Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

MPAA Sues Scour: Will Google Be Next? 187

Posted by timothy from the how-about-the-public-library? dept.
BoFiS writes: "Well it seems the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) was feeling left out of all the suing action going on between the RIAA and Napster because News.com reports that they have filed a suit against Scour for aiding in the transfer of illegal/bootleg copies of movies. The article also talks about the DivX format that many movies come in, but not much about the suit itself." Scour may raise privacy concerns, but isn't their service essentially content-agnostic?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MPAA Sues Scour: Will Google Be Next? More

MPAA Sues Scour: Will Google Be Next?

Comments Filter:
  • Next, the RIAA and/or the MPAA will sue the US Government for starting the internet, which exists for the sole purpose of pirating music and movies.

    Bah, they'd have to sue Britain for indirectly starting the US, which exists for the sole purpose of starting the internet which exists for the sole purpose of .....

    -PS

  • What I think is trying to be said with the title is that they are companys that make tech that can be used to get "illigale" copy of copyright stuff, so google is a search engine it can be used to search for "illigale" songs, movies, software. The companys that are members of the MPAA and the like are just sue happy and if they can come up with even the stupidest resone they will use, I can imagine one of their arguments to sue google... "But you can go and search for MP3 and an artist's name and find it on google"

    I think I will buy some of the "Stop the MPAA" bumper stickers for my car from 2600
  • Actually, that's more or less the argument Napster is going to use. Their lawyer was involved with the Justice department case against MS.

    --
  • Napster only finds things too. It doesn't transfer anything at all. It sets up a direct connection between the two members of the program, but the file never touches Napster's servers. I don't know about Scour, but I presume it works the same way.
  • Oh and uh, I'm the one who wrote that first reply in case you couldn't tell.

    it's usually not that easy to tell one ranting idiot from the next, that's why i login.

    How is it that you've decided to let the industry that controls the creation of an artifact, define the legal definition of it's use? This "piracy" shit is coming straight from their mouths, and it has only one goal. It's FUD, and you know it. I'd like you site an example where more exposure to artistic endeavors has decreased the demand for such things. You even said yourself MP3 sounds like shit. You also said that real music fans will still buy albums (and I heartily agree). So how do you defend the idea that a limitless resource should be made limited solely because the people who make money off of it think that should be so?

    Even the writer of the DMCA thinks it is crap now. He had no idea how to create a viable digital marketplace and these trade industry groups knew it. So they pushed their agenda, which now seems obvious "sue every new form of competition to oblivion over the laws we wrote two years ago."

    hmm?
    --
  • Blockquoth the poster:
    I dislike the MPAA, but I think they have a duty to protect everyone in the movie business from potential damage.
    Ah, I see. Then it must also be moral and right for the Tobacco Institute to falsify data and for the cigarette companies to distort culture and Congress. Sure, tobacco kills its users, but hey, think of all those cigar shops that might go out of business...

    I feel for your friend, but no one suggested stepping in and "saving" the horse-and-buggy makers. Technology can move on, and business models sometimes -- despite all the FUD of the RIAA and MPAA -- sometimes do become obsolete.

  • If Scour looses this one, we're well beyond the time for elections and judicial appeal. That would be time for guns and subversion.

    "This year, it's the ballot or the bullet! The ballot or the bullet! It's either going to be the ballot or the bullet! You're going to have to choose - will it be the ballot or the bullet? The ballot or the bullet. It's going to be the ballet or the bullet." --Malcolm X

    P.S. It's spelled "loses". When you use two o's, you get "loose". Thus, if I refer to you as a "loser", I am implying that you are "one who loses"; if I refer to you as "looser", I am implying that one or more of your orifices are less tight than the average heterosexual male.

    Also, after careful reading, it should be clear that the parent post is not flamebait, and this is.
  • No, the User Friendly strips were about a band who sued Napster (like Metallica did) - what was suggested was that RIAA could be sued.

  • "This lawsuit is about stealing," MPAA president Jack Valenti said in a press conference this morning. "Technology may make stealing easier, but it doesn't make it right."

    That's for sure. It's about the MPAA's right to steal.

    And technology may make it easier to "steal," but that does not make this lawsuit right, nor does it turn technology or search engines into burglar's tools.

    As usual, news.com is virtually useless and doesn't list anything resembling what the actual cause of action is. Contributory infringement? Vicarious liability? Some provision of the DMCA? They don't tell us. Jerks.

  • Re:Just the past few weeks? (Score:3)

    by streetlawyer ( 169828 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @11:03PM (#916468) Homepage
    Technology and big agencies like this do not mix

    Pretty bad news for Nasa ....

  • >Hrmm, is wrongly a word?

    Yep. At the very latest "Stranger in a Strange Land" would've made it a shoo in.
  • Not so. These lawsuits loose money for Scour and for the MPAA. It makes a veritable fortune for the MPAA's legal department, who would love nothing more than to see these cases drag on for a decade.

    Let us not forget when Disney's legal department sued a daycare center for showing Disney animanted films to kids, claiming they didn't have a multi-thousand dollar distrobution license. (The PR department got wind of it, and very quickly granted the daycare center a free license before the legal eagles made Disney look even worse than it already did for "suing children.") I'm not sure we can even blame the MBAs running the big studios. The ones behind frivolous lawsuits are the legal departments. It doesn't matter if the MPAA's case is thrown out of court, the laywers still make a cool couple of mil' on the deal.

