Kazaa to Sue Movie, Record Companies 269
darwin writes "According to a (brief) story at yahoo, Sherman Networks (A.K.A Kazaa) just got the go ahead to sue the studios and record companies for copyright infringement. 'Studios and record companies had asked the court to throw out Sharman's countersuit, but U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson in Los Angeles declined to do so.'"
They'll never win... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:They'll never win... (Score:5, Interesting)
The defendants merely asked the judge to throw the case out on the basis of the allegations set forth in the counterclaim being "too vague".
Think of it of a text book pre-trail motion; it doesn't really have anything to do with the material case at hand. Plus, the lawsuit is going to get (at least partly) suspended until all the appeals of the Grokster case [com.com] are sorted out. At least, Judge Wilson doesn't seem to a man who bows down to pressure.
Re:They'll never win... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How Not to be Sued (Score:2)
Re:They'll never win... (Score:5, Funny)
hehe (Score:5, Funny)
Kazaa: "No, you are!"
Sounds like playground banter to me.
Re:hehe (Score:2)
Is that wrong?
Re:hehe (Score:4, Insightful)
RIAA: Searches inside people's computers, against their will, for sole purposes of litigation. Sues KaZaA (and consumers, ISPs,
KaZaA: Provides medium for exchange of computer files. Consumers use this to exchange illegal files. Sues RIAA for using illegal, modified copies of their software for purposes against their EULA.
My only point is that I don't consider KaZaA's suit any less legitimate than the RIAA's suits.
Re:KaZaA Suit != RIAA Suit (Score:2)
Now I suppose that you could claim that such materials shouldn't be covered by copyright, but I can't imagine a serious argument of that nature that wouldn't also cover the materials that the RIAA is objecting to others copying. So you may not want to a
Re:hehe (Score:2)
What is infringing? (Score:3, Informative)
Does anyone have any idea what part of Sherman's IP was redistributed?
Re:What is infringing? (Score:5, Funny)
I think it was the 192.168. part.
Re:What is infringing? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Re:What is infringing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then it's a violation of Serman Networks TOS, not copyright infringement, unless they copied source straight from Kazaas codebase.
Re:What is infringing? (Score:2)
Yes, copyright doesn't say anything about modifying it. But you see, the TOS is what gives you the right to have the copy of it in the first place. Without the licence agreement with them, you aren't allowed to have it. So copyright violations. Just like if you break the GPL, you get sued for copyright violations, since without the licence, you have no permission to copy and distribute the code.
Some judges have ruled that since a computer loads a program into memory, running a program is a copyright
Does not sound right (Score:4, Insightful)
Only if they "distributed" the resulting program would they be violating the GPL. And certainly they would not be distributing it, since that would allow the enemies of the RIAA to get it and try to figure out how to outwit it's purpose.
So IMHO this is in no way a copyright violation, and KAZAA is completely wrong to even attempt this.
Re:Does not sound right (Score:2, Insightful)
If your assumption were correct, your argument would make sense, but who said Kazaa was GPL'd?
Re:What is infringing? (Score:2)
Re:What is infringing? (Score:2)
Sherman->Serman
In other news,
-a
Re:What is infringing? (Score:2)
Hell yeah! It's clear the RIAA and other large copyright holders feal, for some reason, that they're above the law. It's like a guy who gets his wallet stolen going out and stealing the criminal's girlfriend's car. It may feal good and all, but it's still theft and you'll still be held acountable when your case hits the courts. TW
No winners here. (Score:3, Insightful)
So wait just a minute. On the one hand, we have the record companies trying to shut down P2P. On the other hand, we have Kazaa trying to enforce an EULA. Which do you want to win?
Somewhere in an underground lair deep beneath the Hollywood hills, a deranged genius is stroking a cat and laughing maniacally.
Seriously now. This sounds like a lose-
Don't be so quick to bash EULA's (Score:2)
Be careful there. The GPL is based on the same principle as EULAs are: You have no right to copy this unless you meet <conditions>. With the GPL, the conditions just give more options to the user than a typical EULA does.
