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!

KaZaa Ignores Court Order to Shut Down

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the now-that-takes-balls dept.

Music 365

An anonymous reader submitted that "The Amsterdam district court ruled two weeks ago that the KaZaa P2P program is acting unlawfully by making software available that allows users to download music files and must shut down. The court gave the company 14 days to do this or face $40,000 US a day in fines. KaZaa has chosen to ignore the shutdown order."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


This is not the way to make a profit. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737468)


WHy would it matter? (5, Insightful)

monkeyfamily (161555) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737469)

Even if the corp shut down, we'd all still be able to use the clients, right?

Re:WHy would it matter? (4, Insightful)

Hal-9001 (43188) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737625)

How is the parent comment redundant? This is the fundamental argument as to why networks like Napster and KaZaA should not be shut down: that corporations are not (or at least, should not) be accountable for the illegal behavior of users on a copyright-neutral network (at least before the SSSCA: IANAL and honestly have no idea what current copyright law has been bought^H^H^H^H^H^Hpushed through by RIAA/MPAA). Furthermore, neither the posted or linked stories discuss the fact that KaZaA is just one client on the Fasttrack network so, unlike Napster, KaZaA has no control over whether or not the network is available to clients. That begs the question: how are you going to enforce, either as a company or as a government, the behavior of 27 million people? (especially after Judge Patel's ridiculous 100% compliance stipulation)

Furthermore, why isn't the court going after Microsoft since Internet Explorer is the underlying layer of both KaZaA and Morpheus? Microsoft has about as much control as KaZaA over the Fasttrack network, and is even more culpable because their software is behind both of the major Fasttrack clients. If they want to pursue a ridiculous interpretation of the law, they might as well apply it consistently and not just to convenient targets.

Return Of The GoatSe!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737473)

* g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x *
g g
o / \ \ / \ o
a \ a
t `. : t
s` \ s
e \ / / \\\ -- \\ : e
x \ \/ --~~ ~-- \ x
* \ \-~ ~-\ *
g \ \ .--------.___\ g
o \ \// ((> \ o
a \ . C ) ((> / a
t /\ C )/ \ (> / t
s / /\ C) (> / \ s
e ( C__)\___/ // _/ / \ e
x \ \\// (/ x
* \ \) `---- --' *
g \ \ / / g
o / \ o
a / \ \ a
t / / \ t
s / / \/\/ s
e / e
x x
* g o a t s e x * g o a t s e x * g o a t e x *

Another order.... (3)

mikeage (119105) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737474)

did they also ignore the court order to remove the spyware? What? There was no such order... well.. there damn well should've been... I want to use KaZaa!

Yes, this is a joke, I know they need to make money somehow.

Go KaZa! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737476)

But, how are you going to ignore the seizure of assets?

first post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737484)

first post and i read the article bitches! you are all slow!

Easy solution (1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737487)

When the police show up to arrest the principals, all they have to do is flash a toothy grin and a packet of Mentos, the FreshMaker, and everything will be forgotten.

Hey, it works in Italy all the time.

Easier to download anthrax plans that way (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737491)

Sure glad they didn't shutdown. Cuz, this'll provoke the 'cyber treatys' across multiple nations to be used. Time for that thing to get thrown out of multiple courts. Or time to face up that we really do live in a facist Ashcroft world

Re:Easier to download anthrax plans that way (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737694)

We are living in a more restrictive world with each strangling treaty. Remember when the Red Chinese were the bad guys and the West were the good guys? Sentiment, from much of slashdot posts, follows the socialist philosophy that all inventions and performances belong the people and only the greedy enemies of the people act to restrict and profit from it (or something similar to that effect.)

The U.S. legal view of property is becoming the world view. Worse, business organizations such as RIAA and MPAA are driving these laws and treaties rather than the people the government allegedly represents.

KaZaa = spyware (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737493)

Delete it fast.

Good (3, Insightful)

ConsumedByTV (243497) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737495)

I say ignore all unjust laws.

Re:Good (0, Troll)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737517)

explain the "unjust-ness" of this law to me.

Take this out of the "Slashdot, info/music wants to be free" world and explain to me how this law is unjust.

If you made music, you'd want to get paid for your effort, too...

Free software/music is a good ideal to strive for, but its unpractical in practice. You gotta put food on the table.

Re:Good (4, Insightful)

telbij (465356) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737556)

True dat...

But I don't particularly support music companies because they regularly screw over artists. This is not justification for stealing music, just an interesting fact that no one is suing the recording industry for the theft they've done...

As far as justifying the music I steal :), that is easy, downloading music has nothign to do with what music I buy. If anything, it allows me to hear a wider variety of music and probably influences me to buy more CDs (cuz I don't buy it unless I know it's good, except for zappa).

Re:Good (1)

j_skillz (213723) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737581)

As true as that may be. Why should I pay the recording for nothing. The recording industry will get my money when they deliver me a product. If the recording industry somehow facilitated the music reaching me, I'd pay them, but for now. EAT SHIT RIAA!!!!

