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!

Iceland and USA Feel the Copyright Industry's Wrath

michael posted about 10 years ago | from the long-arm dept.

The Courts 523

spellraiser writes "Iceland's Internet traffic saw a substantial decrease this week as police raided the homes of 12 individuals suspected of sharing massive amounts of copyrighted material over a private, local DC++ hub that was infiltrated by SMAIS, the Association of film right holders in Iceland. The people who were raided were questioned by the police, and had computer equipment confiscated. It is unclear at this point what their fate is, but there is a distinct possibility might face charges." And in the U.S., an anonymous reader writes "The Recording Industry Association of America strikes again with yet another round of lawsuits. Jon Newston over at P2Pnet.net doesn't hold back anything in his great commentary on it today. Best quote 'It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.'"

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

Capturing Terrorists (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10404938)

Osama is lucky he doesn't share videos over the Internet or he would awaken the RIAA Rebellious Viva La Resistance Militia capturing him in 24 hours.

WHY DO YUO HATE AMERICA?!?!`1 (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10404966)

Re:Capturing Terrorists (1)

lukewarmfusion (726141) | about 10 years ago | (#10404991)

I have a Sheneman editorial cartoon on my office door along the same lines.

Re:Capturing Terrorists (1)

}InFuZeD{ (52430) | about 10 years ago | (#10405219)

Actually I think it would be the MPAA going after video sharers ;)

Re:Capturing Terrorists (2, Insightful)

sparcnut (775902) | about 10 years ago | (#10405262)

videos over the Internet ... the RIAA


The RIAA doesn't usually go after movie swappers. RIAA=music, MPAA=movies.

I say someone frames Osama (IP/DNS spoof) and uses P2P to share a boatload of music and movies on a Linux server, so that the RIAA, MPAA, and SCO all go after him. He won't last 12 hours before getting royally pwned by 3 predatory legal teams!

DC++? (4, Informative)

Emugamer (143719) | about 10 years ago | (#10404939)

Re:DC++? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405089)

Before anyone asks, yes there is a DC client for Linux, dcgui-qt [berlios.de] . Expect to be banned or refused by about 60% of DC hubs because you are not using the Windows-only DC++ client.

Re:DC++? (1)

Emugamer (143719) | about 10 years ago | (#10405186)

Whats up with the related links gone comercial?
I wrote a journal about it that mysteriously dissappeared... anyone know whats up?

Industry? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10404948)

What exactly is the Copyright "Industry"? Do you mean the music industry or the movie industry? Copyright is not an industry.

Re:Industry? (2, Insightful)

FunWithHeadlines (644929) | about 10 years ago | (#10405125)

"Copyright is not an industry."

It is nowadays. The strengthening of copyright laws, and the defense of such laws against court cases designed to bring them back to rational levels, has become a major industry in itself.

Re:Industry? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405130)

Copyright is not an industry.

On the contrary, copyright is the only thing that makes music or movie an industry. Ask Jack Valenti.

[/sarcasm]

Re:Industry? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405135)

You're not from around here are you?

Re:Industry? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405162)

I think they mean...

"Those which enforce, administer and benefit from copyright and intellectual (sp?) property"

I.e. IP Lawyers, Patent offices, and software, music and movie industries etc.

It's same with the "compensation industry"

Typo... (1)

Schwartzboy (653985) | about 10 years ago | (#10405196)

I think you misspelled a word there, earlier. Instead of "is not an industry", the actual spelling should be "should never have been allowed to become its own industry".

Re:Industry? (1)

91degrees (207121) | about 10 years ago | (#10405265)

The motor industry is that industry which manufactures and sells cars and motor-vehicles. The Computer industry is that industry that manufactures and sells hardware, software, and offers computer related services.

Similarly, the copyright industry is the industry that produces and sells copyrighted information.

What's wrong with it as an expression. It's a useful term, that makes sense, and conveniently lumps together the movie industry, the music industry, book publishers, and software producers.

you mean... (3, Insightful)

scaaven (783465) | about 10 years ago | (#10404954)

...helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.

they're helpless to pay $8 to see a movie in the theater?

Re:you mean... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405001)

Actually, we pay more than $8 to see a movie in the theater. In Iceland we pay around $12 FYI.

And a little icelandic for ya'all
hæbssí..! which roughly translates to "hellooo..!"

Re:you mean... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405009)

No, he means that they're helpless to pay lawyers thousands of dollars to defend them whether they are guilty or not. Even if they have done nothing wrong, it is cheaper to just settle than pay to fight it.