    --GrouchoMarx

  • I'd like to point out in Clinton's defense, as much as it galls me, ICANN was created(chosen) per a presidential order. While a lot of people try to trash ICANN around here, they are a _much_ better choice than N/A or some megalithic DMV in washington...

    which leads me a little off topic: I heard today that part of Gore's platform is that he'll hire 10,000 new prosecutors to disperse amongst the states, if he's elected. We all know what bored prosecutors do, they bully corporations and peasants (the only two types of American) and they are in full swing acendancy these days, with tobacco, handguns and Microsoft. While some of you may applaud the latter, how long before they set their sights on someone/something you care about?

    :)Fudboy

  • What a fucking boneheaded move (Score:3)

    by drix ( 4602 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @08:12PM (#916472) Homepage
    I've read a deposition from this guy Valenti (head of MPAA) before, and he really seems to lack a fundamental understanding of the technological status quo. Not only is he basically clueless of what's going on online, save a vague premonition that it's illegal and that he should sue, but any, and I mean any (wo)man who has traversed their way as far up the corporate ladder as he has should be astute enough to realize that the last thing to do right now is to sue.

    I mean, talk about bad timing! Napster would have to rank at or near the top of the list of most covered Internet stories ever. You don't think the press isn't going to see this as a Napster analogue and just gobble it up? If there's one thing that really cemented Napster's growth, it's the fourth estate. I doubt if they would have anywhere near 20,000,000 users if Shawn Fanning wasn't on Newsweek and every newspaper and pop-culture rag in the country wrote multiple Op-Ed and news pieces on it.

    And now this flaming idiot Valenti decides to sue! I really, really do feel for Scour - not because they're being sued. Ho no - I just hope that they have the bandwidth and servers to accomodate the five to ten extra million people that are going to sign on once the word "Scour" gets drag through the press just like "Napster" did a few months ago.

    On one level Valenti is doing the right thing, I suppose. But come on. How stupid can you get? I would have at least waited until the Napster issue became stale with the public before throwing essentially the same lawsuit on the table again. It doesn't take a genious to tell you that Napster has benefitted from the RIAA suit far, far more than it has suffered. Even if they end up losing, they've built a brand-name that no amount of advertising could have ever hoped to achieve.

    --
  • Actually, the RIAA is going to sue Tim Berners-Lee and Al Gore next, as they are the co-creaters of the internet.
  • Though what a truly find funny, is the fact that hardly anyone had ever heard of napster before the suit, now everyone know about them. Hardly anyone has heard of scour, will the same thing now happen. And why wouldn't the MPAA learn from the mistakes of the RIAA????
  • In truth a lot of the movies are full length features.

    They go through the legal system because its all they know. Instead of being smart and figuring out the system, they rely on "the old world" way of thinking...
    --
    Humancasting [sourceforge.net]

  • Involved? I wrote that site, and hosted it in my own room! It wasn't immoral then, and it isn't immoral now. I do not believe it is immoral for people to offer copyrighted music online. I believe that it IS immoral for people to download, listen to, and keep the music without having previously purchased a copy. I only download MP3s of music that I bought on CD or tape. If other people can't do the same thing, that's their problem and not mine.

    What we offered at Tek was a service. We encoded and classified the music, provided the playlist service, and kept track of the statistics. Like someone else said in this thread, dont shoot the messenger.

    Oh, and I'm flattered you remember :)

    "jeff"

  • umm, the market doesn't seem to think so. People (i.e. me) would much prefer to peruse pr0n from the comfort of their homes rather than some seedy cum-stained shack on the outskirts of town. You could probably blame our puritannical "won't somebody think to keep the children ignorant" roots for that, if you really wanted to.

    I don't think I've ever been to a town that has a triving "red light district", but I've been there on the Net.

    --

  • Re:more of slashdot's BS articles (Score:5)

    by Jeffrey Baker ( 6191 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @06:35PM (#916479)
    Actually, it is neutral. You are making the mistake of considering the entertainment industry's argument when the underlying assumption is not valid. That is, the entertainment industry has no inherent right to regulate the transmission of digital music files.

    The fact that you can download the music from within the scour interface is irrelevant. Music files on the internet may be copyrighted by bg labels, or they may not be. The industry has a very large share of the copyrights out there, but that doesn't mean that they should be given control over ALL music distribution.

    People are copying copyrighted music out there and I think that is unethical. However, I do not believe that going after the mode of transmission is justified. The cost, which will be squashing independently recorded music forever, is simply too great.

    In short, don't be trapped by the industry's mind control attempts.

  • Sue! (Score:1)

    by radpole ( 39181 )
    How about we start suing the car companies for selling cars to armed robbers. For delivering drugs up and down our nations highways. They should really stop making cars they are used for so many illegal activities. I am suing the computer companies next for robbing me of a life. They know these things are addictive and they just keep making them. I can't even help myself. I just seems to me that all the laws that are made now are making for a lawless society!

  • This is unfair to Scour (Score:3)

    by proxima ( 165692 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @06:36PM (#916481)
    The article states that Scour willingly removes the links of any copyright owner who requests that such a link be removed to their material. Also, Scour has made a few movie trailer/promotion deals with studios on their web site. This same studios (such as Hollywood) are now plaintiffs in this lawsuit!

    The studios were apparently thinking about working with Scour for content, but instead have slammed them with a lawsuit through the MPAA. This is the wrong move, following the lead of the RIAA and Napster - it's not the way to make money. The studios want money, and few people have the bandwidth to download such movies right now - so these studios aren't losing money. IMO, it's far better from a business-stance to make deals and do movie promotions with a company like Scour - that could actually lead to some revenue. These lawsuits just lose money for everyone in legal fees.
  • Disclaimer: I don't care what the tobacco companies do, but I don't want to pay for some one's self-inflicted degenerative disease.

