http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4627679.stm

Proving once again how wacked our justice system is. This is like saying we should throw all of the gun makers in jail because some people use them to kill people. Or that all manufacturers of VCR's, CD/DVD burners, TIVO's should be tossed away cause ppl can potentially use it for making illegal copies.

This is a MAJOR blow to p2p networks and it'd be safe to say they will never be the same after the next few months. Its going to be simply amazing to see how movie, record, software companies twist and turn this into giving them much more control over media, that this initial decission didnt intend on.

This just blows me away.

So this means that Bram Cohen is responsible for the illegitimate uses of Bit Torrent? Come on... this is just rediculous. The courts have far too much power in the States...

i've read about this too, i wonder how many time it would take to come to europe ...

Europe rulez!

But heres the thing... most of the networks you europeans use... morpheus, grokster, some of the most popular torrents.... theyre all operated by U.S companies.... which means theyll be shut down and you guys lose too.

so does this mean that we, the downloaders, are able to sue the p2p network that we use if we are caught or will the government go straight to the p2p network?

i dont rly see why the government is poping in now into pirating stuff, my dad did it with his friends, one would buy a record then he would copy it for his friends, then someone else would but the next record and copy that

if pirating has been going on for at least 40 years, why care now? and i dont rly care that ppl are losing money because we dont have the money to waste all of our money buying cd's

that sucks,, i cant believe it,, what else they gonna take away from us

Is it even possible to shut down BitTorrent?

I can't help but to think that though everybody is saying this ruling is the end of P2P much as RI/MPAA would like it to be, I really don't see how it will affect anything except innovation. The problem with this ruling is, it's based off the idea that like napster, other P2P applications can be shut down by shutting down a centeralized server. I'm just left wondering what happens when grokster shuts down their servers, but 5 years from now the network is still up and operating?

What happens if you're ordered to stop a network and stop working on your application, but despite your efforts the network persists, can you be sued again? It seems to me that no one involved in the plantiff side of this case or within the courts understand what decentralized networks are, and what would be involved in stopping them. Just my two cents.

Totally rediculous,

So are all companys like SONY!, Pioneer, ASUS, ACER, NEC etc etc etc, all to blame for the copying of CD's/DVD's in Music and films? As they manufactured CD/DVD writers???????

One word:

Underground.


Most people today who use and have illegal operations are "underground". I think most people will always have P2P file sharing. Maybe other Newbies like moms and paps and other non-skilled PC users will be more cautions or stop using P2P networks. There is soo many of them, can the US Justice really put a stop to them ALL? Of course not.

Remember what happened when the US Justice decalerd the "CAN-SPAM Act" in late 2003? It was reported that only 8-12% over a 1 year period actually responded to the new law. What makes this any different?

What happened when they shut down Kazaa Lite++? Kazaa Resurection was born. What happend to eDonkey2000? eMule was made.
What happened when SuprNova was shut down? About 7 other networks with 100 servers opened up within a week.
And so on........


Don't get me wrong, everyone deserves the credit for the rightfull work they have done. Some companies are overpriced and/or make you update there software every month with a different Serial number. Other companies only charge once for a lifetime of updates - Those are the best!

The music companies are affordable with thier online download, "pay for each song" feature. This I don't mind - as long as it is not copyprotected. I paid for it, I should be able to do with it what I want within my legal terms. Other music places have very strick policies on the music you download from them - even though you paid for it!!! I hate those kind, and refuse to use them and I discourage you from using them.

On the other hand movies I pay for. But I like to watch the movie first before paying fot it. Paying $9 a movie at the theatre is a lot for most movies. Waiting 3 months for it to come available via DVD/VHS is way too long. How many movies have you seen / rented / or downloaded and you had to fast-forward, walk out on or deleted them because they sucked! so bad. Just like the creator of the movie, I work hard for my money too.

By downloading a movie/song to watch/listen, is that wrong? Keeping the contents and sharing them - that is wrong, (to a certain extent ).


