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!

'Jane Doe' Lawyer Glenn Peterson Talks With GrepLaw

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the sue-you-sue-anybody dept.

The Courts 227

scubacuda writes "Glenn Peterson, attorney at McDonough Holland & Allen, represents 'Jane Doe,' one of the first to fight the constitutionality of recent RIAA subpoenas. In this GrepLaw interview, Glenn gives his thoughts on recent RIAA strong arm tactics, Matt Openheim's assertion that Jane Doe's arguments have 'already been addressed by a federal judge,' and the danger of giving subpoena power to anyone pretending to have a copyright claim."

cancel ×

227 comments

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

Support the Protest Against Patents... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803482)

It's ironic that slashdot would run a story about linux today at all. But what really surprises me is that Slashdot would continue operation today, even though they allegedly support the Online Demonstration Against Software Patents [ffii.org] [ffii.org].

I would urge the /. staff to immediately shut down operations and support the
demonstration, unless they really don't care about open-source software at all.

Re:Support the Protest Against Patents... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803541)

Perhaps you did not realize that we are not longer an autonomous entity - we are a business unit of VA Software. In order to survive as such, we must define and meet certain business goals. The most important goal is ad click-through rate. Since shutting down the site would almost guarantee we would miss this business goal, we not able to shutdown the site. Sorry if this bothers you but this is how business works.

-CmdrTaco

Re:Support the Protest Against Patents... (-1, Offtopic)

Roofus (15591) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803553)

Looks like Slashdot cancelled your account too, eh?

Re:Support the Protest Against Patents... (-1, Offtopic)

usotsuki (530037) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803542)

What would you expect from an American site?

-uso.

Re:Support the Protest Against Patents... (-1, Offtopic)

4lex (648184) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803641)

Yes it is Offtopic and yes it is Redundant, but it has to be said again and again, until we get some satisfactory explanation from the editors. Slashdot could not possibly survive without free software. Free software can be in serious problems because of software patents. A possitive move in Europe (against software patents) could change some things in U.S., and the law we are protesting again is a very negative move. Why not *do* something?

Re:Support the Protest Against Patents... (0)

Sampizcat (669770) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803731)

IANAL... I could be wrong,but don't patents cover processes? What specific processes are there in linux that could be covered?

If someone within the linux community did get sued because they infringed somebody's patent, isn't there a good chance that they could just declare the patent void? In aus, to get a patent the process you are patenting must "not be secretly in use" as well as not in the general knowledge (to someone who works in that specific area). Given that, don't companies also have to make reasonable effort to enforce their patents, so chances are if they DID have the patents long before this stuff was put into linux, wouldn't they lose their rights to the patent due to the fact that they didn't enforce it until this point?

Just my 2 cents...

Of couse... (-1)

Sir Haxalot (693401) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803489)

the RIAA's tactics are illegal, we all know that.

So is Bush's presidency... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803507)

Dubya's resume:
  • I attacked and took over two countries.
  • I spent the US surplus and bankrupted the Treasury.
  • I shattered the record for biggest annual deficit in history.
  • I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
  • I set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
  • I am the first president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
  • I am the first president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
  • In my first year in office Iset the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
  • After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, Ipresided over the worst security failure in US history.
  • I set the record for most campaign fundraising trips by any president in US history.
  • In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs.
  • I cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any other president in US history.
  • I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.
  • I appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
  • I set the record for the fewest press conferences of any president since the advent of TV.
  • I signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any other president in US history.
  • I presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
  • I presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
  • I cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
  • I set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind
  • I dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
  • I 've made my presidency the most secretive and unaccountable of any in US history.
  • Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (The 'poorest' multimillionaire, Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.)
  • I am the first president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt.
  • I presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud in any market in any country in the history of the world.
  • I am the first president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation, and Idid so against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
  • I have created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.
  • I set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any other president in US history.
  • I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Human Rights Commission.
  • I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Elections Monitoring Board.
  • I removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of Congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.
  • I rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.
  • I withdrew from the World Court of Law.
  • I refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.
  • I am the first president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors access during the 2002 US elections.
  • I am the all-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.
  • The biggest lifetime contributor to my campaign, who is also one of my best friends, presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).
  • I spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.
  • I am the first president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied, saying the enemy had the code to Air Force1).
  • I am the first US president to establish a secret shadow government.
  • I took the world's sympathy for the US after 9-11, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).
  • I am the first US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
  • I am the first US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than by their immediate neighbor, North Korea.
  • I changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
  • I set the all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling their huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.
  • I have removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.
  • In a little over two years I have created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided that the US has been since the civil war.
  • I entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down, record unemployment being the most recent achievement.
Records and References
  • I have at least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas drug conviction has been erased and is not available).
  • I was AWOL from the National Guard and deserted the military during a time of war.
  • I refuse to take a drug test or even answer any questions about drug use.
  • All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my father's library, sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
  • All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
  • All minutes of meetings of any public corporation for which Iserved on the board are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
  • Any records or minutes from meetings I(or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.

Re:So is Bush's presidency... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803543)

I was with you on the first item, then I read the second item, and I realized you are a complete moron.

There was no budget surplus. Both the Democrats and the Republicans lied about it. Do you remember when Clinton said that the US was projected to be debt free by something like 2010? This would only have been true if the US kept taxing its citizens at the same rate and cut current spending down to a tenth of its current size.

Another Democratic Party troll who doesn't realize the danger of his actions.

How about attacking Bush for continuing the lie that there had been a surplus in the first place? At least that would have been a true argument against him, you stupid troll.

Re:So is Bush's presidency... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803642)

yeah, he is the moron. Try reading your post again, you fucking loon.

Re:Of couse..., but it was Clinton (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803521)

Yes, but it was Tricky Dicky Clinton who signed the DMCA into law.

Re:Of couse... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803614)

The copyright law is about a deal between the State, We The People, and the corporate scums that needs a carrot.
Yeah of course it's also about protecting the artists from having their art being hijacked by the corporate scums, but you know what? it's happening anyway, copyright or not, justa that they manage to do it legaly, but im not taking about that.

So, get back to our carrots.
It's a social contract between all of us the fine people of the third word of the western civilisation.
We we don't respect the copyright law, there's 2 possibilities.
1. intelectual feudalism, all your IP are belong to the blue-blood chosen ones
2. the music industry gets destroyed (a very good thing, by the way).
3. a big molasse of litige, legality, and bullshit, where the fantasms are the points of law, whatever, nevermind.

OT, Flame, Troll, etc. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803946)

"The copyright law is about a deal between the State, We The People, and the corporate scums that needs a carrot. Yeah of course it's also about protecting the artists from having their art being hijacked by the corporate scums, but you know what? it's happening anyway, copyright or not, justa that they manage to do it legaly, but im not taking about that.

So, get back to our carrots. It's a social contract between all of us the fine people of the third word of the western civilisation. We we don't respect the copyright law, there's 2 possibilities.

1. intelectual feudalism, all your IP are belong to the blue-blood chosen ones 2. the music industry gets destroyed (a very good thing, by the way).

3. a big molasse of litige, legality, and bullshit, where the fantasms are the points of law, whatever, nevermind."-AC

Damn, run that shit through a spell check before posting and save me a headache. Who the hell modded that drivel up...

SCO is controlled by the Mormon Churcn! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803502)

SCO is controlled by the Mormon Church!

Saints and Satyrs, go your way.
Youths and Maidens: Let us pray.

gee (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803503)

Sure is taking awhile for those on-topic posts...

Goddamn legal mumbo-jumbo.

yeah (-1, Offtopic)

fodi (452415) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803506)

I post! you read it!

Re:yeah (-1, Offtopic)

fodi (452415) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803550)

Come on. Give me another one of your mod points. Continue modding me down and I will become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.

SCO: The GNAA-Nigerian connection (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803510)

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am Mr. Darl McBride currently serving as the president and chief executive officer of the SCO Group, formerly known as Caldera Systems International, in Lindon, Utah, United States of America. I know this letter might surprise you because we have had no previous communications or business dealings before now.

My associates have recently made claim to computer softwares worth an estimated $1 billion U.S. dollars. I am writing to you in confidence because we urgently require your assistance to obtain these funds.