    Oh, you mean like obesity?

    -- Jabber: Get the Message @ http://www.jabbercentral.com/ [jabbercentral.com]
  • "Scour may raise privacy concerns" damn the LA Times.. Scour is not anymore a privacy problem then any other filesharing application out there. Don't share shit you don't want people to get, it's really not that hard.. I hate to see people hop on the media bandwagon because someone else makes a claim for a original story. As for the remark about google.. What the hell does Google and Scour have to do with one another?? -X- http://dmusic.com
  • With all the lawsuits around I think I need someone to sue. It is become difficult to tell if the lawsuits are actually because of losing revenue or trying to gain it in a new way.
    Kate

  • If you can give me a good argument for pr0n shops in general to be shut down I'll agree with you, until then I see no reason to think that pr0n shops are inherantly bad.

    I won't say they're inherently bad, but my sense is that most communities think they're something of an embarrassment and would be happier if they weren't there. If the Internet provides cheaper, more discreet pr0n to those who want it, and towns and cities get to improve their image without having to resort to draconian zoning measures (etc), then everybody wins IMHO. (Except, of course, the owners of the pr0n shops... but they can tell their sad stories to the buggy whip salesmen for all I care)

  • "Well it seems the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) was feeling left out of all the suing action going on "

    the mpaa isn't feeling left out of anything, they've been suing 2600 [2600.com] for awhile now.
  • Disclaimer: I hate all forms of IP and think the world would be a better place with no IP or significantly less. Given the mass of capital invested in IP these days I think it's unlikely I'll see its abolishment in my time, but I feel it's important to fight when IP rights are being extended & entrenched.

    Me too. It was such a drag when NetWare/IPX lost the protocol wars.

    sulli

  • Try looking for recent songs on harmony central.

    It's great for classics, and I use it for such, but it's not nearly the same thing as the one true OLGA.

  • although it's neutral, the second site that google found had downloadable metallica mp3s.

  • Re:Sadly, I must agree with the MPAA (Score:3)

    by Deosyne ( 92713 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @11:37PM (#916490)
    Heh, I don't think the reduction in the amount of business that he did was so much because of porn flicks being pirated, but because there is so goddamn much porn out there. I mean, people joke about how much porn is available, but I don't think that too many of us really think about the atrociously huge amount of porn that is available without ever leaving the house. And I'm not talking pirated porn clips, I'm talking the whole friggin bonanza of pornography out there, from still pics to clips to special interest crap to major events; on the Howard Stern Show yesterday, Howard was interviewing a dude who was going to webcast a contest where some women would attempt to out gangbang each other. To win, they had to bang more guys than any other girl in 12 hours AND had to do more than 620 guys, which was the record done by some other chick, also on the Internet. Prize for the winner? One million fucking dollars!

    Internet porn is absolutely huge, there is amazingly massive quantities of it out there and you don't have to leave your house to get more porn than you'll ever be able to spank to for the rest of your life. That dude wasn't driven out of business by piracy, he was driven out by lack of interest. Who the hell is going to buy a ticket to a porn theater and get horned up when they can spend the ticket price on a subscription to a site that tailors to their specific kink and get truckloads of porn for the price of a movie. Shit, take every single pirated movie and clip off of the Internet and the guy still would have gone out of business, because there is just so goddamned much porn available that is legit.

    The supply far, far, far outweighs the demand, and that dude didn't get it until it was too late; so goes business in an industry affected by changing technologies, which, to swing bizarrely back on to topic somewhat, is the same lesson that the MPAA, RIAA and every other acronym that bases their existance on physical media is having crammed violently up their asses. This doesn't make piracy right, and violators should be subject to prosecution, but lawsuits such as the MPAA vs Scour and RIAA vs Napster are a complete waste of these groups' time, as they are pissing away every dime that they spend on these stupid lawsuits rather than developing a new business model to adapt to the sudden turns that technology has taken over the past few years.

    Deo
  • For the past few weeks, the MPAA has shown that its clue level is as low as the RIAA. The genie is out of the bottle and we're not going back. Ever.
    --
    Humancasting [sourceforge.net]

  • Re:Sadly, I must agree with the MPAA (Score:3)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 20, 2000 @08:23PM (#916492)

    you must remember that it's not just size that matters, but how it's actually used.

    Huh huh. Huh huh.

    My friend's theater dropped over the months in clients, and now about only 2-3 people per day come

    Huh huh. Huh huh.

  • I wonder when just being online is enough to be sued by the MPAA or RIA? I mean, you are on the internet, files are available, you could potentially download something they own .. Or what about being an ISP? Packets from MP3s/AVIs/MPGs are flowing through your router equipment, aiding the pirates doint their dirty deeds. Where's it going to stop?
  • I bet the MPAA will sue American Standard [rpgclassics.com] next, because clearly their products are too content-agnostic and are not doing their best to feed the MPAA's cash cow. Actually, the point is more valid than it seems, considering the parallels in what's coming out of the movie industry these days and what's being flushed down American Standard's products.

  • The Actual Complaint (Score:5)

    by Jim Tyre ( 100017 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @08:29PM (#916495) Homepage
    For those who like to read such things. the actual Complaint filed is available here [mpaa.org], courtesy of our friends at the MPAA.

