns kill people, then pencils misspell words, cars make people drive drunk, and spoons make you fat." -- Unknown

What do buses, cars, trains, p2p, and http all have in common? They are general methods of transportation. Guns just transport bullets. At high velocity. Into a target. A gun is a weapon, not a neutral method of data transport. Unless the next step up from fiber-optic cable is bullets.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2, Funny)

Darfeld (1147131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457518)

I knew it was the spoons! They're after me!

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457476)

Most often, it's the bullets that you have to watch out for.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Darfeld (1147131) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457526)

Technically true, but once the bullet is fired, it's generally to late to do anything... But yeah, you can do something about it before, but then you just have to be sure the loaded gun is on the good side of the bulletproof whatever.

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Insightful)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456844)

Which also makes TPB's name choice "The Pirate Bay" stupid. It would be like naming your kindergarten "The Rapists Playground" and then jabbering how people need to have privacy there. It's obvious what happens on the site and what it is intended for, and therefore makes the owners liable too. They should had used some more neutral name. Of course, they wouldn't had grown so big and make millions otherwise.

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456942)

Uh that's a website, not BitTorrent or any other software. The developers who write P2P software are not running that site.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456958)

It was just somewhat related illustration on how your intent does count in court. Blubster, MP2P and Piolet are much more neutral names than one that directly advocates piracy.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1, Insightful)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456968)

I can't really think of a p2p client or protocols that don't have neutral names.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

MachDelta (704883) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457114)

Shareaza?

That's the best I could do off the top of my head anyways.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457196)

Tomato torrent.

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Insightful)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457276)

I'm not sure how 'sharing' could be a non-neutral term. Whether the files are legal or illegal to share, you are sharing them nonetheless on a p2p network.

Re:That is like suing Ford (5, Funny)

not_surt (1293182) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457112)

The name BitTorrent is obviously a thinly-veiled allusion to piracy.
Pirate steal pieces of eight. *Bit*s come eight to a pack.
Water forms *Torrent*s. The sea is made of water. Pirates sail the seven seas.
And so: BitTorrent.
That judge must be blind (or bought off by Big Piracy) not to see that BitTorrent exists solely for piratical purposes.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457206)

I wish I had mod points. Someone mod him up!

Re:That is like suing Ford (-1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457234)

That judge must be blind (or bought off by Big Piracy) not to see that BitTorrent exists solely for piratical purposes.

'Scuse me? I've dl'd FLOSS isos via BT. Not my preferred way of getting them, but sometimes it's the better option.

Guns *can* be used to kill people, but that's not all they can do.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457366)

That judge must be blind (or bought off by Big Piracy) not to see that BitTorrent exists solely for piratical purposes.

'Scuse me? I've dl'd FLOSS isos via BT. Not my preferred way of getting them, but sometimes it's the better option.

Guns *can* be used to kill people, but that's not all they can do.

It's a joke, dumbass.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1, Informative)

Sique (173459) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457372)

Whoooosh!

Re:That is like suing Ford (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457394)

-1.

Wow what a retard.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457046)

Arguing that a website should be subject to legal action just because of its name sounds offensive is nothing more than discrimination.

What next? Is the legal system going to require people to change their names if someone else considers it offensive?

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Interesting)

sowth (748135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457072)

Is the legal system going to require people to change their names if someone else considers it offensive?

There are people stupid enough to demand just that.

I remember when I was out looking for a job in electronics, and some guy was telling people I "stole" his name. (I have the same first and last name as he did.) I didn't even know this was going on until someone put me on the phone with him--it still took me a while to figure out.

This made it even harder to find a job. I even had one prospective employer say "if that is even your real name." Dumb asses.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

InterestingFella (2537066) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457118)

What next? Is the legal system going to require people to change their names if someone else considers it offensive?

If it's unlawful, yes. You already cannot give or take any name you want. This is especially true for companies. Your company name cannot contain anything illegal or what promotes something illegal.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457158)

What next? Is the legal system going to require people to change their names if someone else considers it offensive?

If it's unlawful, yes. You already cannot give or take any name you want. This is especially true for companies. Your company name cannot contain anything illegal or what promotes something illegal.