Short ver:
~~~~~~~
Yes, certain things that you can obtain by a P2P network is wrong.

No, illegal file sharing will never die, ("We never die, we multiply.") or (We don't cry, we don't die, we just multiply)

and yes, America is sooner to the endtimes.... lol.

totally agree with blam-o.... you kill 1, 10 pop up in its place...

A big problem is that our court system is very tech-stupid, meaning the people involved in the decision making (judges etc.) don't understand technology very well.

How is it when Sony was sued by the MPAA because of the betamax those judges understood that you can actually produce a product with good intentions but there will always be people who abuse it, where these judges cannot? I thought we are supposed to get smarter over time, not dumber?

One thing technology is very good at is adaptation... software makers will adapt to the environment

Here are my two cents:

No mater how well something is encrypted, copy protected in any way or how well they learn to track p2p downloading or find ways of tracking and shutting down networks. Remember this, when someone created a way to track networks and users or created a type of copy protect, encryption. There is 1000’s working on bypassing it. The harder they try we try harder. There are enough stupid laws out there and more they keep making. They are wasting Billions of dollars a year trying to stop this kind of thing from happening. They have always been trying for over the last 20 years. But all they do is create more dumb laws. The have had No negative effect on the Underground networks directly in fact they have helped us. They have forced us to find better ways to compress files, faster ways of transferring them, and making it more public that if you don’t want to pay for it download it. This in turn brings more people to the networks which make it even easier to find what you are looking for.

If they were smart they would make the digital industry pay for all stopping of p2p. They would find that they would not pay to have this done. It costs more money every year to try and shutdown the networks then what the lose with it being there.

How many times have we download a full version of a program that people say or they advertises it the best ever, to just find out it sucks, and you wasted how much money? NONE, now we can take our HARD EARNED MONEY and help the local economy and spend it there. In turn helping more people. How much money did the software company loose? NONE. Because we would have never bought it in the first place. Now if it was good software some of us would go and by it. But we all tell other people about the great program. This is where they make there money.

Now about movies. THEY NEED TO STOP PAYING THE ACTORS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR 1 MOVIE. How much has Batman Begins bring in this far? www.fandango.com has it listed at $26.8M for one movie. And how many new moves keep coming out? Hello where are they loosing money ant and how is it hurting the greedy bastards? The stars ya right they have more money that they know what to do with. IF you seen one on the street and asked them for a tank of gas. The would just look at you and laugh.

Come on America lets take the money we use on “trying” to stop this underground networks and give it to the people that need it. Give low income better tax breaks, more money for public schools, help people get there first home. Heck I have been trying for the last 2 years in Las Vegas, NV to get a home they have jumped up in price by double. From the house costing 150,000 to over $300,000 for the same home. Paying rent at about $1000 a month, 2 cars at about $800 a month and insurance at about $300 a month add utilities, food, kids, day care, doctors, dentists, and every thing else a family needs to pay a month. Working some what average jobs both parents, how much can one save? We both tried school but could not afford to go. The government would help out on 3% of cost that is it. I can save money to put down on a $300,000 at 10% with good credit I might add. That is 30,000 I would need to have. Saving $200 per month to buy a house that would take me 12.5 years to save and by that time the price will have gone up.

AMERICA LETS FIGHT BACK. TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY. LET’S MAKE AMERICA STAND FOR FREADOM AGAIN. STOP HELPING 3RD WORLD COUNTRYS AND WORRY ABOUT OUR CONTRY FIRST THEN LETS HELP THE WORLD IF WE CAN. A STRONGER MORE WEALTH NATION MEANS THAT MUCH MORE WE CAN HELP OTHERS. COME BACK TO AMERICAN AND MAKE IT AMERICA AGAIN.

LET FREADOM RING.

Well thanks for letting me get this off my chest. Chat at you later.

sounds good sign me up.

This ruling seems mainly aimed at grokster/streamcast marketing techniques, not P2P. The courts have basically set the standards for legal P2P... Don't use marketing to entice people to break the law, leave that up to their own imagination. That's how I read it anyway.

I think for the most part they did target grokster and streamcast. But this is a very stupid way to do it in. And this brings the next possible point - whos next?

If the courts get away with this, not only is it a waste of money and time passing the laws and taking them to court, but it is totaly arse backwards.....

nm

Relax people. RIAA and MPAA don't have a chance.

These guys are lamers who think the web is the entire net.
The only end users who get caught are those stupid enough to leave
hundreds or even thousands of songs in their "shared Folder" .

And anyway ...Grokster & Streamcast are lame progs.

People are wising up and deserting these progs for BitTorrent, DC++ and IRC.
I don't see anyone from the RIAA & MPAA attacking DC++ or IRC.
How are they gonna attack DC++ or IRC?
They don't even know what they are.
And what about the thousands of Private FTP servers out there in LALA Land?

Check out the top 10 progs on SourceForge
6 of them are filesharing progs! None using the tech that Grokster and Streamcast use....
none advocating the use of their software for illegal filesharing.

Also remember USA law is only valid in USA.