    Not surprisingly, the Proskauer firm, the same one in the 2600.com case is involved, as is Judge Kaplan's old firm, Paul, Weiss. I am personally disappointed that David Kendall of Williams & Connolly represents some of the Plaintiffs. Most may know him as one of Clinton's lawyers, but I know him (personally) as a longtime and good advocate of First Amendment rights.

  • Yes Scour must win this one. All they do is report the response from a particular protocol from certain hosts attached to a certain network. If Scour looses this one, we're well beyond the time for elections and judicial appeal. That would be time for guns and subversion.
  • Certainly they demonstrated their cluebie level long ago. As with the RIAA, they don't get it, and there's no reason to expect them to become enlightened.

    Technology and big agencies like this do not mix. Change only happens quickly when it's done willingly or with resignation. Agencies and businesses that stubbornly cling to their notions of how the world works won't be changing any time soon.
  • The only movies that the MPAA protects are the typicall Hollywood crap ones. Please! I could careless if these movies make it not. What does the MPAA provide independent film? Nothing. I've seen more awesome indie movies and shorts that I can count and now I'm activly watching indie pix on the web. Do they get the support that the MPAA offers? Hell no! Being independent means doing it your own way and not answering to a group of fat cats sitting around with marketing budgets that are hemoring money. Movies for the people by the people...

    <P>
    Hey, but if your happy being feed the same story line with the same actors and the same "explosions" go right ahead and see Matrix 2 when it comes out. Enjoy Star Wars Episoid Two "Electric JarJar Boogaloo." I won't be in line with you. An I sure as sh*t won't be wasting my precious bandwidth downloading DivX copies off the web.
    <P>

  • Will Timothy be Next??? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    to make an absurd reference to Google being an MP3 search engine?? News at 11.
  • If there's an open source application enabling all this file sharing, who would RIAA/MPAA go up against? Individual users? Wouldn't that be cost prohibitive? Is an open application the ultimate defense against this or do we need new legislation...
    --
    Humancasting [sourceforge.net]
  • 'Twas done in Chicago a long, long time ago, as well as many of the suburbs. This has got to be the cleanest area of the country. This is mostly the effect of a religiously conservative oligarch mayor who, for instance, had outdoor restaurants banned because he thought they were "unsanitary". In the burbs, well, that area IS the most politically conservative group of voters in the country. Curiously, the areas of the U.S. I find to be covered in strip bars were... pretty much any place in the Bible Belt! The more conservative the lifestyle, the more copression relief you find just outside of town.
  • What is next? Suing companies that sell CD-Burners and blank CD's because they can be used to pirate data? Come on people. The real thing that needs to be considered is this:
    Programs like napster and scour promote use of technology. The more technology of this nature(not pirating, but easy to use and popular) that is around, the more people will become involved in technology. This means more people will become more competent with computers. It will speed up the advancement of technology, and help us all get those new toys we wanted much faster due to a greater number of people in the field(I still want a flying car or a transporter... or a lightsaber).

    Software like this will, in the end, be of benefit to the whole of mankind, and such innovation should be encouraged.

    -Plague
  • Look at it this way:

    Scour is a search engine for media that has no prejudice in its results.

    Google is a search engine for web pages that has no prejudice in its results.

    I can search for 'windows 98 registration code' and probably find it using google

    I can also search for 'metallica master of puppets' and probably find it using scour

    Does this mean we sue both scour and google and take them down, leaving us with nothing to search with? I really hope not.

    I semi-understand the hostility aimed at napster, but Scour is different. I have used scour to find trailers for Lord of the Rings, and X-Men for instance... Shown it to my friends, in turn making them want to see those movies... But who knows... maybe we should all just give in to this censorship...

  • MP3s are theft?

    most MP3s contain music that has not been licensed by the website/scour/napster publisher. However, this is the publisher's responsibility. If I go to my favorite radio station's website and listen to their Real Audio stream, it's their responsibility to actually license that music. The same goes for MP3s. Storing those MP3s for personal use is fair use. Any service that facilitates making copies of MP3s from any source at all facilitates making fair use copies, since it is not the end-user's responsibility to license that music, it's the publisher's!

    And even if cases in which music that is offered without being licensed also invalidates the fair-use component of copying and/or storing the music, prohibiting an copy-making service will also harm our rights in the cases where the music is licensed. In other words, prohibiting services such as scour, napster, and eventually lycos' mp3 search, irc, http etc. is patently an overbroad measure.

    In conclusion; prohibiting products or services that enable copying harm the individual's right to fair-use, harms the progress of the arts, constitutes an overbroad measure by any stretch of the imagination, and IMNSHO has no basis in law.

    You might as well prohibit CD-Rs and FedEx. Or pens. Hey, how about a tax on paper so only decent upstanding members of society can afford to print newspapers?


    --

  • I have used Napster and Macster and the music I have downloaded has gotten me to buy the cd. You may thonk that I am only one out of many users but take a look at this article [cnet.com]
    from cnet.com. It looks as though there is proof that the use of these online music sources does indeed lead to people buying the music.
  • 'Cuz they found out I'm near to perfecting my replicator. They want to steal as much money as they can before I can clone it and use it to buy all my new CDs.

    MUHAHAHAHAHAHA

    -- Dave

  • Can you sue someone for collateral damages arising from their suit against someone else?

    Interesting - I should get into a victimised frame of mind and start making money, because the court case against OJ caused Friends to be rescheduled, which meant I couldn't watch it, which caused psychological damage and clinical depression - how much money am I looking at in damages?