Re:you mean... (4, Interesting)

tmasssey (546878) | about 10 years ago | (#10405202)

But what if they *have* done something wrong? Copyright infringement is a crime. Downloading copyrighted material that you have not purchased is a crime. If you are commiting a crime, they *should* go after you.

I *hate* the RIAA as much as the next guy. But this *IS* the way that the RIAA *should* combat illegal file sharing. You don't go after the phone company to stop bomb threats. You *do* go after those calling in the bomb threat. How is this any different?

Don't want to get sued? DON'T BREAK THE LAW!!!

Re:you mean... (4, Insightful)

Txiasaeia (581598) | about 10 years ago | (#10405285)

"Copyright infringement is a crime. Downloading copyrighted material that you have not purchased is a crime. If you are commiting a crime, they *should* go after you."

Name one uploader who was threatened with jail time. Copyright infringement is not a crime, it's a civil matter, hence uploaders being sued for *money* and not being thrown in jail.

Re:you mean... (4, Funny)

OverlordQ (264228) | about 10 years ago | (#10405019)

Of course! Paying $8 to see a movie once but paying $20 for something you can listen to for a long time is just wrong and overpriced. I mean come on! Isn't that obvious.

</sarcasm>

Re:you mean... (1)

Cheeze (12756) | about 10 years ago | (#10405093)

Yeah, and paying $15 for the dvd (audio and full motion video) of the movie, complete with english, french, and spanish subtitles, widescreen and normal formats, and usually 2 hours of director commentary as opposed to paying $15 for one hour of audio makes any kind of sense.

You can't compare live media with recorded media. Compare apples with apples and you have yourself a valid comparasion.

Re:you mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405128)

movie's are recorded, it's on film/dvd.
Audo is recorded, it's on cd.

Re:you mean... (4, Insightful)

tmasssey (546878) | about 10 years ago | (#10405250)

Besides, the argument that it's overpriced is irrelevant. It's their product. Just because it's overpriced does *not* give you the right to infringe (steal) their product. Period.

Boy, that Jaguar is overpriced: it's a few hundred dollars of steel, glass and leather. Therefore, I can steal it.

Don't give me that "copyright-infringement-is-not-stealing-because-I- don't-deprive-you-from-using-it." Do you scream when companies use GPL code without releasing the source? How is this different?

Let's make a deal: Microsoft can close the Linux source and you can copy all the music you want.

Any takers?

Re:you mean... (4, Insightful)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | about 10 years ago | (#10405045)

Helpless to afford the $5000+ in legal defense fees they will pay even if found not liable.

Re:you mean... (1)

tmasssey (546878) | about 10 years ago | (#10405283)

You know, you're right.

A person was found covered in a murder victim's blood, holding the knife. He says he didn't do it. We don't want to charge him with a crime and put him on trial: he would incur legal defense fees...

Might these people not have infringed on the copyright? Yes. However, I'm assuming that if their computers were seized, etc., that there was *some* reason for suspecting them of having commited a crime. How is it wrong to charge them?!?

Re:you mean... (1)

bludstone (103539) | about 10 years ago | (#10405067)

Does that mean if I pay the 8$ to see a movie, I can have a copy at home?

KILLER!

Im going to go download "Sky Captain and the World of Tommorow" twice! Because I watched it twice in theaters!

Re:you mean... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405131)

.. or just ignore Hollywood garbage and the unappealing goo that the mainstream music industry shits out?

Article Title (2, Insightful)

Dante Shamest (813622) | about 10 years ago | (#10404957)

Iceland and USA Feel the Copyright Industry's Wrath

Does that mean the copyright industry is an enemy of the USA and Americans? Why else would it be waging wrath upon them?

Re:Article Title (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405056)

Maybe. If you read the article, one of the points made is this:

And as a supreme irony, although RIAA - the enforcement organ that's responsible for bringing so much misery to so many American people - is short for Recording Industry Association of America, only one of its owners - Warner Music - can be said to have an American base.

The majority owners are EMI Group (UK), Bertelsmann AG (Germany), Sony Corp (Japan). and Universal Music Group (Vivendi Universal, France).

And Internet traffic... (2, Funny)

FooAtWFU (699187) | about 10 years ago | (#10404958)

dropped an amazing 40% after the raid. Wow. Fun.

Re:And Internet traffic... (3, Interesting)

adelord (816991) | about 10 years ago | (#10405030)

SMAIS (Iceland's association of film right holders) says that traffic fell by 40%. Would you believe the RIAA if they said the same thing? Nope. Has any objective third party confirmed this?