In the early 1970s the American Telephone and Telegraph corporation developed at great expense the computer operating system software known as UNIX. Unfortunately the laws of my country prohibited them from selling these softwares and so their valuable source codes remained privately held. Under a special arrangement some programmers from the California University of Berkeley did add more codes to this operating system, increasing its value, but not in any way to dilute or disparage our full and rightful ownership of these codes, despite any agreement between American Telephone and Telegraph and the California University of Berkeley, which agreement we deny and disavow.

In the year 1984 a change of regime in my country allowed the American Telephone and Telegraph corporation to make profits from these softwares. In the year 1990 ownership of these softwares was transferred to the corporation UNIX System Laboratories. In the year 1993 this corporation was sold to the corporation Novell. In the year 1994 some employees of Novell formed the corporation Caldera Systems International, which began to distribute an upstart operating system known as Linux. In the year 1995 Novell sold the UNIX software codes to SCO. In the year 2001 occurred a separation of SCO, and the SCO brand name and UNIX codes were acquired by the Caldera Systems International, and in the following year the Caldera Systems International was renamed SCO Group, of which i currently serve as chief executive officer.

My associates and I of the SCO Group are therefore the full and rightful owners of the operating system softwares known as UNIX. Our engineers have discovered that no fewer than seventy (70) lines of our valuable and proprietary source codes have appeared in the upstart operating system Linux. As you can plainly see, this gives us a claim on the millions of lines of valuable software codes which comprise this Linux and which has been sold at great profit to very many business enterprises. Our legal experts have advised us that our contribution to these codes is worth an estimated one (1) billion U.S. dollars.

Unfortunately we are having difficulty extracting our funds from these computer softwares. To this effect i have been given the mandate by my colleagues to contact you and ask for your assistance. We are prepared to sell you a share in this enterprise, which will soon be very profitable, that will grant you the rights to use these valuable softwares in your business enterprise. Unfortunately we are not able at this time to set a price on these rights. Therefore it is our respectful suggestion, that you may be immediately a party to this enterprise, before others accept these lucrative terms, that you send us the number of a banking account where we can withdraw funds of a suitable amount to guarantee your participation in this enterprise. As an alternative you may send us the number and expiration date of your major credit card, or you may send to us a signed check from your banking account payable to "SCO Group" and with the amount left blank for us to conveniently supply.

Kindly treat this request as very important and strictly confidential. I honestly assure you that this transaction is 100% legal and risk-free.

Signed, GNAA president

PS. If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ |
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'

Re:SCO: The GNAA-Nigerian connection (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803539)

SCO is controlled by the Mormon Church!

Re:SCO: The GNAA-Nigerian connection (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803563)

And the Mormon Church is controlled by the morons!!!

This is the trollfest! Party!
Eh, no, no joke, there's a lot of trolls in this thread, I just want to point that.
You, people, you can't keep your backyard clean!

Ask a mormon his opinion, he/she'll confirm!
PURITY!

WRONG PRIORITIES! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803512)

When the fuck exactly are you people going to acknowledge Kirk Cameron [eonline.com] as the genius he is?

Run, don't walk, and see The Growing Pains Movie [imdb.com] , today!

If you have mod points and would like to support Kirk Cameron, please moderate this post up.

Re:WRONG PRIORITIES! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803519)

a pox on you

More Crap (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803522)

Well isn't this another great story! Post something good for fucks sake!

okok lawsuit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803524)

so the riaa sues, and jane dow sue back.
does it mean we can now continue our mucis business without some saying it's not legal and without the riia harassment?
they do it for our right, right?

i liek this 2 ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803525)

A friend of mine was named cecil funt ....

butt out teacher pronounced his name as fecal cunt!

HAW!!!!

TUCCACHRIS

XuL

groklaw or greplaw (1)

yipyow (317154) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803526)

Well which one is it? The editors don't seem able to decide. If I'm not mistaken it's GrepLaw...but I could be wrong.

http://sqrville.org

Re:groklaw or greplaw (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803579)

Greplaw is a technology law and policy news/discussion site at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society (Harvard).

Groklaw is a site about the ongoing SCO law suit, hosted by a paralegal.

They are not the same.

Re:groklaw or greplaw (1)

yipyow (317154) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803645)

I thought I had heard of GrokLaw before, but the article linked to was GrepLaw. Oh well. I suppose I'm just picking nits here anyway...thanks for clearing that up.

sqrville [sqrville.org]

Rationale (5, Interesting)

w.p.richardson (218394) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803531)

The reason the RIAA wants to use the DMCA for subpoenas is that they can pick and choose who they target. Since they don't have to file suit to run someone in, they can pick an undesirable person and parade them around publicly as some sort of miscreant who is stealing from the hard working musicians, technicians, and record executives.

The tactic of any defense suit should be to challenge the DMCA on fourth amendment grounds. Nowhere in the US constitution is the right to subpoena, search, and seize given to corporations or their representatives.

HOWEVER, this doesn't mean that the RIAA are in the wrong necessarily. If they want to enforce the copyrights that they hold, they have to do something. I have always preferred the idea of targeting individuals who were infringing rather than mass lawsuits against "P2P", which was their tactic until recently. The method for doing this should be through normal legal channels though, not based on "PR".

Re:Rationale (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803599)

The artists and musicians should open up the books to show how much money the record companies and record executives earn versus how much the artists themselves actually make. Then we'll see who the real miscreant is.

Re:Rationale (1)

3terrabyte (693824) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803711)

Amen. Also, maybe a long printout of publicly available documents showing all the cases the Music Cartel has been proven guilty of Price Fixing & Price Inflation.

Re:Rationale (5, Interesting)

Hierarch (466609) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803621)

Ye Olde Blockquote:


HOWEVER, this doesn't mean that the RIAA are in the wrong necessarily. If they want to enforce the copyrights that they hold, they have to do something. I have always preferred the idea of targeting individuals who were infringing rather than mass lawsuits against "P2P", which was their tactic until recently. The method for doing this should be through normal legal channels though, not based on "PR".

Yeah, but at the same time they need to get the word out. A lot of people genuinely don't realize that what they do is illegal. Doe's lawyer even makes the same point: teenagers in an environment where they can't be expected to know that what they are doing is illegal. I actually know a couple musicians who think that, because they are musicians and need access to musical works to practice for covers, think that this gives them a right to infringe - perfectly above-board and legally. They honestly believe this, and they tell their friends, too!

So, to protect legitimate copyright claims (yes, legit. I'm talking law, not ethics, not justifications!), the RIAA has to get the word out. They can buy publicity spots and crank out the infommercials. Will anybody listen? Not even during the Superbowl! Or, they can make a few examples, make them firmly, juice them for PR and maybe scare people into listening. It's unfortunate, but there just isn't any better alternative for them to protect their intellectual property.

More importantly, and more germanely, they don't necessarily need the massive subpoena authority granted under section 512. They could still pick a representative handful of people and make their lives a living hell, and make sure the rest of the unaware file-sharing community knows it. Coming from RPI as I did, and personally knowing one of our $97 Billion RIAA Sweepstakes Winners, I'd sit up and take notice in a hurry. It only takes having one person you know get nailed before you stop and think about it.

I think it goes without saying that, as a community, we generally believe that they're better off not enforcing these claims too vigorously. We've all seen the studies that, as sharing goes up, so do sales. But holding to a broken business model doesn't change their rights under broken US law.

Re:Rationale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803698)

So, to protect legitimate copyright claims (yes, legit. I'm talking law, not ethics, not justifications!)

The word you're looking for is "lawful" or possibly "legal", not "legitimate" which implies value judgment (not that there's anything wrong with someone making that value judgment, just that you're saying that you're not).

Re:Rationale (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804541)

About the musician thing: I never met a musician who wouldn't let another musician listen to his music. So yeah most musicians don't care about infringing (whatever that means) if they just need to hear how a song sounds. The idea that a cover band should buy every piece of music they play is pretty silly to me. Its probably illegal to be a cover band in the first place but nobody cares.

Re: Rationale - No AOL subpoenas yet. (3, Interesting)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803685)

As far as i know, i read in an earlier RIAA story that no AOL users have been handed subopenas. Are they trying to scare people to switching to an "isp" in which they have an interest.
This selectivity demonstrates exactly why nobody should be given the power that they currently have.