Well the surname "Cockburn" [wikipedia.org] sounds both offensive and could be taken as an instruction to commit an illegal act.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457146)

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457468)

No they won't:
http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/hunterdon-county/express-times/index.ssf/2010/08/court_panel_rules_dyfs_was_rig_1.html

""We hold that evidence from the ex-wife was admissible to prove that defendant-father was a risk of harm to his children and that defendant-mother’s denials of her husband’s history of violence also made her a risk of harm to the children," the panel ruled."

And that piece of fucking garbage news story you have is out of date, they lost their appeal:
http://www.helmerlegal.com/post-detail.php?id=1610

"documents filed in New Jersey court claim that there were instances of alleged abuse and parental incompetence that made it necessary to take the children from their parents. In August 2010, the court found evidence of abuse, neglect and domestic violence in the home. Additionally, court documents alleged that both the parents had been victims of child abuse, were unemployed and suffered from psychological problems.

Get your facts straight, dickhead.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457452)

...or perhaps the founders know the meaning of the word Irony ... and though the name was funny, like calling a geeky site ... Slashdot ...

Re:That is like suing Ford (1, Insightful)

Artea (2527062) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456862)

Anyone with half a brain knows that these services were created for the purpose of sharing copyrighted material. Sure they don't condone these actions officially, but they are certainly going to look the other way when it happens. As much as I hate the music/film industry, to defend these services saying that they are innocent and only intend for their networks to be used for legal purposes is lying to themselves. Who used Limewire, kazzaa, etc to download thier linux distros instead of the latest pop album or poorly recorded movie that came out in cinemas last week? The nuetral network defense only goes so far, and I doubt the swarm of lawyers are going to give up just yet.

P2P is neutral (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456970)

I only ever use P2P to download FOSS and, windows fixes. There are plenty of music streams if I want to listen to something. I suspect that Comcast is stepping on the streams though at the behest of XXAA or some other equally praiseworthy organization. These guys rip off artists and slander titles out of principle. So I hope someone is sticking it to them for a change.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456976)

Anyone with half a brain knows that these services were created for the purpose of sharing copyrighted material. Sure they don't condone these actions officially, but they are certainly going to look the other way when it happens. As much as I hate the music/film industry, to defend these services saying that they are innocent and only intend for their networks to be used for legal purposes is lying to themselves.

That's not the argument. There's only question that matters: Is it possible to use the technology for purposes that are not illegal, even if it was never used for a legitimate purpose, or a legitimate purpose was never even conceived of before the challenge was made? If the answer is yes, then the technology is neutral.

You can rule on how people use the thing all day long, but there's no legitimate reason to ban a technology because people have used it irresponsibly.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

Artea (2527062) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457020)

Just as some illicit drugs can be used for perfectly legitimate medical uses. There are still laws that regulate those, banning a technology may hinder legitimate usage, but who says they won't try and regulate P2P in a similar fashion.

Re:That is like suing Ford (4, Insightful)

Sique (173459) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457390)

And there is still the question if banning illicit drugs actually make sense. It's more a thing of tradition, because from a objective point of view banning illicit drugs does not hinder their distribution, but increases the cost the society pays in terms of policing, criminality and wrongful deaths.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457400)

Was there a point in there other than the fact that stupid laws already exist and corrupt control freaks will do anything for more control?

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Insightful)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456998)

The purpose of these services was to share material. Whether it is copyrighted or not is immaterial. Bits don't give a damn about copyright.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457042)

Erh... here, me? I'm that guy. Why do you ask?

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457090)

I got bauer-puntu(ubuntu) from a torrent watch yourself

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

slackware 3.6 (2524328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457190)

95% of my bittorrent downloads (I also seed so the bandwidth I pay for isn't going to waste when I'm at work) are the latest Fedora and Chakra with the occasional (other). As for the rest. I have both of those CD's so fair use suckers.

with apologies to Casablanca... (1)

KingAlanI (1270538) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457148)

I am shocked, absolutely shocked to learn that is unauthorized copying going on with this filesharing mechanism

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Insightful)

sowth (748135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457152)

The only reason P2P technology is mostly used for copyright infringement is because the big media companies sued the fuck out of anyone who wanted to create a P2P system whether it was used for a legitimate purpose or not. So a lot of people who were doing legitimate research into creating P2P technologies stopped.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457212)

- "Sure they don't condone these actions officially"
In Spain share copyrighted material (except software) under certain conditions, is legal. They are just witch-hunting. 3 years of torture for Pablo.
- http://hacktivistas.net/content/downloading-files-p2p-networks-legal-spain
- http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derecho_de_copia_privada

"As much as I hate the music/film industry"
- not enough yet :-)

Hey! the problem isnt the p2p software. The problem isnt the people. The problem is just the greedy music/film industry and the infamous laws that "protect" them attacking everybody else.