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737644)

You're not real bright, are you?

Re:Good (4, Insightful)

shepd (155729) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737617)

>Take this out of the "Slashdot, info/music wants to be free" world and explain to me how this law is unjust.

Ok, lets also take KaZaa out of the IT world and put it IRL then.

KaZaa is a music sharing network that depends on its users to ensure they only distribute free music. KaZaa is no more at fault for your personal failure to use your own judgement than the city is at fault when people use city roads to traffic drugs.

Using a road to commit crimes is no harder (actually its easier -- notice how much easier it is to break the speed limits) than using KaZaa to break copyright. And, normally, the law punishes the guilty (copyright violators) and upholds the rights of the innocent (the people building the infrastructure who never broke the law doing it).

>If you made music, you'd want to get paid for your effort, too...

I agree. That's why we must go after the perpetrators (people using the KaZaa network illicitly) and not the builders.

There you go -- no slashdot mumbo jumbo. Just 100% clear laymans terms. You should be able to tell that to just about anyone on the street and they should understand. :)

Re:Good (4, Insightful)

FortKnox (169099) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737638)

Your analogy works great if we were refering to the internet, not KaZaa. In your analogy, KaZaa would be the "Drug Store" on the street. They sell legal and illegal drugs.

They claim that they shouldn't be shut down cause they sell "legal" drugs. The illegal drugs they can't control.....

What would a cop do?
Control it, or we'll shut ya down.

Re:Good (2)

TheCarp (96830) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737682)

Not a drug store...a flea market.

Kazaa is not providing anything but a space for people to "distribute" stuff.... muchg like a flea market. Anyone can come, pay the fee (if there is a fee...usually is) and setup a table and sell stuff.

Should the flea market be liable if you are caught selling illicit drugs at the flea? Its not like you came by and said "Hey, I want a stand at your flea market so I can sell drugs", you just came up and paid the fee and got a space.

Same on KaZaa...they have know way to know what it is your distributing. They are just providing you space.

Or how about this.... This isn't the drug store arguing they should stay open, its the owner of the property the drug store rents its space from saying they should be allowed to keep their building open and to rent it out to someone.


Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737650)

Okay, so now we get into the real problem: Kazaa is unpoliceable.

If there were, for example, a road between Mexico and the US that had no checkpoints on it, it would be closed down. Similarly, Kazaa lets people exchange copyrighted material (a crime) and provides no means for police forces to catch them doing so. So it needs to be shut down.

Re:Good (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737653)

>If you made music, you'd want to get paid for your effort, too...

I agree. That's why we must go after the perpetrators (people using the KaZaa network illicitly) and not the builders.

Just to bring this back to the Slashdot level, let's not forget that if you're trying to remove the people responsible for the artists not getting paid, you're also going to have to go after the labels.

Re:Good (2)

ConsumedByTV (243497) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737639)

If you could only trade music on this and you knew it was all copywritten, perhaps it could be justice for those folks.

However, I thumb my nose at this pittiful attempt at stealing rights. Why should they close down?

After all you can do the same thing with bash, a raw socket, grep and a flat text file.
It just so happens that when someone makes anything easy it comes to the attention of shit heads like the RIAA to protect something that isnt even theirs.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737668)

Downloading illegal music doesn't effect the artists at all. Who it does effect is the Recording industry, which already has more money than it knows what to do with. So it figures, hey.. having more money than all the third world contries combined isn't enough, let's start suing so we can make more, and see how easy it is to sway the judicial system.

Re:Good (2)

Paladin128 (203968) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737530)

"I say ignore all unjust laws."

And get your ass thrown into jail? There are plenty of unjust laws in almost every civilized country. If you ignore them, however, the penalty is stiff.

I guess you could ignore the imprisonment as well, and get shot trying to escape.

Re:Good (5, Insightful)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737570)

I say ignore all unjust laws.

And get your ass thrown into jail?

Yes, that's exactly how it's supposed to work - just ask any civil rights marchers from the Deep South, for instance. Once the government realizes that they can't throw everyone in jail, the laws get changed. Or sometimes you get a new government.

Really, you're taking a gamble that enough other people will join your civil disobedience that the government can't ignore you.

Re:Good (4, Insightful)

dangermouse (2242) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737598)

Sometimes, that's a gamble that just doesn't make sense. Nobody's going to stage a download-in, publically load up their laptops with pirated music, and then go to jail en masse.

For one thing, most people wouldn't consider it worthwhile. This isn't about basic human rights, it's about consumer rights, and that's a whole different-- and less urgent-- ballgame.

Re:Good (2)

Paladin128 (203968) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737624)

  • Really, you're taking a gamble that enough other people will join your civil disobedience that the government can't ignore you.

That's one hell of a gamble in this case. The governments of the world cannot throw all the users of Kazaa in jail because they are anonymous. They can, however, jail those who made Kazaa, and use them to set examples of other programmers who would make P2P technologies.

Unfortunately, most of the public would not march for them. Most people are truly apathetic.