Re: Rationale - No AOL subpoenas yet. (0)

Erasmus Darwin (183180) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803985)

"As far as i know, i read in an earlier RIAA story that no AOL users have been handed subopenas. Are they trying to scare people to switching to an "isp" in which they have an interest."

I think it's probably a bit simpler than that -- the people most likely to be sharing lots of stuff are going to be the ones with the fastest internet connections, and AOL dialup is a far cry from DSL, Cable, and the dedicated connections available at college.

Yeah, there's an "AOL for broadband" option, but I believe you use a regular, non-AOL broadband connection and then just access AOL's own content via the service. So a KaZaA user with that setup would still show up as being from their broadband provider.

Re: Rationale - No AOL subpoenas yet. (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804361)

Actually, AOL has received ONE subpeona [boycott-riaa.com] . Big fucking deal, right?

Though, the same article shows that that AOL's 'sister company' Time Warner, who offers cable Internet access has recieved 135 subpeona's. Interesting, no?

Re:Rationale (-1, Troll)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803958)

The reason the RIAA wants to use the DMCA for subpoenas is that they can pick and choose who they target.

You make it seem as if they're picking out random names and rolling with that. I don't know the cases in particular which have gone to court, but if they had enough evidence, then they had enough evidence.

Since they don't have to file suit to run someone in, they can pick an undesirable person and parade them around publicly as some sort of miscreant who is stealing from the hard working musicians, technicians, and record executives.

So a thief is not a miscreant? Musicians, record execs, and technicians, are they not hardworking? This is rubbish to blame the (what is it) 'greedy' songwriters. Do you know that not everyone is born with a silver spoon in their mouth. The artists are certainly going to want to protect themselves against thieves because after all, any way you cut it, someone is stealing. Sure it is not the same concept of a physical theft, but nevertheless the music is indeed getting stolen.

So let's put this in perspective layman terms now. Some college e-tard decides to place 30 albums online well let me knock this down to 2 albums which by far is low. Each album costs (low crackhead price) $5.99, and he is getting about 1000 connections. Now without factoring in those who will in turn place the song right back up to burn, $5990.00 has now been stolen from the recording industry. Multiply this up to 100 albums per year $599,000.00 but this is only for 1000 connections mind you, Kazaa has what 2million users? Let's be fair and say only 1% did this you would have 20k users multiplied by the crackhead price of $5.99 per album and you have $11,980,000.00 in losses. But don't worry we'll turn this into a 'hell no we won't go' situation online simply because the record companies want to be paid for their creations.

The tactic of any defense suit should be to challenge the DMCA on fourth amendment grounds.

Are you nuts? The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized How is this an unreasonable search and seizure when someone is stealing? I could see if no warrants were issued, and there was no proof, but the facts remain if someone is stealing they deserve to be charged, and those willing to use the shield of the constitution to hide illegal actions should be slapped with a rotten fish.

Nowhere in the US constitution is the right to subpoena, search, and seize given to corporations or their representatives.

Corporations are shielded read on:

WHAT IS A CORPORATION?

A corporation by definition an "artificial person", a legal fiction, let's call him Ersatz Ernie, created immortal by men (and the government that charters it). The purpose is to reduce tax liability, raise money through stock sales, and to protect the personal assets and otherwise limit the liability of the human founders in the event of civil or criminal wrongdoing.

HOW DO THEY FUNCTION?

For corporations to work, they need to be endowed with the "rights" of property ownership and the ability to engage in contracts. But while we humans evidently claim to have figured out how to create artificial life, we have certainly not figured out how to endow little Artificial Abbott, Ltd., with a soul, or a conscience, or a moral code. Corporations "live" for one purpose: profit. They consume natural resources and human labor in the process. (source [clarityconnect.net] )

I have always preferred the idea of targeting individuals who were infringing rather than mass lawsuits against "P2P", which was their tactic until recently. The method for doing this should be through normal legal channels though, not based on "PR"

This makes no sense. So now that they've let go of the mass lawsuits, and have decided to focus on individuals, it is not good enough. S'what it seems like to me, who knows maybe my perception is screwy since I'm tired as hell, but corps. will be corps. if you don't like it vote for the right people to make a difference. That's my take on this situation.

Re:Rationale (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804526)

Nice troll.

Yay! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803532)

I guess ?

morons score again with pateNTdead eyecon0meter (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803535)

that's right, once we've installed radios in rear ends of all the byrds, there'll be music in the air at all times. rough time to be a greed/fear based stock markup felon/hoarder/member of the walking dead/corepirate nazi execrable, etc...

that's right, after the walking dead (aka, georgewellian fuddite southern baptist freemasons, etc..., in opposition to the planet/population rescue program) finish exterminating themselves, & sadly enough, some of us, it won't take long to clean up this cesspool of greed/fear execrable.

we're calling it the planet/population rescue program (formerly unknown as the oil for babies initiatve).

the Godless wons are helping by continuing to show where their hearts lie.

what's wrong with folks selling their kode? if it causes convenience, & interoperates with all the other kode on the planet, we say, no harm, no foul, so long as you fail to employ gangsterious/felonious practices to asphyxiate the 'competition'. sabotaging your free version of anything is a tad dastardly. if there's value added, without FUDging up the compatability, we'll pay. same with music. no more gouging dough though.

fortunately, mr stallman et AL, etcetera, is now offering comparable/superior software, to the payper liesense spy/bug wear feechurned models, in almost every circumstance. there'll be few, if any more softwar billyonerrors, as if there's a need for even won. tell 'em robbIE. you are won of the last wons whois soul DOWt, right? .asp for va lairIE's whoreabull pateNTdead PostBlock(tm) devise?, used against the truth/to protect robbIE's payper liesense stock markup bosses/corepirate nazi 'sponsors'. yuk.

back on task.

what might happen to US if unprecedented evile/the felonious georgewellian southern baptist freemason fuddite rain of error, fails to be intervened on?

you already know that too. stop pretending. it doesn't help/makes things worse.

they could burn up the the main processor. that would be the rapidly heating planet/population, in case you're still pretending not to notice.

of course, having to badtoll va lairIE's whoreabully infactdead, pateNTdead PostBlock(tm) devise, robbIE's ego, the walking dead, etc..., doesn't slow us down a bit.

that's right. those foulcurrs best get ready to see the light. the WANing daze of the phonIE greed/fear/ego based, thieving/murdering payper liesense hostage taking stock markup FraUD georgewellian fuddite execrable are #ed. talk about a wormIE cesspool of deception? eradicating yOUR domestic corepirate nazi terrorist/gangsters will be the new national pastime.

communications will improve, using whatever power sources are available.

you gnu/software folks are to be commended. we'd be nearly doomed by now (instead, we're opening yet another isp service) without y'all. the check's in the mail again.

meanwhile... for those yet to see the light.

don't come crying to us when there's only won channel/os left.

nothing has changed since the last phonIE ?pr? ?firm? generated 'news' brIEf. lots of good folks/innocents are being killed/mutilated daily by the walking dead. if anything the situations are continuing to deteriorate. you already know that.

the posterboys for grand larcenIE/deception would include any & all of the walking dead who peddle phonIE stock markup payper to millions of hardworking conservative folks, & then, after stealing/spending/disappearing the real dough, pretend that nothing ever happened. sound familiar robbIE? these fauxking corepirate nazi larcens, want us to pretend along with them, whilst they continue to squander yOUR "investmeNTs", on their soul DOWt craving for excess/ego gratification. yuk

no matter their ceaseless efforts to block the truth from you, the tasks (planet/population rescue) will be completed.

the lights are coming up now.

you can pretend all you want. our advise is to be as far away from the walking dead contingent as possible, when the big flash occurs. you wouldn't want to get any of that evile on you.

as to the free unlimited energy plan, as the lights come up, more&more folks will stop being misled into sucking up more&more of the infant killing barrolls of crudeness, & learn that it's more than ok to use newclear power generated by natural (hydro, solar, etc...) methods. of course more information about not wasting anything/behaving less frivolously is bound to show up, here&there.

cyphering how many babies it costs for a barroll of crudeness, we've decided to cut back, a lot, on wasteful things like giving monIE to felons, to help them destroy the planet/population.

no matter. the #1 task is planet/population rescue. the lights are coming up. we're in crisis mode. you can help.

the unlimited power (such as has never been seen before) is freely available to all, with the possible exception of the aforementioned walking dead.

consult with/trust in yOUR creator. more breathing. vote with yOUR wallet. seek others of non-aggressive intentions/behaviours. that's the spirit, moving you.

pay no heed/monIE to the greed/fear based walking dead.

each harmed innocent carries with it a bad toll. it will be repaid by you/us. the Godless felons will not be available to make reparations.

pay attention. that's definitely affordable, plus, collectively, you might develop skills which could prevent you from being misled any further by phonIE ?pr? ?firm? generated misinformation.

good work so far. there's still much to be done. see you there. tell 'em robbIE.

as has been noted before, lookout bullow.

morons score again vs. va lairIE's whoreabull.. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803586)

infactdead PostBlock(tm) devise, originally titled:

we don't need your stinking corepirate nazi shysters/hucksters/bootlickers, etc...

how much does it cost US to defend ourselves from the georgewellian fuddite execrable/yOUR representatives?

screw the phonIE monIE, it's the lives of the innocents that is the real badtoll. passing more&more monIE on to these felons, buy humouring their hostage ransom assault on US, is what's really wrong with US.

tell'em robbIE, or are you aFraUD too?