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Informative)

turbidostato (878842) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457262)

"Anyone with half a brain knows that these services were created for the purpose of sharing copyrighted material."

Everything not in the public domain is copyrighted. On one hand this doesn't mean is not intended to be shareable (obvious example being code copyrighted under the GPL), on the other, Spanish legislation is crystal clear: just sharing copyrighted material is perfectly legal (while the entertainment lobby is pressing hard to change this).

Winning! (1)

cultiv8 (1660093) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456878)

Spanish Court Judge In Favor of P2P Engineer

There, fixed

Re:That is like suing Ford (3, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457010)

Why single out car makers? Just to have a car analogy?

It's like any technology. Think of any kind of technology, any kind of device, any kind of tool. There are no "good" or "bad" technologies, all of them can be used for good or bad. From a rock which can be used to crack open a coconut or to crack open a head, to a rocket which can be used to transport a satellite to orbit or a bomb to some other place on the surface of our planet. And if fissionable material only had nefarious applications, we wouldn't have a hard time convincing everyone that it's not a good idea to hand any to "questionable" countries. Hell, not even enriching it to make it weapon grade material is a dead sure indicator that someone has bad intentions, due to the way some reactors work only with such material.

I'm glad a judge finally caught on and noticed that progressing technology and inventing a tool cannot be seen as a crime by itself. It's how the technology is used that should be judged. Do not blame technology for anything bad happening. It's the people using it, not the technology!

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

SharkLaser (2495316) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457032)

What is the good use for handguns? In any way you look at it, they're intended for killing people. They aren't good for hunting, and you can't really craft anything by shooting it. Their only purpose is to kill other people.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457070)

Not good for hunting is debatable. If nothing else, they make a really nice sporting equipment. I don't know about you, but I find it a worthwhile recreational activity to shoot at target discs and see whether I can hit the center. Considering HOW I do it, with the calmness and concentration necessary for me to get any sensible results, I doubt that the skill is applicable in a life-or-death situation, so I guess it doesn't even qualify as practice for the "just-in-case" case. Not to mention that my chances to actually get the gun from its storage in such a situation before it's well past too late are pretty much zero.

It's probably different for military grade weaponry, like smart missiles and the like. But then, I doubt any private citizen will ever have a chance to actually get their hands on a tomahawk missile or something similar.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457074)

Sport?

You could use the same argument for javelins as aside from sport their only use in antiquity was to kill people and/or hunting (I guarantee you a pistol depending on calibre can be more effective than a javelin for hunting purposes)

If sport is not a good enough purpose for you for people to have items, then let us ban chess sets also, as it's only 'good' purpose is gaming and a person could bludgeon someone with a decent quality stainless playing piece.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457246)

yo-yos, golf balls... both also started life as weapons. Now they're a toy. I got my first yo-yo when I was around 4, my first golf set was a plastic effort I got on holiday on the coast when I was 8.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Pseudonym Authority (1591027) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457130)

Deterrence.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

517714 (762276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457178)

To quote you from an earlier post [slashdot.org] : "Not everyone deserves to state their views because frankly, they are just too stupid or uneducated for that privilege. You are a good example of one." Handguns do not need to have a "good" use, if an individual has the right to own/use one that is sufficient. Just as you are wrong about one's right to free speech, you are wrong about the right to keep and bear arms.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

peppepz (1311345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457192)

Yet the police need them to prevent bad guys from doing bad things.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

InterestingFella (2537066) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457296)

No they don't. Police only use guns now because bad guys also use guns. Back in time it was quite uncommon for a police officer to carry a gun.