When I find a law is unjust, I contribute in a way I can: go to non-violent protests, write letters, sign campaigns, give cash to the EFF, NRA, Libertarian party, or whoever I think has the best chance to help fight it. I would not be willing to break the law unless it was a major force of tyrranny that threatened the lives of the people in my nation.

Re:Good (2)

PD (9577) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737606)

Henry David Thoreau was put into jail for not paying his taxes. Thoreau was big on the idea of civil disobedience as a way to address injustice in society. His friend Ralph Waldo Emerson visited him in jail and asked him "Henry, what are you doing in jail?"

Henry replied, "What are you doing OUT of jail?"

(Of course, if you live in a $27 house, even if it's on lakefront property, having the government take everything you own isn't a big deal.)

exactly OT (a bit) (-1)

n3r0.m4dski11z (447312) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737615)

this is my stance on the leagalization of Marijuana. If i smoke openly and never deny the fact that i smoke, and many others join with me then it cant stay illigal forever.

the challenge is being able to stand up for what you believe in and thats what i think these people are doing.

if everyone is breaking the law one of two things will happen...

1. the government will ignore the deviant behavior because it is in there best interest to make everyone into a criminal for the purposes of control (dont like the politics? oh whats this an 0z of hydro? come with me please).

2. It will be accepted by society and we will all be better off.

since im a pessimist i guess i more believe the possibility of No 1. coming true, but hey we can always hope.

I agree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737657)

I say let's take all this good GPL software floating around and use it however the hell we want. It sure would save my company a lot of money and me a lot of time if I could just roll some code from a couple of GPL projects into the product I'm currently working on. It's unjust that people should be able to hold a copyright on the code they distribute and set terms on how I can use and distribute it.

No centralized server. (3, Funny)

Godeke (32895) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737496)

Sounds like they made a bad choice in having the technology to shut down the prior versions of the software... they could have been the first test of truely "uncontrolled" software vs a court order.

Personally, I hope Freenet or one if it's same minded ilk (redundent caching with encrypted content) builds the technology to scale out as large as these kinds of systems have.

KaZaa -- what's in a name? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737497)

In russian (forgive me, it's been a looong time), "Ka" is a prefix meaning, roughly, "from". I foggily remember that "Za" is also a prefix for something or other...

Or, does this mean that they're "From Zaa"?

Re:KaZaa -- "ka" == "to" ? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737510)

or do I mean that "ka" is "to"... damn...

Re:KaZaa -- what's in a name? (-1, Offtopic)

Kenshin (43036) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737539)

But sometimes a name is just a name, and nothing more.

Re:KaZaa -- what's in a name? (0, Offtopic)

rebug (520669) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737603)

Like Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, sometimes a cigar is a phallus, and sometimes you want to bonk your mother.

Freud was a pretty messed up guy.

if you're interested (1, Offtopic)

CptnHarlock (136449) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737698)

Kazaa is an old word for cat. It's in some ancient european/german language. I can't find the reference but some good KH can surely make a nice google search. I guess they were reffering to napster in a way. Also Kazaa was formely Opennap for those of you who didn't know. Hmm.. or was it music city, I don't remeber anymore. anyway they begun as a part of the opennap network and when napster died - they florished. Whan they die someone else will take over ad infinitum.. or at least untill the RIAA gives up or we all are dead.. whichever comes first.. sorry for the fuzzyness I'm tired.. :) ..

Use some creativity. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737500)

God.. exact WORD FOR WORD post that was on geeknews [geeknews.net] yesterday. how LAME.

Umm... (5, Interesting)

dagoalieman (198402) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737501)

It seems to me this isn't the brightest of moves. They're trying to use it as negotiating power, yet ticking off a judge is a really bad idea- keep in mind the judge (at least in the US) gets the final approval on any deal that's worked out during a case.

Also, what do they think this will gain them? While I don't like the DMCAA et al, I think we can all agree there are flat out illegal pirates out there amongst the legal users. Because of this, they're an accomplist to theft/copyright infringement/whatever you want to call it. Plus whatever other legal teeth those provide for sinking into the owners of KaZaa.

Sigh. If the music industry would just quit fighting, start providing MP3 format cds with a couple of extra songs/what have you, I bet they'd find that their piracy issues would go down more than they expect. I won't even try to argue financial benefit, since it's no one really seems to know (RIAA: OH, we lost MONEY! Stores: NO, you sold more! People: Hey, we're getting f*cked!)

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737549)

You're argument is riddled with holes. I won't even begin to show all the reasons why. And yes, I think the DMCA is a circumvention device itself to the original intent of copyright laws too.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737562)

While I don't like the DMCAA et al, I think we can all agree there are flat out illegal pirates out there amongst the legal users. Because of this, they're an accomplist to theft/copyright infringement/whatever you want to call it
So, similarly, gun manufacturers must be liable for crimes committed with their products?

Vehicle manufacturers too?

I think not.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737709)

There is a difference. KaZaa and Napster distribute a product that is specifically designed for illegal trading of copyrighted works, and by their own admission they encourage people to use it for music trading to give them some clout in negotiating with record companies. It's a freely acknowledged part of their business plan.