    I hope you're right, but I'm unsure whether the courts would be willing to create a situation in which bringing a case to court in itself could lead to exposure to damages. Or is that what countersuits are all about? Sorry, my legal knowledge isn't up to this!

  • After all, those little programs are probably the biggest culprits in illegal software and file exchange. You know why don't we just go back to live performances and stop "recording" things. That would ensure that people have to pay... Boy this whole thing really chaps my hide. I hope some sort of frivolous lawsuit law applies here.

    <SIG>
    I think I lost my work ethic while surfing the web. If you find it, please email it to crispy@crotch.caltech.edu.
    </SIG>

  • Re:Strange, I don't quite get it... (Score:3)

    by AndrewD ( 202050 ) on Friday July 21, 2000 @01:19AM (#916509) Homepage

    Odd that you should mention that: landlords can get in trouble over their tenants' crimes.

    There's a piece of legislation here in the UK (and not all the tea in Burnley would induce me to remember an actual citation) to the effect that any landlord who permits premises to be used for the purpose of the consumption of any of a short list of illegal substances is liable to some smallish penalty.

    Given the current state of play in the War on Some Drugs, I would be very surprised to the point of actual amazement if there wasn't something comparable in every single US jurisdiction, Oz, Canada and indeed just about everywhere you can get away with refusing service to people lacking shirt or shoes.

    Back to the subject under discussion: the logic is that where the landlord has control over his tenants' use of the premises (and most leases contain clauses that provide at least some restrictions on use) he is in a position to either throw the tenant out or at least inform on the druggies.

    The logic of this action is that as Scour has at least some control (or the means to exercise control, whether or not they do exercise it) over what happens on their site, they can be held accountable for what they fail to prevent.

    Your mileage may vary as to whether that's a good thing in these particular circumstances.

  • Amen! When OLGA was shut down, I was still in junior high school - and I still remember what it said in the FAQ:

    "What can I do to help?"

    We make quarterly backups of our entire content. Please download them and hold onto them. Wait until the time is right and we can resurface.

    Those archives are still sitting on my old 486DX/33 - I wonder if the HD has decayed by now.
  • Ah, fair enough then. I can understand that, though I think there is a place for both free internet pr0n and a real life sex shop.
  • I was deeply saddened when OLGA shut down.
  • I wonder if MPAA and RIAA will go so far as to sue the power companies since they provide the power to the equipment with which these 'pirate' copies are made? Or, they could sue the connection providers for the various sites (and our ISPs) for providing the media for which the copies to be transmitted through.

    Sorry, just a little sarcasm to brighten up the day.
  • What I meant by "everyone" was both Scour and the studios representing the MPAA. These studios want to make money, not pay their lawyers more than they have to - because that's a business expense. The same with Scour, they'd obviously prefer this lawsuit wasn't taking place, it's going to take a lot of money off of a startup that would otherwise be spending that money improving their service.

    The best the MPAA can hope for is a shutdown of Scour's linking service. They probably won't be able to recoup much legal fees (provided they win), so I think they'll probably lose money on this lawsuit because of the legal fees.

  • I think the saddest thing, in this case, though, was that there were well-organized, well-attended protests in favor of leaving the strip clubs alone and they didn't seem to have any effect whatsoever on the Mayor or City Council. Though I think it shook them up a little when such a large number of people showed up, they didn't back down. When you add in recent free speech decisions by the Supreme Court (which have been a mixed bag, but mostly negative) I'd say the porn store this guys friend was running would have more trouble than just freely available Internet porn.

  • Lighten up - Change is good! (Score:3)

    by stu72 ( 96650 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @08:36PM (#916516)
    If this is really happening, I'm really sorry for your friend and all the other people in the world who derive their income from obselete froms of information distribution.

    The world is changing. It is obvious that many people would rather get their porn/music/movies/whatever over the net than in physical form, many would argue that this is a long term trend. Of course there are IP issues to sort out in this new environment and they will get sorted out, one way or another, and we will move on.

    Your basis for supporting the MPAA is about as solid as the tobacco companies crying, "but what about our employees?" as if keeping a few thousand people employed in a stangant industry was appropriate compensation for massive health care bills.

    Disclaimer: I don't care what the tobacco companies do, but I don't want to pay for some one's self-inflicted degenerative disease.

    Disclaimer: I hate all forms of IP and think the world would be a better place with no IP or significantly less. Given the mass of capital invested in IP these days I think it's unlikely I'll see its abolishment in my time, but I feel it's important to fight when IP rights are being extended & entrenched.
  • Slashdot is often mistaken for an advocacy site.
    It started as a website for news that intrests CmdrTaco. Thats all it ever has been or will be.

    Thats good in a way... It means the Slashdot editors accually know and understand what they are posting.

    There isn't a single legal expert amoung the Slashdot editors... so don't expect legal news...
  • Unethical, vs. immoral, inappropriate, illegal, etc.

    Notice that something can be unethical, and I can still not give a wet slap about it.

    If this confuses you, go buy a decent dictionary.

  • Re:Utterly Clueless (Score:4)

    by Grit ( 18830 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @06:49PM (#916522) Homepage

    Who will they sue after all the people trying to develop person-to-person file sharing are out of business? Will HTTP servers become illegal? Will Gnutella and any other software that could be used for copying be restricted under the DCMA? Will they sue the Internet backbone providers for allowing copyrighted content to flow through their routers?