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457230)

Handguns are good for hunting. I use them myself on a regular basis (3-4 times a week) - a 4.5mm CO2 match pistol for rats (in close quarters) and squirrels (when they're approachable), a 5.5mm spring pistol for finishing hares, and a 6mm BB for chasing pigeons off of rafters. Much easier than getting a dozen guys together to chase rodents with baseball bats, slightly quieter and very much safer.

Re:That is like suing Ford (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457432)

Redneck alert!!! Redneck alert!!! Redneck alert!!!

Shootin' rats again, eh Cletus?

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

mark_elf (2009518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457240)

People do use handguns for hunting animals. People do use bittorrent for FOSS. People do use laser beams for things other than shark-mounting.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457504)

And protection during the inevitable zombie apocalypse.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457448)

It's like any technology. Think of any kind of technology, any kind of device, any kind of tool. There are no "good" or "bad" technologies, all of them can be used for good or bad. (...) Hell, not even enriching it to make it weapon grade material is a dead sure indicator that someone has bad intentions, due to the way some reactors work only with such material.

I'm pretty sure no reactor design requires weapon grade material, unless you purposely made one just so you can pretend it's for a reactor. Regular nuclear fuel contains a small bit of weapons grade material, like the fuel for an incineration facility has to have some degree of flammable material - when people started sorting their junk too well, they had to add some small part of paper back into the mix. But weapons grade material is more like napalm, yes it will burn but it's way, way overkill if you just want it to burn, the only practical reason to do it is because you're making a weapon.

Same as with nerve gas, sure if all you have are batches of various chemical compounds that may be used for lots of various purposes that's one thing, but nerve gas itself doesn't really have any other redeeming uses. Then again you have many countries that justify having WMDs, at least the A of ABC (Atomic, Bacterial, Chemical) weapons but you're stretching it very, very far at least. Particularly if you're finding it in some loony's basement, I'm glad that's illegal even if they don't know the where and when he was planning to use it.

P2P software on the other hand transfers rows of 0s and 1s. I't's like trying to ban the alphabet because the letters could be used to make unlawful writings .It can be practically any format from text, audio, video carrying pretty much all forms of content. There's absolutely nothing inherent in the technology that direct what people can use it for, it's pretty much as generic as it gets. It's like arresting the guy who makes printer ink for anything bad people print with his ink. It's an insane logic and luckily the courts seem a bit saner than that.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

517714 (762276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457098)

You had to use a car analogy right off the bat? Seriously? If you had only used a "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" analogy you would have left a lot of people thinking about which side of the argument they would take.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Jarik_Tentsu (1065748) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457202)

Your analogy is close, but in the case of P2P, most of their use is for illegal things.

So it's more like suing Ford over a car they sold which included features like secret compartments (that criminals use to hide drugs), a giant bull bar (which they advertise as being able to run over a person with no damage to the car), and is advertised as being completely bulletproof, with holes for you to shoot out of.

Sure, it could still be end with them being ruled in favour, but it's not quite as clear cut as you make it out with your example.

Re:That is like suing Ford (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457280)

Â"in the case of P2P, most of their use is for illegal things."

Not in Spain where most use cases are perfectly legal (no, sharing the last blockbuster is not illegal here).

Re:That is like suing Ford (2)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457496)

BitTorrent, a protocol invented by and marketed in a product by BitTorrent Inc. a perfectly legal US company .... who have obviously been shut down because their product only has illegal uses .... ?

God says (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456836)

C:\LoseThos\www.losethos.com\text\SWIFT.TXT

  of the
fleeces.

I stayed but two months with my wife and family, for my insatiable
desire of seeing foreign countries, would suffer me to continue no
longer. I left fifteen hundred pounds with my wife, and fixed her
in a good house at Redriff. My remaining stock I carried with me,
part in money and part in goods, in hopes to improve my fortunes.
My eldest uncle John had left me an estate in land, near Epping, of
about thirty pounds a-year; and I had a long lease of the Black
Bull in Fetter-La

Re:God says (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456918)

Back to /prog/ with you!

technology is neutral? (3, Insightful)

thephydes (727739) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456866)

Well, there's a thought! You mean it has the same neutrality as a car, a knife, a gun? Sorry, where have I been all this time - I've been lead to believe that technology is somehow evil because it "may" be used for illegal activities.

