Copyright Laws

January 28, 2003 3:13 PM

Justice for Consumers "The owners of the KaZaA file-sharing network are suing the movie and recording industries, claiming that they don't understand the digital age and are monopolizing entertainment." Quote from article by Associated Press. I don't about you but I'm sick and tired of big businesses writing all the new laws in this country. Now maybe the people can get some justice for a change.
posted by tljenson (21 comments total)

>Now maybe the people can get some justice for a change.

Naw, you must remember this, right?
posted by jkaczor at 3:17 PM on January 28, 2003

Firstly, Kazaa really has no reason to exist other than to facilitate the exchange of copyrighted things.
Secondly, the people have the right to get all they want for free, dont they?
And the software companies to charge obscene amounts of money for products?
Don't think you about me, 'cause you don't.
posted by ac at 3:19 PM on January 28, 2003

Oh god I used 'facilitate' in a sentence. what is wrong with me
posted by ac at 3:19 PM on January 28, 2003

To respond to jkaczor the issue isn't about copyright but monopolizing the music and entertainment industry. If you had read the article and this goes for you as well ac. Kazaa along with many other services have approached the RIAA and Motion Picture Association, and asked to for the RIGHTS to SELL their products on their service LEGALLY! They have been refused repeatedly, while the music and movie industries have set up there own services thereby monopolizing the industry while shutting out competing services. Why do you think they can get away with selling CD's for $20 a pop.
posted by tljenson at 3:25 PM on January 28, 2003

"Firstly, Kazaa really has no reason to exist other than to facilitate the exchange of copyrighted things."

Well, what about the facilitation of non-copywritten things? Sometimes that happens, too. And also, Kazaa is gonna end up being this big historical stepping stone for the facilitation of new pathways of entertainment product distribution in the US. Napster was a pre-cursor, but I, for one, think its okay that Kazaa is always in some sh*t, making the RIAA chase them around, making Hollywood rethink their modus operendi and so on.

Three cheers for Kazaa, may the US media empire burn, baby burn. Or at least morph, baby, morph.

Course the lawsuit's gonna get thrown out. But it still shows some moxy for crying out loud.
posted by jdaura at 3:27 PM on January 28, 2003

what about the facilitation of non-copywritten things? Sometimes that happens, too

Yeah, and sometimes someone steals the car you were planning on scapping anyway. Let's keep car theives around!

I'm with you on hating the RIAA and everything, and wanting a change in music distribution to suit the desires of the public, but let's not pretend what KaZaA does is in any was just or legal.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 3:31 PM on January 28, 2003

(i am so happy inside) Thank you Kazaa, my day at work has been mired in the quagmire that is red tape, and you have shown me that i can make all that red tape work for me. Beating them at their own game by relentless countersuits. I love it.

I'll second your three cheers jdaura, and I'll drink it up when the RIAA is broken up and censored for its monopolistic ways!
posted by Big_B at 3:38 PM on January 28, 2003

Yeah, and sometimes someone steals the car you were planning on scapping anyway. Let's keep car theives around!

Bad analogy. The differences between independent media and cars on the way to the scrap heap are pretty obvious. Well, usually.
posted by angry modem at 3:46 PM on January 28, 2003

but let's not pretend what KaZaA does is in any was just or legal.

Oh. this could get good. Define "just", and define "legal" as pertains to the circumstance. KaZaa is trying to go legit and profitable, and the powers that be are blocking those efforts. Is it KaZaa, or its users, who are perpetrating unjust and illegal acts? Or is a monopoly of fear using unjust tactics to keep KaZaa from realizing its goal of a beautifully simplistic distribution network for artist's work? Why do you hate small business so much?
posted by Wulfgar! at 4:11 PM on January 28, 2003

Yeah, and sometimes someone steals the car you were planning on scapping anyway. Let's keep car theives around!

Kazaa exists to steal media
Cars exist to break the speed limit
Matches exist to commit arson
Rectal cavities exist to smuggle heroin
posted by Hildago at 4:22 PM on January 28, 2003

what about the facilitation of non-copywritten things? Sometimes that happens, too

Absolutely... my band actively encourages the trading of our music on every p2p software we can find. Of course our music is copyrighted, but to prevent other people from ripping our songs off, not to prevent potential fans from listening. We're far from being remotely famous, but we've managed to find fans on nearly every continent in the world (still working on getting someone down at McMurdo to grab our stuff). O'Reilly is right, for any artist, obscurity is worse than piracy.
posted by 4easypayments at 4:34 PM on January 28, 2003

re: obscurity is worse than piracy ... file sharing as progressive taxation ...

That's a great article 4easy, mucho gracias.