    Well, that might be a bit extreme even for Hollywood. But the MPAA and RIAA's position seems to be that any software which allows arbitrary person-to-person file transfer is illegal. Or is it just indexing that makes such illegal?

    It shouldn't need to be said, I find this attitude completely unacceptable. HTTP clients are not illegal merely because I can find illegal content on somebody else's HTTP server using a search engine. Napster and Scout are more streamlined, efficient, and convenient versions of the same thing; I simply don't see any fundamental or legal difference.

    I think MPAA et al are making a big mistake. Rather than trying to eliminate file-sharing services, they should invest in building their own--- one with features they like. Instead, they may end up in a world where the services currently provided by Scour or Napster are done in a distributed fashion (or in an appropriate jurisdiction) and they have no influence.

  • The thing that I wonder is why is everyone of these major organizations jumping to the legal system as their primary means of problem resolution?

    What other recourse do they have? Sending emails kindly asking people to stop? Or sending BIG guys in trenchcoats to peoples houses?

    Right now, the law is written so that what most of these services are providing is illegal. That's that. There doesn't need to be any kindness towards people breaking the law. That may change however, as these cases go through the legal system, but right now with the law on their side, why wouldn't they want to jump into the legal system?
  • What you're describing is called "competition". The porn store has run up against somebody or something else, that can do the same, better. There is no "right to stay in business" when faced with a superior competitor, but that's basically what this store and the RIAA, MPAA etc want: a government mandate to force you, at legal gunpoint, to do it the bad old way.
  • A little off topic, but this should be of interest to some.

    Hosting a website on a Linux box running on an SDSL connection is the cheap way to go, for around $275 you get 1.1mbps (best deal in the present area) and unlimited traffic. This is critical when you run an independent site which transfers large amounts of data (75GB monthly).

    In steps Scour, unfortunately they index your site and suddenly a mass of people are downloading mpegs (and only mpegs) from you. Nobody is actually visiting you, nor reading your content, and that normally smooth 1.1mbps connection is choking.

    At the time there was no automated way to easily remove the site from Scour, nor could I find what the Scour robot was named. Most search engines' robots are listed on one FAQ or another, so it's easy to set your robots.txt file for them not to index your site. You end up shooting them a frantic email asking to be removed ASAP (since you're experiencing a DDOS for all purposes) and parsing through your server log to try and find that pesky robot's name.

    The heart of the matter is that while Scour may be one stop shopping for everyone it's a hidden pitfall for websites - people download anything you have up, but never actually visit your page or make an impression on that ad counter.

    Here is a FAQ on search engine robots [webcrawler.com] for those interested. The name of Scour.net's robot is: "SCOUR"


    Andrew Borntreger
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Actually, it seems possible to me that they're trying to overturn the Betamax ruling. If they can get win enough of these cases against service providers (as opposed to those actually breaking the laws in question), it might overweigh that decision, which is definitely not in their favour. I don't know much about legal precident laws, but is this possible?


    -RickHunter
  • Scour willingly removes the links of any copyright owner who requests that such a link be removed to their material.

    Copyright is not an opt-out system.

    --

  • This is a rant. I know. (Score:4)

    by bugg ( 65930 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @07:01PM (#916548) Homepage
    Bah! When the Harry Fox Agency shut down OLGA [olga.net], nobody cared. It had one mention on slashdot, and that was it. Olga has been harassed for doing something which is actually honest. Comeon people, anyone who's been to Scour's page knows that they are definetly "piracy-friendly" and that the service is mainly being used for piracy. Look at the top searches, which they flaunt all over the page!

    When a service that's of value to the "average slashdot user" is endangered, we'll see like six articles with updates, and interviews with the agency trying to shut them down. But when the little guy is actually getting screwed when they really aren't doing anything wrong, it gets shrugged off because it doesn't affect you people.

    Scour may or may not be operating in the legal limits of the laws, but one can certainly see how it's service is questionable. But the precent (not a legal precedent, it's never been to court) set by OLGA scares me. It really, really does.

    OLGA used to hold about 33,000 files. Now it holds about 1,500.

  • This would require that anybody transporting any content would have to inspect it to prove it was not contraband.

    And just what the hell is contraband?

    Drugs? Guns? Nuclear weapons? Porn? Strong encryption? Anti-establishment propaganda?

    What is so wrong with those that we as a country are limiting our own constitutional rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness by making them taboo?

    Why is the United States Code 250MB of plain text?

  • It's even funnier regarding the fact that while the MPAA is raising a big fuss about anything from DeCSS to napster they don't seem to be concerned at all about the fact that a big market for DVDmachines (as in cranking out one every few seconds) is in China, now i don't know all those famous Chinese movies ...

    So when the MPAA starts lawsuits because of someone linking to the DeCSS tools why don't they try to sue those who sell DVDmachines to countries where american copyright isn't enforcable at all? I'd really love to see the MPAA answer that one, backed up with some numbers of DVDmachines sold to China versus legal DVD's being produced there.
  • IIRC Scour uses SMB (and a couple other protocols) to transfer the files between computers. It's been a while since I've used Scour so I could be wrong. Now if Scour loses this, would this not make Windows illegal also seeing as how they are using the same protocol for file sharing? I propose we set up a "Network Neighbourhood" over the Internet using Windows (and I guess Linux users could use Samba) to transfer Movies and MP3's. That way when the MPAA and RIAA get wind of this happening it'll be Microsoft they'll have to sue since they created the product. Since Microsoft has the money to fight back maybe the MPAA and RIAA will finally figure out that they are not suing the right people.
  • > there is also an interview with hillary rosen on news.com where she specifically says that they are not just randomly suing people.