Re:technology is neutral? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456938)

I can also try to kill you with a fork or a spoon... Should they be considered as deadly weapons?
I don't think so...

Re:technology is neutral? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456988)

I can also try to kill you with a fork or a spoon... Should they be considered as deadly weapons?
I don't think so...

You might want to give Flight of the Conchords a listen before you make a hasty decision.... :)

Re:technology is neutral? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457044)

Or worse, a man armed with a banana.

Re:technology is neutral? (2)

517714 (762276) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457200)

It's the great homicidal maniac who comes after you with a load of loganberries that you have to watch out for.

Re:technology is neutral? (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457260)

"I'm gonna drink my tea, then I'm gonna kill you with this tin cup."

  - Riddick

Re:technology is neutral? (1)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457242)

Knives of any form are considered deadly weapons. This is why you are charged with "assault with a deadly weapon" if you harm someone with a knife or any object that can take someone's life. Hell, they took forks and knives away from us my sophomore year in high school because 2 girls stabbed each other with the plastic utensils at school.

Let's be honest, though... (4, Insightful)

trims (10010) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457068)

"Technology", in the sense of basic principles, is certainly neutral. However, specific assemblages of technology - from a car, to a gun, to a spoon, or a computer program, certainly aren't neutral. they have good points and bad points, which are determined by their intended or designed use, their practical or common use, and their potential or possible use. How we allow for the use of given assemblies of technologies depends entirely on how we view the social cost-benefit equation of the assembled tool.

Many people want to ban certain tools based on their potential usage, which is either irrational or irresponsible (or displays a hidden agenda unrelated to the merits of the tool).

However, it is equally dishonest to judge a tool merely on its proclaimed intended usage.

As a society, we must look at the whole picture, and hopefully, error on the side of permissiveness. That does not mean that we should be shy about outlawing things whose negative potential and common usage significantly outweigh any benefit that is intended or common usage provides. Like everything else, it's a balancing act.

In this case, the judge did just that, much to the *IAA (or Spanish equivalent's) disappointment.

-Erik

He also might be suing them back... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456888)

The Spanish press ( http://www.elpais.com/articulo/tecnologia/Pablo/Soto/industria/discografica/siempre/va/paso/detras/elpeputec/20111221elpeputec_3/Tes )also says this guy might be suing them back, because in the course of the lawsuit against him, these cartels applied some really dirty tactics against him (like hiring goons to follow him every day, etc.)

Old news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456896)

From TFA:

TRICIA FERNÁNDEZ DE LIS Madrid 19/12/2011 18:12 Actualizado: 20/12/2011

Why the delay? It's been all over the world twice over.

Pablo Soto is an asshole (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456900)

For those who sympathize with this shithead I will let you know that this guy is an arrogant asshole. His piece of shit p2p program is a joke that only runs on Windows and uses ads to make money. The idiot named it 'manolito', which is about the lamest name you can choose.

--
I'm an arrogant asshole [mailto] , so I work for Google now.

So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1, Offtopic)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456912)

This is rare good news! Just like guns in these Unites States. You see, guns were created for the sole purpose of inflicting harm and to some extent, kill (take lives), which is illegal.

So if some thug did precisely that, we cannot ban the possession of guns, can we?

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456974)

Can you name any other use for handguns. They are not used in hunting.

Personally, I am not against possession of guns. I don't think that allowing concealed carrying of weapons is such a great idea though.
And, if there were no guns, you wouldn't need one to begin with. This is a bit detached from reality, but I'm sure you get my point.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

wmbetts (1306001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457016)

Yes, getting stabbed is so much better. Regardless of what you ban people will be able to kill each other.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

peppepz (1311345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457226)

I kind of agree with you, but you'll admit that it's much easier to block a killer holding a knife than one having a gun. It's also harder to kill large amounts of people using a cold weapon.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (0)

wmbetts (1306001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457338)

It's pretty easy to kill someone with a knife and someone who is hell bent on killing you will have it in you before you even see it. Then again I might be giving to much credit to random thugs.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (2)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457050)

Your argument is based on the premise that there are no guns. There is a substantial difference between 'there are no guns' and 'guns are banned.' Attempts at prohibition often forget this difference (and most of the remainder is just a desire to keep certain behaviors out of sight regardless of the social ills this causes).