Re:And Internet traffic... (2, Informative)

lachlan76 (770870) | about 10 years ago | (#10405111)

Yes, but the traffic was going over the biggest ISP in Iceland, which makes it take up more bandwidth. ;)

Re:And Internet traffic... (3, Funny)

antiMStroll (664213) | about 10 years ago | (#10405307)

"Has any objective third party confirmed this? "

I'll volunteer.

Iceland only has 12/0.4=30 Internet users.

There you go, authentic RIAA-strength math.

Re:And Internet traffic... (1)

EinarH (583836) | about 10 years ago | (#10405036)

Don't mock their effort!
These people could have used up all the precious Icelandic Internet packets if they were allowed to continue.

Re:And Internet traffic... (5, Informative)

Juggler (5256) | about 10 years ago | (#10405256)

Yes, the traffic really did drop that much (I live in Iceland). It was very noticable on publicly accessible usage graphs for the largest peering point in Iceland. This graph [isnic.is] from the Reykjavík Internet Exchange [www.rix.is] is very telling.

However, the Register article was slightly misleading in implying that the traffic reduction was directly caused by the raid - it was more likely caused by the media coverage of the raid.

Basically, Joe Sixpacks all over the country read about the raids in their morning papers, paniced and turned off all their P2P apps. This includes the managers of the other DC++ hubs.

Traffic still hasn't returned to "normal".

Global library (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | about 10 years ago | (#10404959)

I have a long term vision on the end of this: http://www.geocities.com/James_Sager_PA/love7.html

Fyord Post! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10404960)

Viva la Fyords

And the UK are finally gearing up for lawsuits too (4, Informative)

buro9 (633210) | about 10 years ago | (#10404980)

As this register article (from today) shows:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/01/uk_to_sue_ music_pirates/ [theregister.co.uk]

Re:And the UK are finally gearing up for lawsuits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405213)

Industry sourced cited by today's Times newspaper claim that the writs will start to fly within the next month as the UK's answer to the RIAA, the BPI (British Phonographic Industry) targets "the most flagrant users of peer-to-peer Internet file-sharing sites", as the paper puts it.

Dude, this is p2p were talking about, don't you mean BPI (British Pornographic Industry)

infiltrating networks (2, Interesting)

Monty845 (739787) | about 10 years ago | (#10404984)

Anyone know how they go about infiltrating a DC network?

Re:infiltrating networks (1)

psykopotat (775986) | about 10 years ago | (#10405137)

word has it it was a invite only dc++ hub of about 100 users. law officials supposedly managed to get a user in and had been monitoring users for several months by observing their activities on the hub and matching them with ISP logs made available with court orders.

Re:infiltrating networks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405153)

Become a fascist. Then you'll pass unnoticed...

Re:infiltrating networks (2, Informative)

ManofWar (818052) | about 10 years ago | (#10405199)

The police promised about 50 to 70GB of new material to get on the hub, got the ip address of the biggest sharer there and started monitering his traffic, this has been going on since february when SMAIS opend the case on the operators of the hub. With in housr all traffic with all public and most private hubs in iceland stopped and people were wiping or moving their harddisks, total traffic was reduced 40% and has been for the last few days here are some graphs for internet traffic in iceland, (in icelandic, mid means wednesday) http://www-m.isnic.is/status/rix/alag/alag.html Almost all dc hubs in iceland are icelanders only, that is beacuse 1GB of data from abroad cost those that download it $32 dollars. Here is the page to the 4 largest public hubs in iceland (in icelandic) http://www.deilir.is/

Re:infiltrating networks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405208)

That's the funny part. the weakest link is the members.

We have a private sharing ring. it's by invite only and ALL members must vote to allow an invite to be sent to a new member.

The secrecy is there mostly to keep out leaches, but over the past 5 years turned into a keep out the RIAA measure.

They got sloppy, that is what happened.

I DARE the RIAA to infiltrate the main Ring/hub I belong to.

'Best' Quote (3, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | about 10 years ago | (#10404992)

What's so shameful about this is: file sharing is not going away

And people buying CD from artists under RIAA isn't either.

Make up your damn minds.... (5, Interesting)

FatRatBastard (7583) | about 10 years ago | (#10404995)

When the RIAA went after P2P software we all screamed "don't attack software that has legitimate uses, go after the people actually breaking the law." Now that they're doing just that everyone's still pitching a fit.