If you declare EULAs unenforceable, you declare the GPL unenforceable.
I think I'd root for the EULAs in that case.
Re:Don't be so quick to bash EULA's (Score:4, Informative)
The GPL applies to distribution rights.
EULA's apply to use rights.
Finding one invalid has no implications for the other.
Re:What is infringing? (Score:2)
It means that they could be; KaZaALite quite happily admits that it's illegal when you install it. But going after the RIAA is a bit more of a PR coup than going after individual users. And I'd guess that (counting all the different flavours of KL) it's probably more like 75% of users.
Re:What is infringing? (Score:2, Interesting)
On the other hand, sueing the sh*theads who are scaring their users with lawsuits is good for the network. Less scared users=>More users=>More money
I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Interesting)
I wish them the best of luck.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Interesting)
*If* the Kazaa licence explicitly forbids using it for such purposes, then the RIAA's agents are in violation of the licence agreement. That means that, as I understand copyright law, they have no right to have even installed the software, and so are infringing on Sharman Network's copyright.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Insightful)
The only copyright violation would be by the developers of KazaaLite, not the RIAA and at best there is only a license violation here. Interestingly enough, if the RIAA loses this would strengthen the use of EULAs to protect software. But no, license violations are not necessarily copyright violations and in this case specifically.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:3, Informative)
Not true. Remember that any validity in EULAs comes from the ruling that installing and running software both involve making copies, so permission from the copyright holder is required. If that precedent had not been set, groups like the BSA would have no legal support.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:2)
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:2)
No. Copyright law deals with such things as copying, distribution, public performance, etc. Violating an EULA does not necessarily involve copyright infringement. For instance, if you download a sofware package from the publisher's web site and later violate the license, you are not in violation of copyright unless the license violation involves one o
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Insightful)
Also:
2.11 Monitor traffic or make search requests in order to accumulate information about individual users;
2.1 Transmit or communicate any data that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;
2.13 Modify, delete or damage any information contained on the personal computer of any Kazaa Media Desktop user; or
2.14 Collect or store personal data about other users.
3.2 Except as expressly permitted in this Licence, you agree not to reverse engineer, de-compile, disassemble, alter, duplicate, modify, rent, lease, loan, sublicense, make copies, create derivative works from, distribute or provide others with the Software in whole or part, transmit or communicate the application over a network.
3.3 You may not sell, transfer or communicate the Software to any third party without our prior express written consent.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Interesting)
Think about it. My company buys a hacked copy of MS Office 2003 from a company called MyCrowsOffed for 5 bucks, and we install it on 200 computers. Meanwhile MyCrowsOffed goes out of business.
Microsoft finds out and wants to sue us. Under what grounds? Can't be license violation, because we didn't agree to any license, we bought de-licensed hackware from a defunct company.
So does that mean I get to install and use illegal software without penalties? I didn't write it, so I can't be blamed? Cool.
Well, no. So obviously the quoted article is wrong.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:5, Funny)
The irony of the situation amuses me to no end.
Re:I dont get why it's "copyright infringement". (Score:2)
What is their IP (Score:5, Funny)
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
"They're, like, totally eating too much!" one frustrated McDonalds manager said. "If they don't stop eating our Big Macs... they'll, you know, explode!"
The Fat Customers Association of America (FCAA) could not be reached for comment.
This article has a lot more info (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This article has a lot more info (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This article has a lot more info (Score:2)
Other suit (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Invade? (Score:2)
This heavy handed crackdown by the RIAA/MPAA (Score:3, Funny)
In other news: (Score:5, Funny)
-
Man, (Score:3, Funny)
*notes that probably five people caught that on "The Apprentice"*
Ben
In Soviet Russia (Score:2, Funny)
Grandstanding... (Score:4, Insightful)
On the whole, though, I'm not sure this is a good idea. If the courts find that Kazaa can assume legal responsibility in matters done TO their users, that puts them a step closer to being responsible for things done BY their users.
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:3, Insightful)
I haven't read the terms of the license (who does?) but doesn't it also prevent users from using the software illegally. In that case, can anyone *force* them to sue home users who use the software illegally?