The old models of distribution powered by marketing powered by blind consumerism are nearly over, I hope, ushering in a new age of artistic success based on meritocracy opposed to the world of lame-o spoon fed entertainment.

The jamband communinty has been sharing their copywritten "property" for years via an oldschool network of file sharing (read: tape trading) with financial success for the bands that deserve it.

Why can't this work for movies, pop music and art? Or anything?
posted by jdaura at 5:09 PM on January 28, 2003

what about the facilitation of non-copywritten things? Sometimes that happens, too
No.
posted by ac at 5:23 PM on January 28, 2003

copyrighted*

non-copyrighted work is traded. some copyrighted work is traded with permission. not everything on a P2P is illegal.
posted by tolkhan at 6:41 PM on January 28, 2003

Firstly, Kazaa really has no reason to exist other than to facilitate the exchange of copyrighted things.

Firstly, fast food has no reason to exist other than to facilitate the clotting of arteries.

Firstly, handguns really have no reason to exist other than to facilitate the murder of human beings.

but let's not pretend what KaZaA does is in any was just or legal.

But let's not pretend what fast food restaurants do is in any way just or legal.

Let's not pretend what gun manufacturers do is in any way just or legal.

[/sarcasm]

Although the above arguments contain a grain of truth, they ignore the fact that fast food, guns and Kazaa are tools capable of helping as well as harming others.

Fast food can be a convenient way to get a hot meal quickly and on the cheap. Guns can be used for rescuing hostages, stopping a pit bull attack and preventing a rape. Kazaa can be used to share knowledge, exchange utilities and to promote independent artists.

Some people tried to sue fast food restaurants for their own poor diet/lack of exercise.

The courts rightfully told them where they can stick their case.

Some people tried to sue gun manufacturers for a criminal's own lack of discretion and morals.

Again, the courts rightfully sent them packing.

Now, music monopolies are once again trying to sue the makers of Kazaa for a user's lack of discretion.

Hopefully, the courts will show the same wisdom.
posted by cup at 6:43 PM on January 28, 2003

Does anyone know *where* KaZaa filed it's countersuit?

Assuming it isn't just a PR stunt, there are some interesting legal angles here. For example, if they could get a Vanuatuian judge to issue an injunction against the RIAA, something akin to a RICO injuction seizing all assets of the RIAA within its jurisdiction, including any paperwork, arrest of any employees or agents, and a massive fine or demand for escrow, just to get the ball rolling.
Then, they could approach a World Court agency with that finding, to try to move jurisdiction to the international level--not examing KaZaa, but examining the RIAA! In other words, ask the World Court or WTO for asset forfeiture in member nations, like the EU and the US.
Oh, I'm sure there are lots of flaws and gaps here, but if properly done, KaZaa could rake the RIAA over the coals for years, if not decades.
posted by kablam at 6:53 PM on January 28, 2003

Have any of y'all read the recent Declan McCullagh article about the obscure law called the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act? From the article:

If you've ever used a peer-to-peer network and swapped copyrighted files, chances are pretty good you're guilty of a federal felony. It doesn't matter if you've forsworn Napster, uninstalled Kazaa and now are eagerly padding the record industry's bottom line by snapping up $15.99 CDs by the cartload. Be warned--you're what prosecutors like to think of as an unindicted federal felon.

...

Yet there are signs that prosecutions are coming soon. A person close to the RIAA told me that it has had recent meetings with the Justice Department.

Kinda spooky, actually.
posted by dejah420 at 7:00 PM on January 28, 2003

If I were a record company, I wouldn't sign Kazaa on as a distributer of my music either and it wouldn't be to stiffle competition, it would be because Kazaa is a truly awful program. It's slow, buggy, and from what I understand of the security vulnerabilities of Kazaa, it's possible that record companies could even expose themselves to legal liability by offering their songs through Kazaa.
posted by boltman at 8:51 PM on January 28, 2003

I have no idea what Kazaa is suing about. The whole intention of the copyright laws is to provide the owners with a legal monopoly over their creation for a certain period of time.

I say throw this antitrust case out.
posted by VeGiTo at 8:53 PM on January 28, 2003

Just to clarify, Kazaa isn't suing anyone. They filed a counterclaim--certain to fail--in order to open discovery and prolong litigation. A common defensive tactic.
From the article:
"Sharman’s counterclaim essentially argues that the recording industry “obscenely overreached” and lost its right to enforce copyright by monopolizing movies and songs."
Many legal experts agree this argument will go nowhere.
posted by Outlawyr at 7:14 AM on January 29, 2003

Kazaa's basis for their argument is that their ability to do business is threatened -- and the way they do business is by bundling spyware with their program. Let's not pretend they are heroes here...
posted by Foosnark at 7:59 AM on January 29, 2003