Does Jane Doe give good head? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803538)

Inquiring minds would like to know.

Niggers smell like shit! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803575)

I'm a full-time student at Santa Monica College (located in a suburb of Los Angeles), and here's the skinny: Most niggers on campus don't even attend my school, come onto school grounds drunk/high, and attempt to procure women. For the select few afri-coons that managed to correctly spell their name on their application (read: IQ higher than 85, a true rarity in the porch monkey species), where are they two weeks into the semester? More than likely, they dropped the class since it was too intense. Wait, to paraphrase the little bastard whale shits: "damn muh muthafuckah sheait muthafuckin class be too hard homey where da weed at an' da bitches?".

Seriously folks, I know it's a great feeling to vent your opinions on these wellfare-leeching bastards, but you honestly have no worries. With the economy in the gutter, these niggers are committing crimes at an ever increasing rate. They do it to themselves: AIDS, prison, narcotics sales and abuse, their "music". I'll always oppress niggers until the day I die. Nothing makes me feel better than a nigger that's down, that's the best time to really kick 'em.

Here's one of my favorite pastimes: social engineering on niggers. These greasy lazy bastards are soo fucking naive when it comes to topics/situations outside selling dope and fucking trashy, low-life STD infested broads. They announce their inferiority to the entire planet through their clothing, taste in "music", their "ebonics", etc. Just pick a nigger out of the crowd and pump him full of mis-information. Throw his day off. Lace your conversation with plenty of racist innuendo. That's what I do.

A special message to a niggers reading this: Remember, I'm the affluent white male, others like me have similar viewpoints in regards to your race. We control this country. If you feel I'm the exception, you're entirely incorrect. You bastards don't stand a chance in this society, go back to your disease-ridden country of A-F-R-I-C-A.

What happens if RIAA wins... (5, Interesting)

Jonny Royale (62364) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803577)

A pretty decent piece at the Detroit Free Press with an example: here [freep.com] shows exactly why there's due process for these things.

Re:What happens if RIAA wins... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803590)

Detroit Free Press?
It's all a plot, a complot from IBM, pitching the free movement on SCO! eh...
Oops, wrong thread.

Eh

Opera + DFP = Headache (1)

#!/bin/allen (136622) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803933)

Don't look at this article with Opera.

Or do, it refreshes itself as soon as it finishes loading. Ouch.

Al Qaeda VS Johhny Music Downloader... (-1, Flamebait)

Sampizcat (669770) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803581)

Ok, while I think that what the RIAA is doing is really terrible, evil and at times just downright mean (extreme I know, but hey, desperate times...), I have to say some of the things the greplaw guy (Peterson) said were pretty stupid. "No doubt, music piracy is a bad thing. Sometimes, it is appropriately characterized as a form of property theft." Music piracy IS property theft. There's no way around it. I don't know how it is in the US, but here in Aus the Copyright Act prevents against unauthorized reproductions, alterations etc. etc. So dl'ing your mp3's is illegal, plain and simple (barring that whole if you own it its ok, or the 24 hours then wipe it thing, anyone know where that came from anyway?). True, it's not quite as bad as murder or beating up the elderly, but still...

My favourite bit : "The potential abuser categories are limitless, and include everything from annoying marketers to swindlers, child abductors, blackmailers, and terrorists." TERRORISTS! Ah yes, I can see it now. "So, Osama, what do you think of our latest plan? We'll subpoena people to courthouses, then we'll BLOW THE COURTHOUSES UP, WITH THEM INSIDE! MUAHAAHAHAAHAAAA!". True evil genius at work... Or perhaps Al Qaeda could release an album, then sue everyone for pirating it off kazaa to make money for their next campaign! The possibilities are endless!

Tired, assignments, busy, apologies...

Sampizcat

Re:Al Qaeda VS Johhny Music Downloader... (4, Interesting)

dago (25724) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803605)

"Copyright Act prevents against unauthorized reproductions, alterations etc. etc. So dl'ing your mp3's is illegal, plain and simple"

Just remember that, if you don't had any special new limiting right, the basis of (Int'l) copyright law is the Bern Convention.

On the basis of this convention, this is NOT illegal to dwl MP3, event the local RIAA-like institutions officially agree with that and put it on their website or in the letters sent to 'uploaders' (which is always illegal, if not within a _small_ _private_ circle of friends)

And this should be the case in most european countries (at least, for sure, BE, CH, FR)

Re:Al Qaeda VS Johhny Music Downloader... (1)

3terrabyte (693824) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803760)

I agree that except for worthless quotes from the RIAA, and misprints in articles, I have yet to see where it says downloading is illegal.

I have seen news articles about the same event say "this person is being sued for sharing X files" vs. "this person is being sued for downloading 1 file!". The media is just paraphrasing. But if you behind these articles at the source, in all the cases so far, and all the laws pertaining to the subject, all I can find is 'distribution of copyrighted material' as being illegal. Not downloading.

If anyone has any information to the contrary, please share your links!

Re:Al Qaeda VS Johhny Music Downloader... (1)

danila (69889) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804593)

Yep. And in some countries things aren't copyrighted unless released in this country withing a certain period. After that, if still not officially available, they are public domain. And in yet some other countries the copyrights are limited (I mean limited as in non-perpetual). For example (my favourite example), in Russia most movies released before 1973 are public domain (at least according [mincultrf.ru] to the Russian Ministry of Culture). So if you stumble upon an avi with Steamboat Willie, Bambi or Snowwhite and the Seven Dwarfs on *.ru site, feel free to piss Disney off. Downloading it is legal as said elsewhere in this discussion, and uploading it is legal, because it is in public domain.

P.S. If anyone is interested to invest a couple thousand USD to open a classic public domain movie distribution site in Russia, you [masterhost.ru] are [easyhost.ru] wel [ru-hosting.ru] come [m-10.ru] .

Good to know: (2)

ballpoint (192660) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803603)

"No doubt, music piracy is ... certainly no more a societal concern than elder abuse, drunk driving, vandalism, violence, identity theft, investor fraud, and a host of other behaviors."

Relieved, the one-eyed pirates are.

Fair use needs to be defined more clearly (5, Interesting)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803615)

Rather than defining what P2P is, lawmakers should focus on what "fair use" is, especially related to "sharing" of digital "works" versus flat-out copying for distribution. We all know that a vcr can tape any TV show, but SUPPOSEDLY, you'll only really get in trouble if you turn around and sell those episodes you taped of the Simpsons. Casette tapes have been able to record for years -- and the musical world has not ended. Again, this points to the fact that good/popular albums are still going platinum, but the "single with 10 fluff songs" albums, the bad albums by good bands, etc are getting reamed, and RIGHTLY SO. if the whole album sucks, why should people have to buy it to find that out?

Re:Fair use needs to be defined more clearly (1, Insightful)

Sampizcat (669770) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803669)

Firstly, IANAL.
Rather than defining what P2P is, lawmakers should focus on what "fair use" is,
Generally, lawmakers set out the laws, and stuff like focussing on what "fair use" is is left up to the courts to decide based on the law (hence why case law aka common law is so important, it sets the precedent. So, if the courts decide that doing X with P2P does not constitute fair use, then chances are every other case will follow suit). So it all really depends on how these early cases turn out.