Last I checked, car and gun manufacturers don't design products specifically intended for breaking the law, and the vast majority of car & gun owners don't use their products to break the law (speed limits excepted). Also, car & gun manufacturers definately do not openly encourage illegal uses of their products, nor did they build their business plans around getting people to do it.

Re:Umm... (5, Interesting)

dangermouse (2242) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737580)

So, the relevance of this post to yours is hanging by a thread, but this is more or less on the subject of the RIAA fighting a good thing because they're idiots.

Yesterday morning, as I was sitting in traffic on 680 wishing I'd attached an outboard motor to my car, I got to hear an interview with Huey Lewis on a local radio talk show.

The interviewer asked Huey what he thought of the whole "downloading thing", and his answer was that it was "complicated", but that his son downloads stuff all the time (that's hearsay, you Feds, you leave Huey's kid alone!) and when he finds something he likes he buys the album. So Huey didn't really have a problem with it.

When the interviewer mentioned that he himself downloads a fair bit of music, but doesn't buy many CDs, Huey pointed out that people their age just never bought (or sold) much music anyway, relatively speaking... it's far and away a kids' market.

Re:Umm... (1)

visualight (468005) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737583)

What the "industry" doesn't seem to realize is that working with services like kazaa is the only way they can survive. The day will come when even the cd's and dvd's that we buy in stores will be electronically distributed, with the stores stamping/burning and printing the downloaded files. With that kind of distribution who needs Warner Bros., etc.?

The artists are already organizing, it's only a matter of time before they just cut the corporations out of the picture.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, just because there are people trading copyrighted material doesn't mean the whole service should be shut down. It's my opinion (and my perception is certainly more accurate than any judges - to me) that since services like kazaa allow for unknowns to produce and distribute their own material, shutting them down is cause for a lawsuit by the users. I think some people tried that with napster, but I don't recall the outcome.

Re:Umm... (5, Informative)

jilles (20976) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737620)

There have been a few recent major screw ups at the dutch OM (the dutch district attorney). Consequently, they'll be reluctant to take on a high profile case that has a good chance of blowing up in their face. Legally speaking, Kazaa is not doing anything wrong (at least, that would be hard to prove). The fact that the most useful application of their software is trading warez, divx and mp3 is irrelevant since they do not actually engage in the transactions themselves (unlike napster).

Basically what Kazaa said is that they have no way to comply with what the dutch judge told them to do (namely to put an end to the illegal exchange of the above mentioned stuff using Kazaa). It is simply not feasible since the transactions are fully peer to peer. The searches nor the downloads go through a central server.

In any case, Limewire 2.0 is available now and has some new features that should enhance scalability of the gnutella network greatly. Gnutella is open source and has no dependencies on a login server (unlike Kazaa) eliminating the last link to a central server. If Kazaa is going to lose their case it will be because of the logins.

Re:Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737661)

"Because of this, they're an accomplist to theft/copyright infringement/whatever..."

So the telephone company is an accomplice since they provided the phone lines where millions of users trade illegal goods every day. And the ISP is an accomplice for not policing their network where the illegal goods are traded. And the computer manufacturers are an accomplice for providing the computers where the illegal goods are traded. And the news media is an accomplice for seeding the minds of impressionable traders of the illegal goods.

Why does this sound just like the argument that has been overruled time and time again that the gun manufacturer cannot be held liable for the actions of the user?

History repeats itself (5, Insightful)

Squeezer (132342) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737508)

This sort of reminds me when I believe it was Andrew Jackson was president and the Supreme Court made a ruling he didn't like, and he said something to the effect of "The Court has made their ruling, now let them enforce it". Because the Supreme Court only has judicial powers, all they can do is decide the outcome of the case, but they have no enforcement powers, and at the time, Andrew Jackson had the power and popularity to enforce his ideas instead of those of the court.

That sort of reminds me of what Kazaa is doing, to the effect of "The Dutch court made their decision, now lets see them try to enforce shutting us down."

Re:History repeats itself (1, Troll)

dangermouse (2242) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737547)

Um, this is kinda sorta completely different in that KaZaa isn't the executive branch of a damned thing, and the court could most certainly have its order enforced on them.

KaZaa may be lucky enough to wiggle out of this one because of the prior court order. This is hardly them staring down The Man.

it's not about KaZaA (3, Interesting)

prophecyvi (249996) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737509)

There may be more to this than just the usual recording-industry-heavy-handedness. After all, KaZaA (or however it's capitalized) isn't nearly as big as Napster was - Napster was the one choice, most mp3-swapping was centralized around it. Now with WinMX, AudioGalaxy etc., not to mention the OpenNap servers, the fragmentation means no one service will dominate. That makes the pursuit of KaZaA suspicious to me. It seems the technology behind KaZaA, which also runs MusicCity, Morpheus etc. is what's under attack.