I'm not a fervent supporter of either party in this but if Sharman Networks win this case, my sympathy for the entertainment corporations wo
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:5, Insightful)
One problem I see is that they're attempting to sue them for using KazaaLite, in violation of Kazaa's license agreement. Which means they are attempting to enforce an agreement that the RIAA may have never signed. And it would be a whole lot easier to hit KazaaLite with an IP infringement case than users thereof. The argument CAN be made, but it's not a very strong one. (it would be, as I see it, basically equivilent to suing a kid for wearing an unlicensed Simpsons T-shirt - in strict legal terms it might be illegal, but it's very problematic to argue. To begin with, you'd have to establish malicious intent and some sort of knowledge that the product in question was illegitimate)
Also, TOS\EULA violation cases don't have too much legal precedent behind them, and certainly aren't upheld universally. What might be grounds to terminate a user for TOS violations aren't necessarily grounds to sue. Again, it's another hurdle that could be overcome, but not assured. Now, if Kazaa had sent the RIAA a C&D citing TOS violations ordering them to stop using the service, which the RIAA then ignored - then there would be a case. But I don't think this happened.
In the meantime, there are any number of anti-trust \ RICO-style laws under which a far stronger argument could be made. It is almost inarguable that the RIAA is throwing huge amounts of money and resources trying to litigate Kazaa to death. If Kazaa presented itself as legitimate competition, which the RIAA is illegally attempting to destroy rather than facing them on the open market, they'd have a pretty good case. It would come down to a pure verdict on whether the RIAA's actions were anti-competitive.
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:2)
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:3, Informative)
And the latest version was released a couple of weeks ago. Didn't stay dead for long.
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:2)
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:2)
Why copyright infringement (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps they want to give these organisations reason to limit the powers of these laws that they have bought?
Re:Grandstanding... (Score:3, Interesting)
Get the facts first... but then, this is Slashdot.
NOTE: IANAL but IAAP2pD(eveloper). Our EULA specifically forbids using our software for the purposes of identifying users for legal action. Also, specific companies and known agents of RIAA/MPAA are explicitly barred
This will last HOW long? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This will last HOW long? (Score:2)
In Capitailist America ... (Score:5, Funny)
From the Mercury News article... (Score:5, Informative)
Sharman said the companies used Kazaa Lite, an ad-less replica of its software, to get onto the network, and that they violated its own software's license agreement by sending warning messages to people on its network."
There's the answer; the RIAA/MPAA used an _illegally modified_ version of Kazaa Media Desktop in order to connect to the network. When you install Kazaa Lite (not saying that I have, despite what's copy/pasted next), it states:
"Please note that installing this software is ILLEGAL and is in violation of the Kazaa Media Desktop Terms of Use. If you do, however, install the software contained in this package, you agree to take ALL responsibility for your actions."
In this case, it's a big-ass lawsuit against you. The RIAA/MPAA violated the Sharman Networks EULA for Kazaa, and as such, opened themselves to legal action.
Ironic, isn't it?
(And to think that they could have used dummy machines to get around the Cydoor, P2P networking, and Gator that was in Kazaa...)
Re:From the Mercury News article... (Score:2)
If this came up in a box with an "I agree" button, than it is a typical click-through EULA agreement, and almost everybody agrees that these are unenforcable. Nobody reads them, everybody just clicks "I agree" immediately.
to that man.... (Score:4, Interesting)
I wish kazaa the best of luck. I hope it gives the studios a wake up call to the real world.
OH I get it! (Score:5, Insightful)
stop me if i'm wrong, but isn't "invading users' privacy" half the reason (the profitable half) that Sharman made Kazaa? Oh wait, now i see where the "infringement" lies...
In other news... (Score:5, Funny)
They use p2p just as much as any of us.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Who cares, right? Well, the music companies are paying these guys for the statistics. The very people that are suing kazaa and their ilk for a piece of software that supposedly only has the major function of piracy are using the same software for a very legitimate and profitable purpose. They love to know that some new song that is the number one download in Omaha isn't even being touched by the radio stations and should thus be put into heavy rotation. When asked about using such data, the radio stations and record companies of course vehemently deny any such affiliation.