Re:Fair use needs to be defined more clearly (1)

BobSutan (467781) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803768)

I completely agree with you. If you were to follow this thought to completion you'd see that this is what was probably meant to happen. Remember, copyrights are for meaningful works. If a CD sucks and only has one good song on it, why should it be protected if its not meaningful in the public's eye (who will ultimately decide the matter, and not the corporations)?

Re:Fair use needs to be defined more clearly (1, Interesting)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804301)

If the songs suck so much though, they won't be on P2P so the discussion is moot.

This "fair-use" bs is tiresome. Yes you can tape TV shows for your own PRIVATE viewing. You can't rebroadcast them [even for free] to the public.

So yes, you can backup music and dvds [which is why I think nobody should restrain DeCSS] but you can't "share" them with people [well you can, but you're not supposed to].

Tom

urge overkill (4, Insightful)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803616)

The RIAA is demanding that ISPs and universities provide it with the names and addresses of users who distribute copyrighted music online so it can sue these users for copyright infringement.

I know I will end up getting mod'ed the hell down to hell, but it needs to be said. I for one do not support the RIAA in fact I have some fuck the riaa t's [cafress.com] however, I don't see nothing wrong with them wanting to be paid for their material. If you were on the receiving end you would too. I could see where they would go to certain uni's being that few e-diots mess a good thing up for whorish purposes, eg drive more traffic to their site or pretend to be doing for the 'cause'. Whichever case it is still illegal, and their is no excuse for someone to be sharing 10,000 songs.

Boston College and MIT challenged the RIAA's subpoenas on narrow technical grounds, arguing that the RIAA had filed its subpoenas in Washington, DC, instead of Massachusetts.

This in itself is a shaky comeback for MIT, and Boston College considering if some law was broken cross state lines, and mind you the DA's will look at the fact downloads occurred all over the world. Law is law anywhere in the US, I don't know when it stopped being so.

However, the music industry is pursuing music piracy with strong arm tactics and subpoena powers that far exceed those available against violent criminals.

Highly doubtful. Because the RIAA is taking steps to fight for what they think is right, gives no one the right to knock them for it. It's the same as if someone started badmouthing *geek*world for spending so much time on this issue. We feel it's right so we protest, the RIAA feels they're right so they do so as well. Kind of hypocritical to make that statement. But to compare the RIAA tactics and those which pertain to violent criminals, there is not one case of a swat team surrounding any student with guns drawn or the FBI or CIA or any other agency going gung ho over this crap.

Has it ever occurred to people that while protesting can at times be used for the better, at times it can also can major negative impacts on the actual thing being protested. Think about it, if I got a little ticked off that some lawyer is comparing this with violent crime, what do you think average joe is going to think.

In today's news, the MA National Guard was called in to remove a student trading MP3's... This guys reference to hardcore crime on this topic is outrageous, and leads me to believe he is simply looking for sympathy for his cause. Pretty lame, and shows his case is weak.

Re:urge overkill (1)

RamenNoodleGod (698869) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803700)

there is not one case of a swat team surrounding any student with guns drawn or the FBI or CIA or any other agency going gung ho over this crap.

Actually, I do think I remember hearing about Interpol shooting up some guys running a private P2P network... I can't remember where and who it was. Some help here?

Re:urge overkill (4, Insightful)

DarenN (411219) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803869)

However, the music industry is pursuing music piracy with strong arm tactics and subpoena powers that far exceed those available against violent criminals.

Highly doubtful. Because the RIAA is taking steps to fight for what they think is right, gives no one the right to knock them for it


No, it's not highly doubtful, it's a fact. The subpoena powers the RIAA have been .... errr... granted are much, much more wide-reaching than those normally used. No Judges are involved, so subpoena's are essentially de-valued (which does not make them any less powerful, it just means that "being subpoenaed" is not as indicitave as it used to be of reasonable cause). It also means that the RIAA can issue subpoena's that would have been considered whimsical not so long ago, and it undermines a citizen's right to due process.

As has been mentioned before, there is nothing wrong, intrinsically, with the RIAA representing their members and protecting their members Copyright. It's just the methods are dubious, and I don't think the end's can justify the means

Re:urge overkill (1)

replicant108 (690832) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803981)

"Has it ever occurred to people that while protesting can at times be used for the better, at times it can also can major negative impacts on the actual thing being protested."

Protesting is supposed to have "major negative impacts" on the "thing being protested", you eejit!

Re:urge overkill (1)

segment (695309) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804026)

meant to state negative impacts for the protesters sorry too little sleep will do it

worth reading, again (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803619)

Dubya's resume:

* I attacked and took over two countries.
* I spent the US surplus and bankrupted the Treasury.
* I shattered the record for biggest annual deficit in history.
* I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period.
* I set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market.
* I am the first president in decades to execute a federal prisoner.
* I am the first president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
* In my first year in office Iset the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
* After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, Ipresided over the worst security failure in US history.
* I set the record for most campaign fundraising trips by any president in US history.
* In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their jobs.
* I cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any other president in US history.
* I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period.
* I appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history.
* I set the record for the fewest press conferences of any president since the advent of TV.
* I signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any other president in US history.
* I presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed.
* I presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have.
* I cut healthcare benefits for war veterans.
* I set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind
* I dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
* I 've made my presidency the most secretive and unaccountable of any in US history.
* Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (The 'poorest' multimillionaire, Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her.)
* I am the first president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt.
* I presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud in any market in any country in the history of the world.
* I am the first president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation, and Idid so against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
* I have created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States.
* I set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any other president in US history.
* I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Human Rights Commission.
* I am the first president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the Elections Monitoring Board.
* I removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of Congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history.
* I rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant.
* I withdrew from the World Court of Law.
* I refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions.
* I am the first president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors access during the 2002 US elections.
* I am the all-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations.
* The biggest lifetime contributor to my campaign, who is also one of my best friends, presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation).
* I spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history.
* I am the first president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied, saying the enemy had the code to Air Force1).
* I am the first US president to establish a secret shadow government.
* I took the world's sympathy for the US after 9-11, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history).
* I am the first US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
* I am the first US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than by their immediate neighbor, North Korea.
* I changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts.
* I set the all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling their huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts.
* I have removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history.
* In a little over two years I have created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided that the US has been since the civil war.
* I entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down, record unemployment being the most recent achievement.

Records and References

* I have at least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas drug conviction has been erased and is not available).
* I was AWOL from the National Guard and deserted the military during a time of war.
* I refuse to take a drug test or even answer any questions about drug use.
* All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my father's library, sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
* All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
* All minutes of meetings of any public corporation for which Iserved on the board are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public view.
* Any records or minutes from meetings I(or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and unavailable for public review.

Free your mind and your ass will follow! (-1)

Genghis Troll (158585) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803632)

The kingdom of heaven is within.

Really? (-1, Offtopic)

RMH101 (636144) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803733)

Like, within my ass?

I wondered what all that harp noise business was about

RIAA's rights are irrelevant. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803635)

The copyright law is about a deal between the State, We The People, and the corporate scums that needs a carrot.
Yeah of course it's also about protecting the artists from having their art being hijacked by the corporate scums, but you know what? it's happening anyway, copyright or not, justa that they manage to do it legaly, but im not taking about that.

So, get back to our carrots.
It's a social contract between all of us the fine people of the third word of the western civilisation.
We we don't respect the copyright law, there's 2 possibilities.
1. intelectual feudalism, all your IP are belong to the blue-blood chosen ones
2. the music industry gets destroyed (a very good thing, by the way).
3. a big molasse of litige, legality, and bullshit, where the fantasms are the points of law, whatever, nevermind.

just for info... (4, Interesting)

jlemmerer (242376) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803649)

... if i post here including my copyright, and somebody answers cutting out some of my text in his reply, can i sue him for obscene amounts of money (of course at a court in the state of NY).
does anybody know?

Re:just for info... (1)

jlemmerer (242376) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803665)

oh, i just forgot: the parent message and this one are of course copyrighted, just in case i can make money out of it

Re:just for info... (2, Funny)

RamenNoodleGod (698869) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803746)

Too late, it's already being circulated on my post-trading network! I've distributed it to dozens of users already, and the list is expanding rapidly! Bwahaha!