Re:Make up your damn minds.... (1)

Gr33nNight (679837) | about 10 years ago | (#10405083)

Its not that they are going after the people breaking the law, it is that the RIAA is suing people who have not dont anything wrong, and those people cant even defend themselves! There have been numerous cases where people who down even own computers have been sued. Not to mention all the suits against people who have free software. Suing people who have committed the crimes are fine, but their tactics are dead wrong.

Re:Make up your damn minds.... (1)

gowen (141411) | about 10 years ago | (#10405151)

There have been numerous cases where people who down even own computers have been sued.
Really. Can you cite these numerous examples, please? Did they win or lose?

Re:Make up your damn minds.... (1)

gunnk (463227) | about 10 years ago | (#10405236)

Google on:

riaa lawsuits "don't own a computer" [google.com]

The first three links are:
1 - News on an RIAA lawsuit versus a man without a computer
2 - News on an RIAA suit against a woman without a computer
3 - News on an RIAA suit against a couple without a computer

And you get get all that just from reading the link descriptions.

This is a flaw in the justice system then (1)

ink (4325) | about 10 years ago | (#10405273)

This is a flaw in the justice system then, and not an indication that the RIAA should stop trying to sue. If you think that it costs too much money to defend yourself in the judicial system (which I wouldn't disagree with...), that's great -- but don't confuse the two issues. By the way, where are the "numerous" cases of people who don't even own computers being sued found at? I was under the impression that they were tracking all of this with IP information, and ISP cooperation...

Re:Make up your damn minds.... (1)

FatRatBastard (7583) | about 10 years ago | (#10405290)

I'm not arguing that their tactics, which I agree have at times been drastic. However, this isn't the argument I'm making.

*IF* someone gets sued on the flimsiest of grounds (i.e. the RIAA sees you're hosting a file called "brittney" which is a picture of your cat but they think is some Spears tune) then they have set themselves up for a huge counter-suit by the defendant for things such as barratry, but...

Not to mention all the suits against people who have free software

As far as I know no-one's actually been sued for such things. In such cases the RIAA sends out a take down notice, defendant replys back "hey, douche bags, this ain't a music file..." and that's that; no further action has taken place. Pain in the ass? Yes. But as far as I know the only folks who have gone to court / settlement are ones who have actually uploaded/downloaded files they weren't supposed to.

Re:Make up your damn minds.... (2, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 10 years ago | (#10405313)

Show me these cases, no please do. Supply a list. Of the cases highlighted by the media and slashdot, one was a grandmother who was using a mac, claiming she couldnt have done it because theres no mac clients for the network she was using (a blatant false statement, as soon as I read that a quick google search found a number of clients for that network), and a 12 year old girl, who had been duped into paying to access 'premium material' (IE shared material that had been checked and verified by certain persons, but still copyrighted and shared without permission) on the Kazaa network.

Neither of the cases highlighted invalidated the charges brought against them. I havent seen one case highlighted where it was proven the person did nothing wrong, and was being sued falsly. Im sorry, but from where Im standing the RIAA are hitting the right people.

Now, Im with you with the automated DCMA takedown requests that have been highlighted (these arent cases of SUING), they shouldnt be doign that. But the cause here is that they are using an automated system, and it pains me to say it, but when the problem has reached such a point where the infringements are too many for a human to process, then it indicates to me that society as a whole is pretty much heading for the shitter.

Bottom line, dont leave yourself wide open, do not share copyrighted material. All p2p applications have ways to turn off sharing, use them. If you dont, and you get one of these cases brought against you, im sorry but you dont have my sympathy.

A number of people on here are commenting on the legal fees these cases mount up, and the maximum potential fines possible. Well, Im afraid thats the cost of not including copyright infringement under criminal law. Its a lesser 'crime' under civil law, but the complainants have more recourse over you.

MOD PARENT UP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405109)

Good point! People breaking the law certainly SHOULD be prosecuted, but not the people who make the software that lets them. It's the same thing with gun manufacturers: they shouldn't be prosecuted either in civil or criminal court when a gang member uses their product to shoot somebody, neither should Ginsu for making the knife that someone uses to go on a bloody rampage. The issues that I have are: 1) CD prices are too high, 2) the little guy needs to be better able to represent himself in court. I'd like the RIAA can fix (get it?) the price problem, and I'd like them to stop flexing their lawyer muscle to make an example of 15-yr-olds and grandmothers to intimidate John Q Public.

re:make up your damn minds.... (1)

ed.han (444783) | about 10 years ago | (#10405182)

"it's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power."

what do you mean, almost?

ed

Exactly (1, Interesting)

ink (4325) | about 10 years ago | (#10405187)

People trading in illegal media are not "helpless", they're criminals. The RIAA should be suing lawbreakers instead of trying to get software banned. The same goes for people who pirate Windows and then complain about Linux/BSD -- a bunch of whiners.