Bear in mind that Napster has targeted March as their return date, complete with pay-as-you-go music and under the boot of RIAA et al. Why would you go pay on Napster if you could jump on other networks and get it for free?

Does the client still work? (1)

XRayX (325543) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737514)

As far as I know FastTrack is (in theory) completely decentralized, but with the last client version (1.33), they introduced keys, you need to download from a master server in order to search, download etc.. This makes the system as atackable as napster was. The Time of OpenFT is coming...

Refusing, but with a reason (5, Insightful)

jspey (183976) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737515)

The reason they aren't shutting down isn't just because they want to be rebels or something. While KaZaa does state that there's nothing they can do now that their software's out there and being used, they say they're not shutting down in order to comply with a different court order. In a different case with Buma/Stemra (the Dutch licensing body that's also suing them to shut down), KaZaa won an injunction forcing Buma/Stemra to continue to negotiate with them about a streaming-on-demand service. KaZaa says that if their current sevice isn't up and running, they can't negotiate well with Buma/Stemra.

I'm personally of the same opinion as the author of the article. I think that as soon as they get shut down, they go to a much weaker position to negotiate from. Why negotiate with KaZaa to make money fromthe music they're distributing when they aren't distributing music anymore?

Mr. Spey

Re:Refusing, but with a reason (2)

tcd004 (134130) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737585)

But the article notes that KaZaa has demonstrated in the past that they have the ability to disable thier own software remotely. Ooops.


Re:Refusing, but with a reason (2)

jspey (183976) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737629)

But the article notes that KaZaa has demonstrated in the past that they have the ability to disable thier own software remotely. Ooops.

This is why I think they're trying out a different argument. They can always fall back to, "we can't do it", but the other court case gives them a different option.

Mr. Spey

Not civil disobedience (4, Redundant)

SumDeusExMachina (318037) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737516)

As you can tell by reading the article [mp3newswire.net], and as you certainly wouldn't be led to believe by reading CmdrTaco's summary, they are refusing to shut down in order to comply with a previous court order. This is more a case of conflicting orders in the judicial system than anything else.

Damn the man!! (1, Offtopic)

Bonker (243350) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737519)


One wonders what's going to happen when the legion of black-robed LEO ninjas descend en masse to phsyically shut down Kazaa, however.

Actually, all it would take is a court order and a guy with a pair of diagonal cutters at their backbone connection's origin.

Still, it's nice to see that even companies are beginning to realized how screwed and skewed copyright law is.

Re:Damn the man!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737578)

Read the article dimwit. There is another conflicting court case that is preventing them from following the judge's order. They aren't just thumbing their nose at the court.

For the "too lazy to click links" crowd: (3, Redundant)

Xzzy (111297) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737520)

They're not really ignoring the order, as presented in the news post.

More like they're trying to squirm out of the deal by either claiming they can't shut it down (being de-centralized and all that), or that doing so would violate previous court orders. They're not ignoring by any means, they're attempting to squirm.

Redundant, probably, but it's posted with the intent of staving off some of the "woohoo stick it to the man!" posts.

Re:For the "too lazy to click links" crowd: (2)

alexjohns (53323) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737669)

it's posted with the intent of staving off some of the "woohoo stick it to the man!" posts.
Woohoo!!! Stick it to the man!!

Whatever else you may think about why they're doing this, it still takes balls to ignore a court order. Imagine a cop walking up to you and telling you to get out of the car. You refuse on grounds that it's a free country and you aren't doing anything wrong. That takes balls. A little stupidity too, unless you're a really good lawyer, really rich, or both.

So yeah, stick it to the man. Don't you just love it when the underdog takes on the Man. Remember back, long ago, around 1995 or so, when Netscape could do no wrong? Man, those were some cool times. FTPing Mosaic. Then switching to Netscape. Laughing at IE 2.0. Those were the days.

What were we talking about? Can I get another hit?

What are they thinking? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737531)

If you are going to try to do the same thing as Napster, you can expect to receive the same fate as Napster. What, did they think no one would notice or care? The only logical choice for this situation is to go de-centralized, open-source like Gnutella and forget about trying to make money from providing piracy software.

There Is No Off Switch This Time!!! (1)

cybrpnk (94636) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737537)

As noted in this [oreillynet.com] editorial over at O'Reilley, how can you pull the plug on something that is decentralized? This is why people went to Kazaa and other P2P solutions after overly-centralized plump target Napster got emasculated. Long live P2P!!! Elvis has left the building!!!

bah (2, Flamebait)

Quasar1999 (520073) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737541)

Crap, pure crap! We have people in the US who openly admit to breaking the DMCA rules on national TV (Patrick Norton on TechTV), and nothing happens, yet they try and make an example of a foreign based company that is simply running a p2p network server, it's not their fault everyone uses it to pirate... Hell, I'm amazed they don't try and shutdown ISPs and the entire Internet, afterall the p2p networks use the net don't they? sheesh...

Re:bah (2)

Levine (22596) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737627)

What's interesting about The Screen Savers is that almost on a daily basis, the entire cast of the show admits to/talks about breaking the DMCA. How the producers allow this to happen is beyond me, and how the government hasn't picked up on it yet is even further beyond me.