I'm really curious as to whether or not kazaa's suit includes any information on this usage to help them along...
At least Sharman has a leg up ... (Score:3, Informative)
It's a EULA case... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It's a EULA case... (Score:2)
There are two types of EULAs:
A Better Article, Some Clarification (Score:5, Informative)
The "right" to sue? (Score:5, Insightful)
We're in a crises in this country. Laws are so convoluted, so full of holes and stops, that no one can understand them. Tort law has been thrown out and instead has been replaced with protections for those well connected. In the past, if you wronged someone, you had to pay for the consequences. Today, private property is all but gone, and the person or group with the most money controls what used to be your property, through the courts.
Sherman Networks should be able to sue a user for abusing its license. When you use software, you agree to the license of the owner of that software. Why is it that slashdotters gripe about Microsoft's crazy license (and yet go on and use the software), but its now fine for SN to use the same protection? Kazaa is their software. You use it under a license, and they can revoke it if you break their rules. It is their property.
This country needs to get out of its American System of Mercantilism as invented by Henry Clay and move towards a system of capitalism where private property protects you from the greed and wealth of others.
No mod points, but... (Score:2)
You do have a right to sue (Score:5, Insightful)
We actually need to strengthen this, as there are way too many frivilous suits these days.
Re:You do have a right to sue (Score:2)
Re:The "right" to sue? (Score:2)
Re:The "right" to sue? (Score:2)
Re:The "right" to sue? (Score:2)
If you could sue anyone for anything you wanted you could do damage b
I hope the RIAA wins. No Troll (Score:3, Insightful)
I actually hope the RIAA wins this one, it'll mean the end of all the stupid crap that I have to deal with when i have to reinstall a friends windows box.
Re:I hope the RIAA wins. No Troll (Score:3, Informative)
Custom Versions of Kazaa designed by Bay TSP (Score:5, Interesting)
The RIAA and MPAA have employed very secretive companies like Bay TSP to develop systems designed to disrupt the P2P networks. Bay TSP has apparently authored specialized version of the Kazaa client to do just this. Which of course, because of the DMCA, is an act of illegal reverse engineering. In addition, this work had the clear intention of disrupting a network, a probable criminal violation.
There are probably a number of cyber crime laws that Bay TSP regularly violates as well. Because what Bay TSP is doing for the RIAA and MPAA is nothing more than serving as a paid vigilante.
While it is the duty of the RIAA and MPAA to report instances of copyright violation to law enforcement, they have gone far beyond that. They're now actively subverting the computer systems of those they assume to be guilty. There is no trial, there isn't even any official accusation. They are their own judge, jury and executioner. This is why vigilantism is illegal in most forms, just as it is in this one.
And if this means Bay TSP and their ilk are knocked down a notch and forced to act within the law, I applaud Kazaa for this action.
Just goes to show... (Score:5, Funny)
You should always be careful when you squeeze the Sharman!
Ba-dum-psshh.. thanks, I'll be here all evening. Tip your waitresses and try the buffet.
Consumers' copy rights? (Score:2)
You know, I was wondering about this... (Score:5, Interesting)
This was, in fact, going to a question to Slashdot. But here goes anyway:
The FastTrack network (KaZaa), supports multisourced downloading. This cannot be changed in the settings. So, here's the problem: When the RIAA goes to court, how are they proving that the downloads haven't been multisourced from different people? Because if they are, at worst they're only proving that the client had SOME of A FILE which happened to come together into the song in the end. For instance, let's say I had a song that began as a sample from an RIAA-copyrighted song but then broke into a song that I created. If they're using multiple sources, how can they prove that the song they have isn't the beginning of their song with a middle and end that belong to me?
But what if, to avoid the above legal problem, the RIAA made their own client that did not support multisourced downloads, which is what I believe they have done. Wouldn't this require them to reverse-engineer the KaZaa client, and wouldn't THAT put them in violation of the DMCA AND general software copyright law since they are using it to make a profit [thestreet.com]?