Re:Exactly (1)

k3v0 (592611) | about 10 years ago | (#10405304)

They are not criminals, they are copyright infringers
There is a difference.....

Poor kids (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10404997)

'It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.'

Maybe those poor helpless men, women and children should stop stealing then.

Re:Poor kids (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405203)

Stealing?

Exactly. (2, Insightful)

gregarican (694358) | about 10 years ago | (#10405229)

This biased story line read like an excerpt from Les Miserables or Oliver Twist. If I don't like the 35 MPH speed limit on the road leading to my home I can't commute 70 MPH every day and not expect repercussions. If you don't like a law why not attack it legislatively? Make a grassroots effort to overturn the law. But don't knowingly break the law and expect to get any sympathy from me.

It's a shame... (4, Interesting)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | about 10 years ago | (#10405013)

These icelanders hadn't been using a network like my own. Anonymity, each link to another person crossing an international border... it wouldn't have been infiltrated nearly as easily. Oh well...

Re:It's a shame... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405188)

You are correct, because that's not how DC works. Everyone connects to a central hub, which in turn receives and routes searches to all clients. DC is not conducive to anonymity.

Mod this idiot down (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405235)

He keeps pushing his poorly reasoned "network" that no one wants to use because they know it doesn't solve a damn thing.

Going in Circles (5, Insightful)

ravenspear (756059) | about 10 years ago | (#10405014)

The RIAA just doesn't get it. Continuing with these lawsuits is not going to do anything but build another revenue stream for them. At this point, one has to wonder if they realize that and if that is all they are hoping for.

You see, the market has already spoken and it has spoken loudly. An entirely new paradigm of music distribution has evolved and it isn't going to regress to the way it was in the previous generation. The RIAA had their chance to give people a product they want online and to use the new mechanism of distribution for profit. It failed to do so, thus other non-sanctioned methods entered the space to fill the void.

What will happen now is one of two things. Either the RIAA realizes that they can't have it their way and comes up with an acceptable online offer that will attract customers, or they will continue to spin their wheels in vain and alienate their customers who will in turn seek other outlets from which to obtain music.

does _anyone_ understand what the RIAA is doing? (4, Insightful)

HBI (604924) | about 10 years ago | (#10405016)

1. Sue tons of people.
2. People bitch to politicians.
3. Politicians pass another copyright adjustment law that 'protects' consumers while improving the recording industry's profit margin.
4. Profit!

It's that simple. They have no fear of boycott or consumer retribution. Consumers of music are sheep. Even if some of the sheep wise up and stop buying, there are more people growing up to take their place, which is probably as good an explanation as any for why the music industry targets youth.

Re:does _anyone_ understand what the RIAA is doing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405163)

You have completely broken the Slashdot rule of profit planning. The rule plainly states that there has to be a completely unknown/crazy/impossible event represented by "???" before a profit can be made. ;-)

Wait a minute... (5, Insightful)

diamondsw (685967) | about 10 years ago | (#10405023)

Back when the RIAA was focused on Napster and P2P, didn't we say they shouldn't be focusing on the technology, but on those who misuse it?

Now they're doing just that - focusing on the people, not the technology. Their methods could be a lot better (they should focus on people who share a lot, not anyone with an MP3 with a suspicious name), but they *are* on the right track.

Well duh . . . (1)

greenreaper (205818) | about 10 years ago | (#10405031)

It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.

Of course it is - they're the ones causing all the problems!

like your sig (1)

phyruxus (72649) | about 10 years ago | (#10405133)

>>"Eternity lies ahead of us, and behind. Have *you* drunk your fill?"

Nice sig, very poetic.

Have you read "Grendel" by John Gardner? There's a scene where a dragon is telling Grendel that Nature has no absolute scale, that things have size only in comparison to other scales, and that there's infinity in both directions. Gardner phrased it much better than I did.

Btw, the book "Grendel" has nothing to do with computers, the RIAA or Iceland. It was however, enthralling and fresh. To the mods: I know this is off topic, which is why I posted with no Karma bonus. Thank you in advance for not mod-bludgeoning me :)

This is The Right Approach (4, Insightful)

Bob9113 (14996) | about 10 years ago | (#10405039)

...the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.