    Actions speek louder than words...

    Google is a smart search that cuts out garbage using it's own logic...
    Score uses a compleatly diffrent logic that leads it to link directly to MP3s....

    Same results however... you wanted MP3s.. you got MP3s...
    Just like AltaVista...

    Only Score and Google give you lagit sources... AltaVista sends you to pirate websites...

    Yes score makes a GREAT piracy tool... so dose Napster... so dose copy on dos... and hard disks... and CD burnners....
    Sue Sony, HP, IBM, Microsoft, and basicly the whole consumer hardware industry...
    hay sue the music industry too for setting "set to pirate" standards....

    It just so happends... and yes... it's at random...

    Is this invalid?
    Hay... Maybe score is ignoring someones Robot.txt... that changes things quite a bit
  • It's possible to be an accessary to a crime that one doesn't actually commit.

    My point, which I didn't make very well, was that the original poster's statement:

    Scour willingly removes the links of any copyright owner who requests that such a link be removed to their material.

    did little to convince me that Scour has any respect for others' copyrights. The fact is that Scour links to material that they know full well violates copyright and then try to look like good guys by claiming that they will gladly remove the link if the copyright owner ever finds out about it and goes to the trouble of informing them.

    This is sort of like those warez sites that have a disclaimer about how they don't host any of the files and the links to cracked programs are provided only for educational purposes. Does anybody actually believe that? Probably the same people who think Napster is all about trying music before buying it.

    --

  • This is something I've wondered for a while about recording companies' wierd file-first-and-ask-questions-later policy:

    my.mp3.com... At least they try to limit content access to at least those who have had a real physical duplicate of the album at some point.
    But, yet, they get sued by record companies. The solid basis of the record companies case: The copies that the users are accessing are not copies of the cds they purchased, but of copies from another source. In other words, their case is based on a technicalty. But, likely a solid one.

    Why, though? If record companies kill my.mp3.com and verifier-controlled services like it, then all the users will move over to unchecked storage sites like myplay.com and distributed file sharing systems like napster, gnutella, freenet, etc., all (or at least most if indexing is contributory infringement) of which are protected by the betamax ruling, because they have one or more significant legitimate uses. Are they really that short-sighted?
  • The MPAA has convinced a judge in the town of Lower East Cowpoke (pop. 139) to grant an injunction against anyone using FTP or hosting an FTP server because it could be used to transfer MP3's files containing copyrighted music.

    "It doesn't matter that the techonology pre-dates the file format by more than 20 years! Unless we control the transmissions and can make more money off of it, it shouldn't be allowed!"

    Meanwhile rumours of merger between Microsoft and Time-Warner-AOL-PacBell-Sony-Perdue-Disney-Ford-Sa ab continue. The MPAA expressed support for the merger since it will "keep the control of information in the hands of responsible corporations who will know how to use it wisely."

    (Yes, this is fictitious. Yes, it's sarcasm. No, I have not stolen from the breakfast tables of millions of Europeans.)

  • As one previous poster mentioned, if the Napster and Scour technologies are being targeted for lawsuits, then it would seem that FTP and HTTP would be even more culpable as technologies that enable illegal file-sharing. The difference is, Napster/Scour/Gnutella offer greater de-centralization of the content. That is: the average computer owner can easily control and distribute content with these technologies - the parental middleman (ISP operator controlling most web servers) is removed from the picture. Also, with Napster/Gnutella/Scour, the distributors generally have dynamic IP's - that makes things for more difficult for MPAA/RIAA when they want to track people down (though in the case of Napster/Metallica, the centralized login system proved that decentralizing content isn't always the issue.)

    Anyway, this decentralization of distribution is a scary thing for the big-ticket content providers - it not only makes piracy more feasible, it also makes competition more feasible. Independent media creators now have a greater opportunity to distribute outside the mainstream channels, and this is problematic for MPAA/RIAA etc... These groups consistently try to control distribution in ways that assume/ensure that they are "the only game in town." Remember MPAA's proposed surcharge on blank video tapes a few years back, to reimburse them for revenues lost to piracy? Was any of that surcharge to be distributed to independent videomakers?

    The point to bear in mind when discussing the squelching of technologies/services that appear to foster piracy, is that these same services/technologies also foster distribution of alternative/independent content. To "shoot the messenger" as its been referred to here, is to censor independent distribution, not just distribution of pirated mainstream content.

  • Wow, that jerky little 5inch window is pretty damn valuable, compared to the big screen, surround sound, full immersion experience you get for a lousy $[5-9] at the theatre! Appearently they (over)estimate each download is going to cost at least 15,000 ticket buyers or 75,000 video rentals. Amazing.
  • Good post. I think you're right that their business model is under threat and that if they don't adapt rather than cling to history, they'll suffer quite badly.

    The problem here (as I see it) is that we have two arguments, and whilst each one on it's own is very valid and not *that* threatening in itself to these four-letter institutions, when you put the two together, they have every reason to be righteously pissed.

    1) We have a right to privacy, I don't want a unique ID on my Pentium III, Doubleclick extrapolating my browsing habits to figure out my preferred colour of underwear or anybody anywhere figuring out character traits of mine by following what I do on the internet. - Fine.

    2) We have a right to "fair use" and to exchange whatever files we choose to exchange, and nobody has the right to gag the medium we use to do that, be it called Napster, Scour, Gnutella or an envelope and a stamp. - Fine.