You'd think they would tone it down or something, considering that they are /national television/, but no:

"Why, Patrick, doesn't that violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?"

"Yes, Leo, but I won't tell anyone if you won't!"


Actually Surprising? (1)

eAndroid (71215) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737545)

How seriously does the Amsterdam legal system treat violations like this? Without sounding completely ignorant I wonder because Amsterdam does have several other laws in place that are bent daily, openly in public.

Perhaps ignoring court orders is a common part of legal negotiations? I'm sure there are more than enough Amsterdam-based Slashdot readers that know.

And please forgive me if this is at all stupid - respond with comments, not moderation.

Re:Actually Surprising? (1)

cxvx (525894) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737693)

There isn't such a thing as the "Amsterdam Legal system".

Amsterdam is just a city in the Netherlands (aka Holland).
There are city laws, but I doubt there's anything in there about P2P's :)

Re:Actually Surprising? (3, Informative)

Gorgonzola (24839) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737712)

First of all I'd like to point out that Amsterdam is just a bloody city in the Netherlands, not a jurisdiction on its own. On the point of laws that are not enforced in the Netherlands, there is a distinction between public and private law in the so called civil law countries. Public law governs the relations between government and the citizens, private law governs the relations between citizens. Going after a citizen who has violated a regulation that is part of public law, for example the penal law on substances of abuse, is a typical governmental task. Here a peculiar principle kicks in. Penal laws that give the government the right to prosecute someone tend not to oblige the government to do so. Hence the government can decide to dedicate scarce law enforcement resources to prosecuting criminals they deem more harming to society, e.g. people mugging old ladies, than some pothead peacefully smoking his gear. Since copyright law is mostly private law, principles such as this do not apply at all. Basically copyright holders trying to get a court order in order to prevent their intellectual property from being infringed is an entirely different kettle of fish.

last decision by judge (2)

radja (58949) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737557)

the judge has ordered BUMA/STEMRA (dutch equivalent to RIAA) to resume the talks that were broken off because of the RIAA lawsuit. Looks like they'll get a licence for streaming only at the moment, but while talks are ongoing, Kazaa does not have to close.


Damn. Another one. (0, Offtopic)

Qwerpafw (315600) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737559)

It really ticks me off every time courts crack down on music sharing. Heck, what some people use it for may be illegal (okay, most people) but the programs have legitamate uses.

I, for one, used a P2P program some time ago to get all my LP songs as MP3s... much much cheaper than buying a new turntable, software, etc...

The DMCA is just stupid. That a company (or a person, like Dmitri Skylakarov) can be sued because someone uses their product or research in illegal ways is just plain anal.

For an interesting comparison, take guns and cars. Guns are often used illegally, yet that is not their only use... nobody persecutes gun manufacturers ("Guns dont kill people... people do") Cars also kill people all the time or are used to ccommit crimes all the time. Yet we dont sue Ford for hit-and-run incidents.

Lets say someone bought a car... and a gun. Then they pulled up in front of a bank, and used these two pieces of equipment to ROB THE BANK!!!!! Would we sue Ford, inc, and Colt, inc?? No! we would go after the culprits, and let the manufacterers get away, because ITS NOT THEIR FAULT.

The DMCA is just stupid, because it takes the opposite approach.
True, their is a differecnce b/w cars and P2P software... you own your car. the manufacturer doesnt have to worry about you. with P2P software, you only own a licence... like if enterprise-rent-a-car owned the bank robbery vehicle. Since the company still owns the software, they can be obliged to makee sure that its not used in illegal ways... i just still think its unfair.

Bah. We all know, deep down, that the reason the DMCA et ect exists is because of lobbying $$ spent on the part of the RIAA and their equivalent for video...

Re:Damn. Another one. (2, Informative)

sulli (195030) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737596)

The DMCA is just stupid.

It is, that's correct. However, this case is in Holland, and the DMCA is a US law, so your comment isn't as relevant as you think.

Re:Damn. Another one. (1)

senine (513587) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737651)

You know, If I were to rob a bank with a rented car, the people STILL wouldnt shut down the rental company.


Evolving to a what? (2)

mESSDan (302670) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737584)

With its back to the wall, KaZaa looks like it may evolve into a streaming music service.
Does this sound totally and incredibly NOT what KaZaa is now? I mean, now, you can share just about any kind of file you want, and I don't see where streaming comes into play at all. What the hell kind of business plan is this?

"We developed this great piece of P2P software, but now that we're being sued, fuck that and lets stream some music!"

Of course, I haven't been to sleep in a good while, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

Consumer vs Corporate Morality (3, Interesting)

darkov (261309) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737587)

I think the important point to remember here is that the record companies are not playing fair. They do not want to licence their products for sale on the internet. Although it may not be illegal, or rather someone has not caught them out according to the law yet, they are basically trying to control the market.