This is precisely the right thing for the labels to do. Go after the people who are breaking the law, not the people who make products that can be used to break the law. It is good because it is the way law should be (punishing the infringer, not the toolmaker), and it is good because it shows people how much the current copyright model sucks. Actions like this are exactly what we want, so that people will be motivated to move to new economic models of content distribution.

We need to find an economic model that both compensates the creator and moves the product into the public domain (or a similar Open license). Actions like this are exactly what will show the general public the value of the public domain.

Helpless men, women and children (4, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 10 years ago | (#10405043)

Who happen to be sharing copyrighted material, i.e. breaking the law.
Lets call a troll a troll, here.

The RIAA suing copyright violators is *good* (4, Insightful)

roca (43122) | about 10 years ago | (#10405044)

From a moral point of view: people who distribute copyrighted material are violating both the letter and spirit of the law, and deserve to be punished.

From a strategic point of view: The only alternative to punishing copyright violators, short of abandoning copyright altogether, is to make violation impossible through Orwellian DRM backed up by even more Orwellian legislation, or by hamstringing the Internet in some other way. I don't want to lose my freedom and my technology because some punks thought they should be allowed to download music without paying for it.

Re:The RIAA suing copyright violators is *good* (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405172)

I don't want to lose my freedom and my technology because some punks thought they should be allowed to download music without paying for it.

Guess us Canadians are punks, then. And anybody else living in a country with Fair Use laws.

Last I checked, I can still download all I want, as long as it's for personal use. I cannot distribute, however.

The Revolution *WILL* be televised... (5, Funny)

GeneralEmergency (240687) | about 10 years ago | (#10405050)


...but unfortunately, you will *NOT* be permitted to record it.


Haha! Wait till dual layer dvd's go mainstream!! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405051)

We won't need the internet anymore, after all there isn't enough music being created to keep up with the ever increasing storage capacities.

Soon everything ever created will fit on one DVD and that will be the end of the RIAA as we know it!! The pirates win!!

Of course I'll have to explain to my future grandchildren why we have been listening to the same Britney Spears song for the last 30 years, but screw it!! it was FREE!!

How are they going about it? (1)

ActionPlant (721843) | about 10 years ago | (#10405053)

Anyone know exactly how the RIAA is going about prosecuting these days? I'm one of a lot of people who used to do a lot of filesharing and have since cleaned up their act (I went the way of iTunes). I deleted music I didn't honestly own and haven't obtained any illegally since; my question is, is the RIAA suing indiscriminately based on IPs possibly logged many many months (or even years) ago, or are they going after still-current offenders?

It seemed in the beginning that they were making a statement, and that (based on decreased Kazaa traffic) the message got through. The fact that they're still suing people is scary of those of us who got that message long ago but no longer have the opportunity to sign onto the now-defunct amnesty list (which was plagued by legal issues anyway).

Like stepping on ants... (5, Insightful)

earthforce_1 (454968) | about 10 years ago | (#10405066)

A quote from a German Colonel made during operation Barbarossa:

"The German Army in fighting Russia is like an elephant attacking a host of ants. The elephant will kill thousands, perhaps even millions, of ants, but in the end their numbers will overcome him and he will be eaten to the bone."

So it is with the *AA. Eventually they will fail out of the sheer weight of numbers they are fighting.

Re:Like stepping on ants... (2, Insightful)

Chess_the_cat (653159) | about 10 years ago | (#10405105)

The elephant will kill thousands, perhaps even millions, of ants.

The problem is finding enough ants willing to be killed. The Russians didn't have that problem because they had no choice in the matter. Personally, I'd rather not d/l music if it means being sued for thousands.

Re:Like stepping on ants... (2, Funny)

mblase (200735) | about 10 years ago | (#10405144)

he German Army in fighting Russia is like an elephant attacking a host of ants. The elephant will kill thousands, perhaps even millions, of ants, but in the end their numbers will overcome him and he will be eaten to the bone.

Did anyone else have flashbacks to Peter Jackson's Battle of Pelenor Fields when they read that?

On the other hand... (2)

mackman (19286) | about 10 years ago | (#10405069)

'It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.'

I hate to side with the RIAA here, but don't you remember all the p2p networks screaming in court, "You can't blame us, we don't put pirate music on the internet, our users do!" Apparently the RIAA got the message.