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457270)

Can you name any other use for handguns. They are not used in hunting.

Yes, they are.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (2)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457272)

I'm sure Field and Stream would agree link [fieldandstream.com]

I've used handguns for hunting many times. It can be a far more difficult challenge than hitting your target from 400 meters with a .308 or other rifle.

You could also list them as a deterrent to criminal activities

Most states have very strict laws about the carrying of a concealed weapon. This is why your standard weapons permit only allows you to own the weapon and a CCW (Carry Concealed Weapon) permit does. CCW's are highly regulated to such an extent that most average people with no criminal history can and will be denied them.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457310)

funnily enough, you can carry *unloaded* firearms in the UK - but they have to be concealed (this includes pistols in drop holsters). Rifles and shotguns can be carried through the middle of any city as long as they're in a case or slip Separate the barrel from the rest of the gun and it's just a piece of metal - as long as you can explain why you're walking through the middle of town holding sixteen inches of match-quality iron. Bows can be openly carried anywhere as long as they're not strung while in a public space (with the possible exception of the City of York on a Sunday where they can not only be strung but loaded, and then only if you're hunting Scots). Crossbows are right out.

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

wmbetts (1306001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457354)

When does Scot season start?

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457512)

sometime around September 1305

Re:So there are sensible judges across the pond! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457380)

I don't know what you are talking about. Most states have "Shall issue" laws whereby an adult with a clean record *cannot* be denied a carry permit. Some like Alaska, Vermont and Montana simply do away with a carry permit altogether and allow their law abiding citizens to carry openly or concealed without a permit. Others, like Washington where I live, issue a permit for $60 and a clean criminal record, and require no license for open carry.

I swear (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456948)

All music/movie execs need to be shot.

He wrote it to share files... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38456952)

What files, exactly? Seriously..

I mean, what sort of files did he actually *intend* for people to share with it when he wrote the software? In particular, what files did he think people might legally share with the software that couldn't have been obtained elsewhere? I'm betting that he knew full well what his software was going to be used for, and those that would use it that way were even his target audience.

But I mean, seriously... how much of a difference is there between deliberately conspiring to help somebody else break the law and then actually directly helping them?

Re:He wrote it to share files... (2)

Mathinker (909784) | more than 2 years ago | (#38456994)

But I mean, seriously... how much of a difference is there between deliberately conspiring to help somebody else break the law and then actually directly helping them?

Beats me. What difference is there between being "unlimited in length of term" and merely practically so because the length is constantly being enlarged at a rate which is faster or equal to the progression of time?

SCOTUS thought there was some kind of difference. [wikipedia.org] Unfortunately...

Re:He wrote it to share files... (5, Insightful)

peppepz (1311345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457170)

P2P helps people break the law in the very same way as FTP ad HTTP do. If you want to find real-world examples of P2P usage for legal purposes, just try to download some popular operating system image or a MMORPG installer, you'll probably find that they are also offered as P2P downloads because it results in less strain for the content owner's servers and potentially faster downloads for the content consumer.

Re:He wrote it to share files... (2)

sowth (748135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457182)

How about videos of cats doing funny things? Or dogs? or kids? Or art? Political speech? Open source software? There are plenty of examples of what people could legally publish. The big media cartels aren't the only ones who can produce content.

Re:He wrote it to share files... (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457328)

just be careful what you name it. I remember a case a few years back (can't find a link, sorry) where a teacher was whacked by the MPAA over an instructional video that just happened to have the same name as a (rather shitty) movie. Settled out of court, IIRC.

Re:He wrote it to share files... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457410)

Don't worry, they're working on fixing that problem.

Not sure if spanish (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457176)

>Blubster, MP2P y Piolet

Ok, that's programs. y is and.

Even that isn't exactly correct (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457302)

Blubster, Piolet, and Manolito P2P are all programs that operate on a network (confusingly) called MP2P.

if TFS is accurate... (2)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38457194)

...then anyone who uses P2P in any of its forms is automatically violating copyright? We're talking anything from a crossover cable between two computers to a university compute cluster to the INTERNET here, folks - the labels, to put it bluntly, are fucking delusional.

I PUT SPANISH OMLETTES IN MY ASS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38457482)

Anybody want some?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>