This is going to be bigger than the Star Wars Kid :-)

Re:just for info... (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804429)

Nope. It would be a deriative work. All the person would really need to do is give credit to the author.

The deriative works thing brings up an important point. MP3's could be easily considered a deriative work. Why? Because not all of the information is in them. You don't actually get the full song, just bits and pieces of it. Perhaps someone should clue the bastards at the RIAA in on this. An MP3 is NOT a perfect copy. At best, one could consider it a deriative work.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I must go butcher the word 'deriative' some more (as I have no clue how it's actually spelled).

Re:just for info... (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804472)

... if i post here including my copyright, and somebody answers cutting out some of my text in his reply, can i sue him for obscene amounts of money (of course at a court in the state of NY).

You may sue, but you won't win. But under the DMCAs subpoena provision, you could try to get the names of all slashdot readers - because you have "reasonable" (read: reasonable enough to get a rubberstamp approval) grounds to believe they have made a copy of your copyrighted text in the cache. Of course the argument wouldn't stand up in court but for the judges' clerk it's probably enough...

Kjella

GPL issue (0, Offtopic)

raffe (28595) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803656)

A little of topic by still, take a look at
Against SCO's GPL jihad: one size doesn't fit all [theregister.co.uk]

Re:GPL issue, SCO controlled by Mormon Church? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803686)

Three of SCO's board members are graduates of Brigham Young University, and Darl McBride worked closely with Stephen Covey before joining SCO. Many references are made to the Canopy Group but who controls them? A somewhat dark organization called Angel Investors who as it turns out are not publicly traded and are owned outright by the Mormon Church!

Mod parent up (interesting) please (1)

Psyborgue (699890) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803715)

now can somebody start a new thread with this... i'm itchin for an SCO story.

Setting herself up ... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6803693)

for a shit-storm of bad side-effects!
Nice-one "Jane Doe"...way-to-go! NOT!

Re:Setting herself up ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804131)

How the hell is this "-1: Offtopic"?
Did you read the title of this article?

JANE DOE you fucking dumbass!

It's official : you slashdot people are morons.

Wow, nice plan, Glenn (3, Interesting)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803748)

Based on this interview, he's going to argue that people can't be identified in a civil suit until we know that what they're being sued for is actionable.

Psst, Glenn, in a civil suit there is no presumption of innocence, and quite literally no prejudice. The result of the suit is the indication of whether the case is actionable. There's no stigma attached - in the eyes of the law - if it fails, and if you believe otherwise, your response should be a counter-suit to show that, not an argument that a suit can't be brought against you.

No, IANAL, but I'm wondering how much of a lawyer Glenn really is. He mentions constitutional issues five times, but doesn't expand on what those are, or why they'd apply in a civil suit.

I wish him and Jane the best of luck, but on this basis, they're really going to need it.

Re:Wow, nice plan, Glenn (5, Insightful)

misterpies (632880) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803902)

>>Psst, Glenn, in a civil suit there is no presumption of innocence, and quite literally no prejudice.

RTFDMCA. Under the DMCA willful violation of copyright is a CRIMINAL offence as well as a civil one. Thus a subpoena demonstrating the existence of infringing material may well lead to a criminal prosecution. Hence the need for presumption of innocence.

>>No, IANAL, but I'm wondering how much of a lawyer Glenn really is. He mentions constitutional issues five times, but doesn't expand on what those are, or why they'd apply in a civil suit.

More of a lawyer than you. The argument is that the LAW is unconstitutional, not that the suitor is acting unconstitutionally. Every law passed by Congress, civil or criminal, can be challenged in court and overturned if it breaches the constitution. That's what the constitution is for.

Re:Wow, nice plan, Glenn (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804490)

>Under the DMCA willful violation of copyright is a CRIMINAL offence as well as a civil one. Thus a subpoena demonstrating the existence of infringing material may well lead to a criminal prosecution.

Which would be an argument in a criminal prosecution. This, however, is a civil case. That gives it a hell of a long and wandering way to go before it reaches a court which will strike the law.

> The argument is that the LAW is unconstitutional

OK, I understand that, but I still want to know what the constitutional grounds are. Where exactly in the fourth amendment (which is what I'm assuming) is the right to anonymity?

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Which is why the DMCA specifies that the infringement claims are made under penalty of perjury. What he seems to be about to argue is that good faith isn't enough, and that complainants have to somehow prove their case before they bring it. I can't see how he's going to argue this in a way that doesn't make it look as though he's simply trying to keep a civil case out of court.

Abuse of subpoena? (1)

The Revolutionary (694752) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803801)

"Arguably the most dangerous consequence, the subpoena power can be put in the hands of anyone willing to pretend to have a copyright claim."

Peterson suggests that this can be abused by swindlers, child abductors, and terrorists to name a few.

How realistic is this? I've never had the privelege of being in court or served a subpoena myself (and as such I'm rather uninformed about the system), but doesn't existing law provide for means to sue or press charges or something of that sort against people who abuse the system?

Sure, you might have to go to court if Cmdr Taco sues you for infringing distribution of the Audioslave album, but certainly you can bring him right back there with a suit of your own once his case is dismissed, to get back your court fees and lost wages, yes?

Can someone explain to me where I am confused here or what I am missing? It seems to me that this would be a sufficient check on the system.

Re:Abuse of subpoena? (2, Insightful)

nolife (233813) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804003)

Peterson suggests that this can be abused by swindlers, child abductors, and terrorists to name a few.

Here's an example of an abuse.
Someones posts a negative comment as anonymous to a public trading board or somewhere like FC [fuckedcompany.com] . The company sues for the AC's information claiming some interpetation of a copyright violation. Who can stop this AC's information from changing hands? Who reviews a case like this to determine if a copyright violation actually occured or not? No one under the current system. The RIAA wants to run by a different set of rules and regulations and under the existing political pressure (money), they are getting special treatment. If you want to look at the exact opposite power of what the RIAA gets, search Google for the horror stories that people have with identity fraud and how hard it is for them to get thier own information from a company or track down accounts opened in thier own fucking name and SSN. The difference? RIAA has lobby money, identity fraud victims do not.

Re:Abuse of subpoena? (1)

Xebikr (591462) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804510)

Ok. Example: I run a website targeted toward seniors. When someone browses my website I collect their IP address. I then take that IP address down to the court and get a subpoena, alleging copyright infringement. I give that to the ISP, who then gives me their name, address, and phone number. I never press the court case, but I do hand the personal information over to my buddy who specializes in ripping off old people. Based on the areas of the website they visited, I can give him a good idea of what they are interested in.

The scarey part is that all you need is an IP address. You can make up the rest. If your goal is to get the personal information and you have no intention of actually filing a suit, then a counter suit isn't a big deterent.

Similarities (5, Interesting)

xThinkx (680615) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803804)

Quoth the article "There are interesting similarities between the RIAA's campaign, Prohibition, the War on Drugs, and the 'War on Terrorism.' ".

Really well put, what do all of these things have in common, they will all, in the end, be failures. I've gone in to this a thousand times before, but sometime soon governments/organizations will have to learn that no matter how hard you try you cannot manipulate everyone into thinking the way you want them to. There is an innate ability in some humans to make their own decisions, and although it is more sparce today than say 20 or 30 years ago, there are those who use this ability and formulate their own decisions. The gov't/RIAA hate this.

During prohibition there was a massive (failed) propaganda campaign. The war on drugs, I think everyone who realizes that it is easier to buy pot/coc/crack/heroin/pcp/lsd than alcohol on a sunday in most states will agree that this has been/is/will continue to be a failure. I know I'll get at least ten proud citizens that will argue with me on this one, but the War on Terrorism will fail too.