If this were about the SCO lawsuits we'd all be crying for the distros and hardware vendors to indemnify us. I guess it's a little too late to ask Kazaa to take the blame for us.

Explain something to me (4, Insightful)

Exmet Paff Daxx (535601) | about 10 years ago | (#10405076)

Why are we sticking up for people who make copyrighted Hollywood movies available for download? The one and only defense of P2P networks is that they are not "pirate to pirate" networks but rather a new tool for distributing independent, privately financed media and breaking the Hollywood deathgrip on media distribution. For years we've screamed that attacking the toolmakers (DMCA) is insane, that the tool abusers are to blame. And now, when the RIAA finally listens to Slashdot and sues the pirates themselves we're still against them?

It's articles like this that convince lawmakers, businessmen, and the Silent Majority that all this crowd is actually interested in is stealing movies. Right now I'd be hard pressed to argue with them.

The one and only defense? (2, Insightful)

cascadingstylesheet (140919) | about 10 years ago | (#10405126)

The one and only defense of P2P networks is that they are not "pirate to pirate" networks but rather a new tool for distributing independent, privately financed media and breaking the Hollywood deathgrip on media distribution.

The one and only defense?

I thought it was that we are free people who are innocent until proven guilty, and should be free to connect our computers together without having to prove that we have a "legitimate" reason first. But that's just me ...

Domestic bandwidth usage stats (2, Informative)

psykopotat (775986) | about 10 years ago | (#10405082)

This is pretty funny, as stated in the news report domestic bandwidth for the entire country dropped about 40%. This can be seen as clear as day from the usage stats for RIX (Reykjavik Internet Exchange) a centralized point for traffic between Icelandic ISPs. Check out the second and third from top here [isnic.is]

Bandwith reduction.. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405086)

You can see the bandwith reduction here [isnic.is]

This is what we want! (2)

paragon_au (730772) | about 10 years ago | (#10405090)

We want them to go after the people ILLEGALLY sharing files.
These people are knowingly and willingly breaking the law.

This is much better than them trying to shut down the p2p networks/applications themselves.

elite club (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10405099)

With the Icelandic population [nationbynation.com] betwen ages 10-40 at probably about 100K, 12 people going icefishing for a weekend makes a substantial decrease in Icelandic Internet traffic.

I've said it before, I'll say it again.... (1)

mblase (200735) | about 10 years ago | (#10405112)

...this is exactly what we asked for, and it's the right way to do it. For years advocates of P2P have said that copyright holders (which, regrettably, includes corporate entities) should be pursuing the individual violators rather than trying to kill P2P software or force ISPs to block their use.

The corporations may be a bit severe in their approach, and IMO the RIAA's tactic of fining offenders through a pre-court settlement is something of a miscarriage of justice. But when press releases tell us about P2P users busted for blatantly ignoring copyright holders' rights -- to the tune of thousands of files, twenty-four hours a day -- I find it hard to sympathize with them.

Let's rewrite this (4, Insightful)

finkployd (12902) | about 10 years ago | (#10405114)

Best quote 'It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.'"

How about this instead:

"It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on the actual men women who are breaking the law and causing the problems on the first place"

Finkployd

where will they put them ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405115)

does iceland even have jails ? Seems like everybody would know everybody on that island.. Iceland is a prison within itself, god damn remote and isolated, they might as well sentence these guys to a lifetime of Icelandic Living, the best they can do.

the worst punishment might be restricting them to the island, no more trips to tahiti... heh.

John_Allen_Mohammed.
Allah Ackbar,
Linus is Great.

emod u4 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405134)

something that you cycle; take a abou7 who can rant of user base for AND SHE RAN best. Individuals by BSDI who sell operating systems of challenges that

Editorialization (2, Interesting)

Mori Chu (737710) | about 10 years ago | (#10405174)

Great commentary?

"Best quote 'It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.'"

At the risk of being modded troll, what is wrong with cracking down on people who are:

  • committing tons of theft of intellectual property
  • sending a ton of traffic over the net, slowing it down for their countrymen

Since when was it a right to do that with one's internet connection and movies? How does the headline submitter expect movie industries to make any money, if he endorses this behavior?

60% traffic drop (5, Informative)

Kafteinn (542563) | about 10 years ago | (#10405177)

DC++ hubs were started in Iceland because we usually have to pay extra for foreign downloads so people started sharing stuff between them for free.
When they raided the 12 guys (and seized 11 terabytes of data) all the dc servers were shut down and immediatly MRTG graphs clearly showed about a 50-60% traffic between domestic connections.
We have long heen proud to say that we have very high percentage of net users here, about 95% (number pulled out of ass) of the country has the internet and DC isn't the only way Icelanders share copyrighted stuff.
In fact most people just get cd's from friends who download from DC or someother p2p sharing app.