It's up to us to put pressure on them to licence their music. A good way to do that is to swap MP3s. You might call it theft, but many of these companies are not exactly saints and in any David vs Goliath battles, dirty tricks are to go. in there arrogance, record companies forget that they only exist becuase of us, the consumers. By acting together we remind them of that fact.

Re:Consumer vs Corporate Morality (1)

sheldon (2322) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737602)

"They do not want to licence their products for sale on the internet."

No, they just don't want to give their product away for free. They're perfectly willing to sell on the internet, but they don't want to be in a position where they only see 1 sale for every 1,000 people listening.

"It's up to us to put pressure on them to licence their music. "

But they want to license their music.

"A good way to do that is to swap MP3s. "

A good way to convince BMW to sell cars for $100 is to steal them?

Your post is what we in the industry call clueless.

Re:Consumer vs Corporate Morality (1)

visualight (468005) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737691)

"They do not want to licence their products for sale on the internet."

No, they just don't want to give their product away for free. They're perfectly willing to sell on the internet, but they don't want to be in a position where they only see 1 sale for every 1,000 people listening.

Without quoting your entire troll, let me respond to the whole thing.

The CHC (copyright holding corporations) do not want to license anything. They want to be the only ones to provide onlines sales of music and movies. Your parent thinks this is wrong and if it is, then it is up to "us" to put on the pressure or accept it.

And as far as BMW's go, if I found out that it cost BMW about 50 bucks to deliver a car to the dealer but was selling it for 45,000 dollars, I would feel justified in stealing it.

Let's get things straight (5, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737593)

KaZaa isn't really what it claims to be. They're superficially like Napster or Freenet, but that's just pretense. Or if it's not pretense, then the people running it are unbelievably stupid.

A system like this only works if all the users keep their P2P agents running 24/7, so that others can access their shared files. But when the agent is running, you get a stream of annoying popups. So people only run they agent when there's something to download. So they boast a huge database of stuff that's mostly unavailable.

Re:Let's get things straight (2)

Reziac (43301) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737635)

If you read the Kazaa bug reports forum even semi-regularly, it will become clear that this guy doesn't give a flip how bad his software or service are, so long as he makes money at it. So regardless of the ethical or legal issues, his current position doesn't surprise me.

Perfect timing... (0)

Linuxthess (529239) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737612)

For the introduction of Limewire 2.0 [limewire.com]. This new version of the popular Gnutella client has the same feature which made the FastTrack network awesome- "Swarm downloading" which allows you to utilize your bandwidth better, and download a file from multiple users at once.

What next? (2, Redundant)

icemind (191210) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737621)

"The Amsterdam district court ruled two weeks ago that the KaZaa P2P program is acting unlawfully by making software available that allows users to download music files and must shut down."

So next up are they going to order Washington University to shut down for making wu-ftpd available? That's software that lets people download music files too.

- icemind

What? Why? (3, Insightful)

Pyrosz (469177) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737628)

Why is some software targeted when other software is not? Take for example KaZaa, they make a program that allows you to share information and files. Is this not the same as having a web server and a browser? Or something like ICQ or any messanger service that lets you send/recv files? Wouldn't using an Internet browser to download the KaZaa software be illegal if the KaZaa software is deamed illegal? Therefore all Internet browsers are the cause of all piracy on the internet? So many questions, so much bs.

Usenet anyone? (1, Insightful)

dimer0 (461593) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737632)

Is usenet that unusable that people rely on services like this? I'm just curious why there's a need for all these P2P applications to trade files, when the biggest file-trading network has been in existance for a very long time..

Oh crap! Maybe I shouldn't have posted this! I've let the secret out. (Locks doors, bars windows..)

Re:Usenet anyone? (3, Funny)

WildBeast (189336) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737656)

P2P is easier for newbies, it's more familiar. But not to worry, even newbies will do whatever is needed to get what they want. MP3's are everywhere and their's nothing that can stop it.

Once the toothpaste is out, it's hard to get it back in.

My Defense of Kazaa (4, Insightful)

TeleoMan (529859) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737647)

Alright, I'm tired of hearing the same old arguement over and over again, so here's the reasons I use Kazaa now instead of buying CDs (I own several hundred CDs btw).

First, I'm into trance, a form of eletronic music, that I can't seem to buy ANYWHERE, not even online. Sure I can find some albums every once and awhile, but most of the time the stores have never heard of what I'm looking for, can't get it, or it will take weeks to get, etc...

Second, in the electronic music spectrum, there's alot of stuff I don't like. I used to try buying CDs, then find out they were junk. Waste of money. Sure, I'd buy CDs of artists I liked that I could actually get ahold of, but I'm listening to alot of bootlegs and things from Europe that can't be purchased, at least in the USA...

Third, I'm poor. Now more than ever, it's difficult being a college student. I couldn't buy albums at all (maybe a couple a year) if I even wanted to. I'm sure alot of other people feel the same way. Most of the people who are pirating on Kazaa (including me) I bet would not buy the album of the person they were pirating anyway, either because they don't like it that much, it's just something novelty they wanted, or they're too poor to go out and actually buy it. You can argue then that the person should not have that recording, but the artist still is not losing money anyways and perhaps smaller ones gain from sharing their music to people who would have never heard it otherwise.

