• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

File-trading networks can be liable-court

vandree

Member
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
234
Reaction score
0
Location
Studio City, ca
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
http://money.excite.com/ht/nw/bus/20050627/hle_bus-n27292014.html


File-trading networks can be liable-court

Monday June 27, 11:41 AM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Internet file-trading networks can be held liable when their users copy music, movies and other protected works without permission.

"We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright ... is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties," Justice David Souter wrote for the court.
 

MikeyC

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
123
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Which file-sharing services are actually in the US and could potentially be shut down as a result of this?
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is a completely ridiculous decision.

It's like saying we should sue car manufacturers for drunk driving.

And what did they base this on:
"We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright ... is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties," Justice David Souter wrote for the court.
That would be a fine decision if the resulting opinion was against P2P apps that promote its use to infringe copyrights. I know of several local musicians who use P2P apps for the express purpose of getting their music out there.
 

Fantasea

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
3,692
Reaction score
8
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that Internet file-trading networks can be held liable when their users copy music, movies and other protected works without permission."

In no time, any file-trading networks located in the US will simply move off-shore out of US jurisdiction. It's not a big deal to re-locate what little it takes to run that kind of an operation.

What then?
 

MikeyC

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2005
Messages
123
Reaction score
0
Location
Upstate New York
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
The big networks like Kazaa, Limewire, Bittorrent, etc. will easily be able to do this.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,970
Reaction score
6,079
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
MikeyC said:
The big networks like Kazaa, Limewire, Bittorrent, etc. will easily be able to do this.
Bittorrent is not a network per say, but it is "networking" software.

World of Warcraft uses this new "networking" software to publish their patches and content.

Very very bad decision.
 

jpwright

New member
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I agree. File-sharing networks are not necessarily liable if one of their users does something illegal. I like the car manufacturing/drunk driving example... what's next, we ban the Internet entirely? It's stupid.
 

vandree

Member
Joined
May 12, 2005
Messages
234
Reaction score
0
Location
Studio City, ca
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The first thing that came to my mind was gun manufacturers and murder...

It seems to me manufacturers and distributors of blank DVDs can now be sued because they distribute devices other people can use to violate copyright laws. :roll:


....EFF represented StreamCast in the MGM v. Grokster case. The Supreme Court's decision held that software innovators may be held liable for inducing the copyright infringement of their users. EFF believes that the Court unleashed the potential for a torrent of new litigation by creating a test that has many factors, is very fact-specific, and is difficult to predict. The Court also set us up for a world where consumers are given fewer choices in the marketplace, because innovators will be scared to introduce products that do not have Hollywood's seal of approval.

There is no question that there will be a flood of litigation as a result of this decision, as well as congressional hearings. EFF must be there to represent the rights of innovators and consumers in the fights to come......
More Directv style lawsuits to come.....

BTW here is the link to the opinion:
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/....supremecourtus.gov/opinions/04pdf/04-480.pdf
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Old news! Try reporting on that RIAA (Record Industry Association American) sued a user of Kazza P2P, that they infringed their rights. They counter-sued that RIAA infringed Kazza's rights by using a modified version of the Kazza software that they used to catch the Kazza user. Which the copyright law specifically states "Cannot be modified without written permission from the copyright holder".

Result:
Kazza broke the law.
Kazza user broke the law.
RIAA broke the law.
Case was dismissed.

FYI: Intel and Microsoft have bribbed there way into your homes, and have been doing so since 1985! Happy Computer Shopping! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
 
Top Bottom