The reason the war on terrorism will fail is because we (the US) are using the wrong methods. Again we've fired up the propaganda machine, I saw an interview with the new "Big Cheese" of Fort Bragg. In it, he said the reason that terrorists attack is because they are "jealous of our way of life". This could not be a more callous, arrogant, and ethnocentric lie. These terrorists, especially the 9/11 group and friends, weren't jealous of our way of life. They were irrational because they were religious extremists and a 1,000 years ago christians returned to a land they had given up years ago, slaughtered indiscriminantly, and claimed to have "retaken the holy land", which coincidentally, is the muslim holy land too. So began the feud between the extremist muslims and the extremist christians. Fast forward a few hundred years and we see that even though the US has a supposed separation of church and state (don't even get me started on that nutcase holy roller 10 commandments uber-conservative closed minded judge in Alabama) the US gets involved in this war and picks (of course), the judeo-christian side. That series of events is (predominantly) why the 9/11 attacks happened. Back to the war on terrorism failing, so we're attacking this thing in the wrong way. The gov't is spreading falsities about the people involved, we're insulting everything from their land, to their culture, to their names, which does not bode well for diplomacy and mutual respect. To add insult to injury, we're killing anyone who gets in our way while we try and kill a few of our personal favorites as well. The apparent reasoning behind the killing is the "cut off the head and the body dies" logic, which DOES NOT WORK WITH NON-CENTRALIZED organizations. Due to this piss-poor technique, the war on terrorism will, in the end, create MORE TERRORISM.

It's a similar logic failure which is afflicting the RIAA's battle. Rather than scaring users into paying full price and not pirating, they're simply angering and frustrating them into adapting to new ways to achieve the same result, sometimes worse. I wasn't boycotting the RIAA until about 5 months ago, so from me alone they've sold around 15-20 less CDs (for some reason some indie bands end up on RIAA labels), and I've increased my downloading (and uploading) levels, yeah, good strategy here.

Re:Similarities (1)

Gulthek (12570) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803874)

Now that is extremely well written. Ever read dailykos.com?

Re:Similarities (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804298)

I would question the assertion that 9/11 was entirely religously based. While religous-centric world events certainly did not aid the situation I would conjecture that historical events also played a large (if not larger) role as well. For example, our involvement with Afghanistan / Al-Qaeda just a few decades back- in a favorable "we sell you weapons and train you" kind of way. Long story short, the US pretty much used them up and left when it was to our benifit and just disregarded the deals we had with them. Then, a few decades later when things aren't so great we are planning an invasion of their country- then 9/11 happens and we no longer need to worry about how we push the invasion to the public.

I can just hear the advisors now:
"In the face of this great tradgedy, we will simply call the dissenters terrorist and those who follow quietly, patriots."

A Lawyer That Reads Slashdot (4, Funny)

jareds (100340) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803819)

From the interview:

  • The scenario Jane Doe is fighting is the one where you don't know about the subpoena until the RIAA shows up at your door with a summons and a lawsuit. In any case, I strongly suggest seeking legal advice to deal with it. That's not a plug for lawyers, it's just that
  • I've heard lots of people voice bad ideas about how to respond and many of those ideas would just make a bad situation worse.

Wow, it looks like he reads Slashdot.

if the riaa wants people to pay (3, Insightful)

Comsn (686413) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803924)

why dont they just start lawsuits, then settle out of court for the people to pay subscription fees into one of thier music websites?

that way, they keep thier customer base, the consumers dont get up in arms, legal music grows in users... etc

instead of suing them for $250,000 each song...

Tired of this... (5, Interesting)

assaultriflesforfree (635986) | more than 10 years ago | (#6803959)

Frankly, I'm tired of reading the same recycled comments on this issue, and I've never really interjected my opinion for the simple reason that very few of you will probably agree. Many might think I'm insane. But I'll go ahead and kill my karma right here. Take this as a criticism to Slashdot for discussing this article.

Copyright law is bullshit. First off-- to make those of you that actually care understand that I have some standing on the issue-- I'm an artist, among other things. I write, act, and direct both for free and for money. The pay is little, and I honestly am only concerned with making back the money I put into a performance. I can and do find money elsewhere, doing the meaningless things that our labor-as-commodity economy provides and occasionally finding the job that really provides me with satisfaction. Would it be nice to devote more time to my creative work? Sure, except I find being an automaton provides just as much time to space out and file ideas away in my head as sitting in front of a computer thinking ever could. It certainly provides me with more inspiration.

I don't care if people tape my shows. I don't care if people show them to all of their friends. I don't care if people make as many copies as they possibly can give them away. I doubt I'd even care if people sold those tapes for $1000 a piece. There's really only one thing I really care about: a little bit of credit. If someone's taking my writing and performing it (whether or not for pay), I'd like to receive just a note of thanks for putting some effort into writing it, exactly as I appreciate it when my girlfriend thanks me for bringing her lunch at work. Common courtesy is all I ask.

I don't create for money. I create because I have to. It makes me happy. At most of my free shows, we break fire code. And when I manage to take all of those people and force them into the exact mix of emotions I'm aiming for--when a nervous, uncomfortable laughter rides over the crowd--that's a better feeling than anything. Like the MasterCard commercials, money can't buy some things.

Some of you will say, "Yes, but you have a right to be paid for what you do." I don't see it. I have a right to do what I want to do, and in a perfect world, I'd be able to work my ass off doing that and not have to worry about paying the bills and whatever. I have no right to be rich, and that's all royalties and pay-for-play is about. I perform for people because I want to connect with them, to make them laugh, to simply make them glad that they took 2 hours out of their day to sit back and enjoy something. Charging only limits my audience, and frankly, the reason I do what I do seems to me to be far more important than getting paid to do it, particularly when I consider how disgusted I am with what the pursuit of money has brought this country.

I have no reservation about "stealing" from record companies, software companies, or whatever. No, I don't want to see artists starve, but really, the revolutionary that's too careful about stepping on toes doesn't do shit. I want to keep hearing Aesop Rock, but I want, more than that, to tear down the barriers that reinforce elitism. I want to see everybody "pirate" music and software. I want to see Microsoft's profits dwindle until they disappear and force it to fold. I want the creative work of the world come to a screeching halt under capitalism so that people realize free is the only way to go-- that creation implies ownership no more than discovery. I want this because the system we have is fucking stupid. It's so fucking stupid that we get article after article posted about the latest lawsuit the RIAA's intellectual-property-rights claiming jerkoffs are waging against somebody that really just wants to share the creative wealth of human achievement.

Noam Chomsky sums it up well: "It is sometimes argued that constructive and creative work will cease unless it leads to material reward, so that all of sociey gains when the talented receive special rewards. For the mass of the population, then, the message is: 'You're better off if you're poor.' One can see why this doctrine would appeal to the privileged, but it is difficult to believe that it could be put forth seriously by anyone who as had experience with creative work or workers in the arts, the sciences, crafts, or whatever. The standard arguments for 'Meritocracy' have no basis in fact or logic, to my knowledge; they rest on a priori beliefs, which, furthermore, do not seem particularly plausible."

Please do not respond with recitations of such a priori beliefs. I've heard them all and don't find them particularly insightful.

Re:Tired of this... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804109)

CONGRATULATIONS! Now should I make thinly veiled comments about DIGNITY, self-esteem and finding TRUE FUN in your RIGHT VENTRICLE??

Re:Tired of this... (1)

assaultriflesforfree (635986) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804229)

No, I don't think that would be particularly useful.

Although I guess you've already made some thinly veiled comments. And no, they weren't particularly useful, partly because I don't think I understand them perfectly. Interesting.

Re:Tired of this... (1)

mopslik (688435) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804325)

I don't create for money. I create because I have to. It makes me happy.

That's all well and good, but copyright protects those who do create for profit. Given that, if you are solely creating for creativity's sake, you are free to release your songs to the public domain as an independent artist. Let copyright law apply to those who require it to make a living.

...how disgusted I am with what the pursuit of money has brought this country.

It's sad, yes, but it's the way things work. Pretending there's a better, less money-centric world doesn't make this one disappear.

Re:Tired of this... (1)

kenthorvath (225950) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804610)

It's sad, yes, but it's the way things work. Pretending there's a better, less money-centric world doesn't make this one disappear.

I have to disagree. It is the strive for idealism that results in progress. Just because a system is in a given state does not mean that it can not change. If that were the case then America's revolutionary war would never have succeeded and the world would be a vastly different place. More to the point, the parent poster is not "pretending," he is outright claiming that there is a better way and he is encouraging you to do nothing more than think about it with an open mind.

Let copyright law apply to those who require it to make a living.