So in our case most of the population is rampantly breaking copyright laws all the time and suddenly because of complaints from SMAIS 12 random guys are arrested and two of them held for 24 hours.
2 years in prison is the maximum punishment for a crime like this while murder is maximum 16 years and if anyone is convicted for a copyright violation in Iceland we are going to have to put the entire nation behind bars.

I'm personally disgusted that our government is even thinking about putting profits of american companies above the well being of the people it is supposed to serve.

Re:60% traffic drop (1)

bobcave (775032) | about 10 years ago | (#10405220)

What's worse, is I suspect that SMAIS has got SCMODS. (State County Municipal Offender Data System) -Elwood

Re:60% traffic drop (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405222)

RTFA. of the 5 largest of all the RIAA members, only Warner is American. The rest are French, UK and Japan, etc.

Re:60% traffic drop (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10405303)

if anyone is convicted for a copyright violation in Iceland we are going to have to put the entire nation behind bars.

Well, that speaks volumes about your country then doesn't it? Perhaps Iceland should be converted into a debtor's prison. Just put up a fence circumventing the coast and make it "Escape from NY."

Evil Business Major (0)

KrackHouse (628313) | about 10 years ago | (#10405195)

Stealing music is wrong however you do it. If the artist realizes that there is a chance they could get more gigs and sell more tickets to shows by releasing their music for free then great but that's their choice. If they succeed in preventing P2P sharing people are just going to resort to CD Burning again. A lot of people, including the inventor of BitTorrent are making a lot of money just from donations and none of that goes to a middleman. Hopefully artists will turn to word of mouth marketing and donations sometime in the near future.

Why do people still watch/listen? (1)

Evil Poot Cat (69870) | about 10 years ago | (#10405263)

We're not talking about smoking here. Kick the little pissers out until they can act responsibly. Example:

The last four movies I've either seen in a theater or rented, in no particular order:
--(unadulterated) Gojira: Theater, fulfilled an old promise to myself.
--X-Men (1): Theater, first week of release.
--Episode 1: Theater, on release night.
--Princess Mononoke: Theater, on release day.

This, from when I used to rent/watch movies at least once a week. And my DVD collection stopped at 8 or 9. I remember enjoying movies, but since I really don't like the Racket, I avoid paying it for anything. Now movies and albums are a novelty.

They might force me to pay to watch, but they can't force me to watch in the first place. The same goes for music.

Helpless men and women? (1)

ShatteredDream (636520) | about 10 years ago | (#10405266)

Oh come on. In this day and age if you share copyrighted goods online and have no clue that it is illegal then you are helpless because of a mental disability, not your financial state. While I have some sympathy for those who get caught, I just have to say you brought this on yourselves.

Until the law is changed, you know what you are up against if you share files you have no right to. We can disagree with what the RIAA is doing all day, and I certainly don't think that sharing a few songs is worth $5000 in fees, more like $1 or so for each song IMO, but these people are merely stupid, not helpless.

And What Would Sales Be If...? (4, Insightful)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | about 10 years ago | (#10405295)

Nor has it ever been demonstrated that one download equals one lost sale.

One way to test a thesis is to view the result if it were true.

The record industry wishes us to believe that every download is a lost sale. If true, what would their sales be if all downloads had never happened? Does this figure sound reasonable? Or does it exceed the total GNP of the G-7 nations, plus Nigeria?

I, for one, do not believe for a moment that Internet music sharing has kept the music industry from suddenly expanding several times in size. And since they can't tell the truth about this, I don't believe them about much else either. Do you?

Then again, I don't believe memos allegedly typed in 1971 clearly using Microsoft Word are authentic either. But if they are, then I'm using them as prior art to invalidate all patents relating to Microsoft Office!

bogus melodramatic story summary? (1)

nusratt (751548) | about 10 years ago | (#10405300)

"suspected of sharing massive amounts of copyrighted material over a private, local DC++ hub that was infiltrated by SMAIS"

I just finished reading TFA, and the only two hits on google-news,
and I saw no explanation for the phrase "private local hub".

This phrase made it sound (to me) like the arrestees were on a LAN,
where the p2p traffic wasn't passing over the public net --
which, IF true, would be a lot more chilling.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?