What's more, I'm interested in how they are proving how many songs somebody is hosting. Are they, for instance, downloading one MD5-hashed song and then using the shared list to infer that the rest are legitimate RIAA-copyrighted songs? Or are they downloading every song and then comparing the MD5-hashes? And if the latter is the case, can it be implemented in the peer-to-peer protocols to keep individual users from uploading to the same people? That way, any lawsuit could be limited to say 5 songs or so?
What do you guys think?-Grym
Illegal activities still have certain protections (Score:5, Interesting)
M
Re:Illegal activities still have certain protectio (Score:2)
A few years ago there was a state that passed a marijuana sales tax so they could hit dealers with tax evasion on top of drug-dealing charges. Funnily enough, a dealer actually paid the tax, which nobody really expected. A court ruled the state couldn't use that as evidence ag
Is this really want we want? (Score:3, Interesting)
Seemingly, this would seem to go along great with what most on Slashdot want. (Well, besides the ones that wish to see the RIAA HQ violently explode on national TV.
If Sherman Networks wins, what exactly will be so great? We get a better S/N ratio on Kazaa? We get to stick it to the industries with a taste of their own medicine and say "neener neener neeeener!"? OK, I suppose that sounds good, at least to some. But, doesn't this also just strengthen the EULA and other such frivolous legal mumbo-jumbo? Wouldn't that just prove that the EULA is a real and binding contract?
Assuming I've understood the suit (which as I pointed out up top, I'm not sure I have), it seems many people are being hasty and blinded by their wish to see the entertainment industry falter. I mean this would amount to nothing more than thinking that it's OK to use Gestapo tactics, but only if they're used on criminals. Slashdot is quick to fall in love with this battle only to lose the war.
Of course, I could be wrong.
TSage
Huh?!? (Score:3, Funny)
Jaysyn
Pay Attention!!! (Score:2)
Just what I thought: Future DMCA fun to come... (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically you can sue everybody and everything for using anything that you're involved in. Think of the copyrighted Haiku for spam filtering or now this. Which, mind you, actually by law IS a case, imho.
Build a network for OSS projects, with a own protocol, copyright the stuff and add a modified GPL that forbids anyone who ever even thought of issueing a software patent to come nearer to it's code than 500 yards. As soon as Mickeysoft / RIAA or the likewise even twitches, sue them to chunky kibbles.
Really, if you think about it, this DMCA bullshit - which as I understand, even has gotten US Judges and law experts thinking if that was such a good idea - it's a wonderfull hinge & crowbar for seriously harrasing any organisation (RIAA, etc.) that is a major pain in the butt for any honorable US citizen.
I'd say it's time for you folks across the pond to use it to fight back. Maybe we europeans then won't have to go through the same hassle wilst our politicians are trying to pull the same braindead stunt. Mindlessly copying all US bullshit without even thinking twice. Instead of copying, for instance, US speedlimits or something else that would actually make sense.
Wait... (Score:2, Informative)
IPs to sue:
145.34.75.2
216.45.35.43
192.168.1.45...
This Explains Why Sharman Shut Down Kazaa Lite (Score:2)
Now it makes sense as a first (necessary) step in their intention to sue the **AA.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Uh? (Score:2)
"misusing Kazaa software to invade users' privacy"
This isn't copyright infrigement imho. Wouldn't RIAA just use a scanner to check what IP addresses it's connecting to and log those? They don't need to invade Sherman's copyrights or use an altered / hacked version of Kazaa at all.
"and sen
Re:Shortest Slashdot article ever! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:wack (Score:3, Funny)
What do Britons know about proper spelling in English? (=
Re:it's too easy! (Score:2)
1. steal copyrights from artists 2. sue customer base for copyright infringement 3.??? 4. Profit!!!
So I'd say that Sharman is simply taking lessons from the experts.
Re:Copyright infringement? (Score:2)
Re:It is copyright infringement (Score:3, Funny)