Fourth, everywhere I look, record sales are booming. They're having no problems pushing CDs, even though they're generally $3 - $5 more than 5 - 10 years ago when I was in my teen popular artist CD buying phase.

The only thing I can find in my local record stores are asshole employees, limited selection (plenty of the MTV crap), and high prices. I could buy online, but it's more of the same except the salesperson is taken out and replaced by phony reviews.

I'm glad Kazaa exists, it has opened me up to music I would not have found otherwise and allows me to get my hands on things I wouldn't be able to get my hands on.

What really happened... (5, Funny)

bluenirve (470125) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737662)

KaZaa "We can not shut down because our product because people cannect to each other, not a server."
Reporter "You have shut down earlier clients..."
KaZaa "But in the newest client, it is impossible to do so..."
Reporter "If it is run by clients connecting to clients, why do you need to be around."
KaZaa "Because the software won't work otherwise."
Reporter "For some reason, this seems like what Microsoft would do..."

Fair Use of Kazaa (2, Insightful)

TeleoMan (529859) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737665)

OK, for once and for all: The fair use law says that I can make copies of a Metallica CD I buy for my own personal use. An example being I copy onto a tape because I only have a tape player in my car. This is legal. Along the same lines, do you think it's wrong for me to download that same Metallica CD that I have purchased, using Kazaa to my MP3 player so I can take it to class? It's true that if I were technically savy, I could convert all of the CD myself to MP3's, but logically is this not a legal use of Kazaa, so that 100,000 people don't have to waste time and effort doing this conversion when it's already been done?

- I like pudding.

Let's sue everybody that shares files (5, Funny)

Webmoth (75878) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737675)

Hmm. They are suing KaZaa because they make software that allows file sharing over the internet.

Are RIAA/MPAA et al going to sue Microsoft, too? After all, Microsoft makes software that allows file sharing [slashdot.org] over the internet with no content control.

Shoot, even WITHOUT all the unintended security holes, it's pretty easy to set up a web server with all your mp3's and get a search engine to list them all.

Morpheus? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737680)

I'm aware that the file-share protocol is shared by both Kazaa users and Morpheus users.

How does this court order affect Morpheus peoples?

Sharing is not a violation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737683)

Sharing is not a violation under the terms of Fair Use previously decided. It seems to me that the vilation of the law is in the DMCA itself, and not in the use of software. Napster promised to fight, woke up and saw what appeared to be a reality that would not allow them to continue until they sold out. I expect KaZaa to do the same. It's not about anyone selling a license, it's about our RIGHT to communicate and share information (of all types).

"The World Corperate Government would exterminate us all in the blink of an eye, if it could make a profit from it" --- Daniel Loon

Kazaa: It's all been said before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737684)

"Many artists enjoy the publicity the recieve by having their songs traded on Kazaa."

Many artists are also suing Kazaa and anyone else who either trades, or facilitates the trading of illegal mp3s.

"CDs cost too much! Why should I pay them $12-$18 when CDs are so cheap?"

If you think CDs are too expensive, don't buy them and don't listen to the music. Find cheap local labels, or get music from independent sources like mp3.com Don't download the music for free then complain that it's "too expensive".

"If the artists are in it for the art, they should welcome mp3 trading."

Try living off of "art". Walk into a supermarket and try to trade your mp3 collection for a loaf of bread. Art is nice, but money is a necessity. And do you really think that Metallica or [insert current teenage pop star] are doing music for "art"?

"All intellectual property should be free"

If this were true, most music wouldn't exist. Despite what your favorite left-wing writers might think, financial rewards still have an attraction for most people.

"Anti-Kazaa 'advocates' want to destroy free music!"

No, many just think that the attitude of many Kazaa users is hypocritical and wrong. You don't deserve everything for free, no matter what Momma Slashdot says.

"Kazaa introduces a whole new paradigm of free information exchange which artists need to understand."

Perhaps *you* need to "understand" the current paradigm better. Most artists don't offer mp3s for sale. That is no excuse to download them illegaly. You can live without the new Britney Spears album. Trust me.

"You must work for the RIAA!"

Good parrot. Have a cracker.

Re:Kazaa: It's all been said before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2737706)


my oh my.... (1)

SGDarkKnight (253157) | more than 12 years ago | (#2737707)

I can see myself getting flammed for this but ah well...this is going to be napster all over again, I'm guessing we will be seeing the news about it on /. for the next year or so easy. I can't wait for the lawyers to go after IRC channels next, after all, that is the best place to find anything and everything you ever wanted. Wether it be music, programs, postage stamps or plutonium.

I still say they should simply move or sell thier service to a company in some other country where the DMCAA or the RIAA have no legal handholds on the way music is distributed. Then what would they do, cry and complain that they should conform to the way north america and europe handle these situations. *end rant*
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