The parent poster is clearly attacking the merit of such a system. His position is that people do not deserve to be financially supported by their respective creative works, at least not to the end where they are gauranteed dictatorship over who may experience and share the work and at what cost. A person who is able to sell his work to a person willing to support him has that right, but no more. He should not have absolute say in who can charge for his works or who can experience them. In his eyes, there should be nobody that requires copyright law to make a living. The system is deprecated.

Re:Tired of this... (2, Insightful)

imadork (226897) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804342)

I think you have a good perspective on things. There is more to life than making as much money as you can, and from what I gather, if you can make someone's life better through your art even for a few minutes, you've been paid enough.

However, I think that you're a little off the mark in saying that you wish to fight the system through "piracy". Like it or not, we live in a capitalist country, and the almighty dollar will dictate most of our big decisions. Up until now, it had dictated that art has value only when its distribution is carefully controlled, and circumventing that system is illegal.

I think massive civil disobedience on this issue won't get us anythere: nobody will say "since most people are making illegal copies of music, we should make it legal". The only thing that will work is to show that there is value in art that is distributed as widely as possible. When people realize that they can become musicians without signing away their rights, and possibly even make a living selling their own music if they distribute their music themselves, on their terms, the RIAA will become irrelevant.

The key thing is not to circumvent copyright, but show that the big copyright cartels are not where the value in art lies anymore. Thus, mass copying of other people's work will not accomplish as much as opening up the distribution of your own work. This is what the Free Software movement does: it uses copyright (which was designed to limit distribution) as a tool to distribute information as widely as possible. Perhaps it's time for a Free Music movement?

Re:Tired of this... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804395)

Here's a better idea. Shut the fuck up. You goddamn hippie, you apparently don't believe in free markets, free markets which make America what it is. Do us all a favor and go to China. They don't like copyrights there.

"Ooooh me no rike ropyrights so I'll ropy this software berause I'm a stealing chink!"

Re:Tired of this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804480)

Government copyright laws create a less free market since the government is 'regulating' the market (patents do the same thing by allowing people to claim ownership over non-material goods). In a true free market these bullshit "create-artificials-scarcities-for-the-common-good " laws would not exist. (and I wouldn't have to worry about the crack i'm smoking since that would be legal too)

Foregin Bands (1)

darkstar949 (697933) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804094)

On a side note, how do the US copyright laws apply to foregin bands? I like to download Japanese music to hear new bands, simply because it's about 40$ to import a CD and you are out alot of money if you end up not liking the band.
However, in terms of US bands I can see why the RIAA would be annoyed, but I can also see why their tatics are wrong. In the eyes of the general public they are trying to be the school yard bully in the why the go about "copyright protection".

RIAA alternatives (2, Insightful)

chipwich (131556) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804158)

The battle between the RIAA and listeners appears to be very similar to the battle between software vendors (Micro$oft et al) and end-users.

Since the combination of technology (DRM) and law (DMCA, EULA's) give unreasonable amounts of leverage to the IP producers, the only real alternative for the end-user is to avoid winding up a criminal by choosing something with less restrictive licensing.

Can someone respond by explaining the alternative licensing arrangements available to artists? What sites post media created under these licenses?

If large numbers of these files started showing up on P2P networks, this could have the potential to legitimize their content, benefit non-RIAA artists, and share some good music/art with the world all without supporting the RIAA.

Of course, you've got to stop buying the RIAA's latest boy-band fad, but that shouldn't be a problem here...

Oh, and lastly, is SCO challenging any of these artistic licenses yet?

Re:RIAA alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804241)

YOu don't undeerstant the deal about DRM and DCMA

The State Machine don't want the honorable corporations from using too good cryto technologies, because the TSM fears that in the far future generation would not be able to enjoy the damn fine art that is Britany Spice Girl.
So instead tey ise a law, the DMCA to send a message to the damn fine corpos "hey look buddy, strong crypto's not needed, see, we protect your investment" and everythnig is fine in the world.
But some silly researchers attempts to say it's stupid because they should use strong crypto, so the future generation cant benefit from the enlightement given by holy Britany Spice Gilr.
Of cource the researer scientinst just want a job in his domain!!

Well... (1)

Aldric (642394) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804222)

Eventually someone will be abducted and murdered with the help of the US legal system after posting something online that someone else doesn't like, then the government will be up in arms to change it. Until then, they stay bought by the RIAA.

Stuff that matters (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#6804296)

I thought this was going to be about this Jane Roe [thesmokinggun.com] - stuff that really matters.

Bringing some common sense to "damages" (5, Insightful)

The Revolutionary (694752) | more than 10 years ago | (#6804393)

Peterson says in response to a question on damages:
"I feel especially passionate about this with respect to the "intent" factor. The intent associated with printing 1,000 counterfeit "Harry Potter" books and that associated with kids sharing music with other kids is obviously different and I can scarcely visualize a scenario where $150,000 per download would be appropriate."

I've already written "my" senators and congress people on this (we'll see what good that does...).

I am just utterly dumbfounded when I see as potential damages for a single act of infringement: $750-$150,000. Can anyone tell me what the basis is for these numbers, or at least whose ass they were pulled out of, and for how much?

Were I to distribute a copy of a track from the latest Metallica album (*shudder*) to one Mr. John Ashcroft, my doing so constitutes a single act of infringement. The theoretical maximum loss to the copyright holder due to this single act of infringement is the price of the album the song is officially distributed on; perhaps the album sells for $14.95. I don't know, I've never purchased an album (it is true!), and as such don't really keep up on prices.

While this is an obvious upper bound, the actual loss to the copyright holder will be far less than this. There a number of factors:

The electronic copy in .mp3 or .ogg format is not a full substitute for the uncompressed CD track.

John (hey, buddy!) has been distributed only 1 of (let's say) 12 tracks.

John has not received a physical duplicate of the printed CD.

John has not been distributed a jewel case.

John has not been distributed "liner notes".

The current retail price of the album may be such that, while John has no objection to being distributed a copy of a single track at no cost to himself, given John's relatively ho-hum interest in the track (understandable), and his limited means (hey, he's Attorney General, not CEO of Haliburton), John would not have acquired a copy of the track at all if it were only available to him at the current retail price.

We see that in the case John would not have been willing to pay any money at all to acquire a copy of the track (on the album), the copyright holder incurs no loss whatsoever by my act of infringing distribution.

Even if John would have been willing to pay the current retail price of the album, his receiving an infringing copy of a single track, or even several tracks, can not be said to result in a loss to the copyright holder in the amount of the current retail price of the album. It can not, beause John may still purchase the album. Given the previously presented list, this should not be at all surprising.

In fact, perhaps one of the few cases in which, although John had previously been willing or able to pay the current retail price of the album, upon hearing the infringing tracks I distributed to him he would no longer be willing to pay the current retail price, is the case in which the album fails to meet John's expectations. So yes, in this case, in the case where the current distribution model results in an uninformed and mislead consumer, perhaps my distributing to John one infringing track will result in a loss to the copyright holder in the amount of the current retail price of the album.

But even this is hardly reasonable, for the same effect could have been acheived through perfectly legal means, either by John hearing the track on the radio and realizing "it is the suck!", through word of mouth, or by Mr. Ashcroft coming over to my place for some head-banging, only to discover the album does not meet his expectations.

And so, if we want to assign a fair damage amount for each act of infringing distribution, on average I suspect it will not be more than about $0.50 a track, for an amateur-produced .mp3 of a track from a 12 track album.

What? Oh, yes, it may be that my single act of infringement "leads to" many more acts of infringement. It may be that John redistributes 10 copies of the track I distributed to him (I know you like those big .gov pipes John!).

Well, am I responsible for these additional single acts of infrginement, or is John? If I am responsible for John's additional single acts of infringement, and they come after me for the $0.50 per act, first they will have to prove at least to some reasonable standard that these acts by John, and so on out into the tree resulted from the copy I personally distributed, but what's more, If they come after me for the damages, they can not go after John or anyone else for those same damages, because they have already been compensated for those damages.

This came up with the discussion about SCO, and whether they could collect from inidividual Linux users even after they collect $2 billion (hah!) from IBM.

The answer seemed to be a firm, "No!", because those damages have already been compensated for. I think some of you lawyer types called it "double indemnity" or something along those lines. Any help here?

Screw you, RIAA. Suck it!

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>