What if the server is in Russia or China or even Iraq?
Can you honestly see any 3rd world country that has been
oppressed by the USA ( and there are a lot of them)
complying with all this s***?

Furthermore it will be very hard to sue any company that hasn't
actively encouraged Piracy. ( See Article 1 below)

Microsoft has somehow snuck DRM enabled wma format into Napster.
Personally I don't think it's gonna stick.
The majority will balk when they realise the songs are copy protected.

Apart from all of the above there is one over-riding
factor which everyone is missing :
Music wants to be free.
And always will.

And if your still not convinced read these articles by people
who know what they're talking about.

Article 1

Article 2


It's a dynamic world out there and, if you wanna be a pirate you have to move with the times.
Learn how to use IRC....or DC++ or, if you must use a web based prog use
Shareaza or some other Gnutella based prog (they weren't even mentioned in
the court case.

But if you're not an UberGeek and you only know how to use Web Based progs
don't worry.

I predict these File Sharing companies will simply change their tune.

All they have to do is put a notice in their software and on their web site.
Something like:
"Whatever you do don't use this software to illegally download music, movies
and pirated software!"

Oh, I don't I don't!!!

I am, however, a beta tester........ )

The whole copyright issue itself is nonsense. I've seen this whole mess from its beginnings with Napster up to its current incarnations. For starters, what people are doing over p2p isn't anything different from what people have done for years with cassette tapes and vcrs.

If you look up legal history, you'll see a similar case was brought up in some major courts YEARS ago concerning vcrs and how they can record live TV. The final ruling was that it was completely legal to use a VCR to make a copy of anything that was broadcasted over TV/cable networks.

Fans have been making backup copies of music or just trading songs via cassette recorders for a few generations now, with no issues or problems. It just goes to proof how full of hot air these pompus windbags are. The only thing that has changed is that people can now trade with others all over the world, instead of just their friends and family. Suprisingly, even though piracy "kills" the entertainment business, and puts so many "poor artists" out of their income.....oddly all these big mega stars and companies that make huge complaints over piracy are all the ones that take in millions or billions each year in profits. Also oddly, most of the "starving artists" that haven't become mega famous, all seem to support p2p because it gets their music, movies, etc out to the public in ways they never could on their own.

Their arguement would hold more water in their complaints over piracy if Sony or Microsoft, or similar company were on the verge of bankruptcy because of it. This is not the case. Sure their profits are down some because of piracy, but it's not exactly putting them in the poor house either. What it comes down to is greed, and obession over money and profits, nothing more. The RIAA and MPAA don't give a flying f'k about the "artists" they claim to be "defending" with all their efforts against people who share things over the internet.

If you will bear with me, here is an example of what I use when I talk to people about the copyright and piracy issue. If you find it useful, feel free to use take on things with people who are obsessed over the issue.

When you buy something, is it yours? Do you own it? or Are you just buying a single user license for using it?

1. If you own it, it is yours to do whatever you like with, including making backup copies to protect your investment, or sharing it with family or friends. If you own it, then there is no merit or right to any of the arguments against the free and open sharing of media of any form. Since you own it and it's yours, you can do whatever you like with it.

2. If you are only buying the single user license to use it yourself......look at this in the extreme they might one day take this issue if they are not stopped. Say your parents let you live with them while you are growing up. However, you aren't paying for the single user license/right to stay in that house. The bank isn't getting anything from you to give you the "right" or "license" to use that house. This means your parents are violating the bank's copyright of your home. As such your parents can be fined and jailed for violating that copryright, since neither they nor you ever paid for you to have the "right" to live at that house.

How about another insane possibility? Have you ever ridden in a car that wasn't yours? A car that you never paid the car factory or dealership for? Then you and your friend or relative, who gave you a ride somewhere, can be jailed and fined. You never paid for the single user license to sit in that car seat or ride within that car.

How about another one? Have you ever used a public restroom? Guess what, your liable to be fined and arrested because you never paid for the user license to sit on that toilet. You never paid the toilet factory who made it, or the business where it is located or the water company for using their water to flush that toilet.

This is where fanatacism and obsession over greed and money, could very well lead to, if this copyright issue isn't put in check and settled once and for all. People could get arrested, jailed, and/or fined for all sorts of rediculous things if we don't put a stop to this floodgate of lawsuits and problems being thrown at people by these big corporations. Don't sit on that park bench, you never paid for the license to sit on it. Don't walk on that sidewalk, you never bought a license to use it for walking on. Don't eat that food, you never bought a user right to injest that food at that location in that way. etc. etc. Think these examples are too extreme to actually ever happen? Think again, the RIAA and MPAA have already sued more than a dozen 12 year old kids, in their efforts to stamp out piracy.