    Put those two together and you have a situation in which people are going to copy stuff that they're allowed to copy, and make it available to other people, who will then download it in an environment that we are protecting so jealously that there is no way to police it, and that leads to potentially huge losses in revenue to the companies represented by these institutions.

    Why? Because when people think they can't get caught, many of them quite happily do whatever they want, be it legal, moral, or not.

    We sit here complaining about the MPAA and RIAA or whatever they're called, and protecting our medium's existence and privacy, but never offer them any viable solutions. Until someone bridges that gap and thinks of a solution, this problem isn't going to go away and the media companies will continue to try to gag what they perceive as a medium that facilitates the unlawful exchange of their product. Maybe we should try to come up with a solution to *their* problem instead of always just trying to slow them down. If we want them to go in another direction, lets open one up for them rather than just trying to close off the options that they have. What else can they do to protect the revenue flows they are entitled to arising from the goods they sell.

    Now I'm no better than anyone else, because I don't want them treading all over my privacy or the tools for information exchange that exist on the internet, but I haven't got a solution for them either - I just think that that direction is more likely to succeed than the protection of a medium that is obviously being used to exchange pirated music and in vast volumes.

    PS. On a related note - to say that "they make so much money that they had it coming to them" is economically rubbish. How much money they make is irrelevant. If you think the music costs too much, don't listen to it, in the same way that if you think a car costs too much, you don't buy it. You don't steal that car and then justify yourself by saying that it was overpriced in the first place.

  • Years ago that little program you are talking about never transfered files through the Scour's servers at all. When Scour was used, SMB sharing was popular but most people didn't know how to get to SMB sites with Win95/98 that were outside of the local browsing network. You can always get the file directly from the providers computer though with NT or smbclient. The scour program just makes that easier by dealing with the SMB stuff for you, along with whatever other types of protocol the files could be downloaded from (HTTP and FTP).
  • Firstly, as another poster states, Napster and Scour also only point you at the locations of files, and don't actually have the files. They are more like the Geocities pages with links to Warez FTP sites or doing a Google search for "Warez", than the Warez FTP sites themselves.

    Secondly, if anything by the standards being applied in these court cases Google is more infringing than Napster/Scour, as Google caches local copies of potentially copyrighted material.

    tangent - art and creation are a higher purpose
  • Meglocorp Peon Sir, Millions of people are downloading our movies from the net!
    Meglocorp VP Gasp! How are they doing it?
    Meglocorp Peon They are using advanced search engines that link files on personal computers!
    Meglocorp VP Gasp! We are loosing millions! People will go broke! Homeless and Starve to death!
    Meglocorp Peon We should SUE them!
    Meglocorp VP Ok, Who do we sue?
    Meglocorp Peon Ok, how about Excite?
    Meglocorp VP Nonono, We own that company..
    Meglocorp Peon How about Lycos?
    Meglocorp VP Oh nonono, our sister company owns them...
    Meglocorp Peon Humm, Yahoo?
    Meglocorp VP Nope, too big...
    Meglocorp Peon Hey, what about Scour.net...

    After long lawsuit, and Scour.net looses...

    Meglocorp VP I have this idea of allowing people to share files on the internet, and we charge each customer per transaction!
    Meglocorp Peon Wow, Brilliant boss...

  • Re:This is unfair to Scour (Score:3)

    by fishbowl ( 7759 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @07:28PM (#916572)
    "These lawsuits just lose money for everyone in legal fees."

    Not everyone.... Those legal fees go from one person's hand to another's.

    When I started college in 1982, the counselors bluntly discouraged "computer science" degree programs, and recommended Biz Adm and Finance.
    If you insisted that you knew better than they,
    you would be steered toward "Business Computer Information Systems" which was a lot of (guess what?) Bus. adm and finance, with some programming and mainframe administration (Pascal on Apple II's, which was actually the most fun I ever had in a programming class I must admit), then two semesters of Cobol (in those days, we still punched our jobs on cards, and took them to be neglected by grad student high-holies!), a VAX clone running "MUSIC" (McGill University System for Interactive Computing)... But I do ramble with my nostalgia, sorry.

    My point is, a LOT of people went into business law in those days. These people are lawyers at the peak of what they thought was a lucrative career, until they saw (or perceive!) 18 year olds making billions because they were at the right time in the right place with the knowhow and drive to make the technology sector really happen. So now, they're getting a piece of the pie. Get it?

  • Sadly, I must agree with the MPAA (Score:4)

    by Phil Eschio ( 210602 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @07:07PM (#916573)
    As much as I want large, firm rights and hard freedom on the net, and as much as I am disgusted by those big, solid corporate conglomerates, I am afraid I must side with the MPAA based on past experience. Let me probe deeper into the situation.

    One of my friends was the head of a theater and movie rental store that specialized in adult entertainment and movies (don't make jokes, just read on). Unfortunately he recently had to pull out of the market after his sales had dropped significantly from since last year(the year broadband connections dramatically increased along the country).

    Using common screen capture devices along with VCR's, (then later DVD's as the tech progressed), pirates began trading clips, then eventually full adult movies over usenet and irc and ftp, not to mention the new arrival of gnutella, freenet, and scour's client. Now, I'm not drawing size comparisions with Napster, but you must remember that it's not just size that matters, but how it's actually used. Many Napster users actually buy the CD's they pirate. But with the stigma attached to adult entertainment, such films get pirated big time anonymously as people would rather not be seen buying erotic films. My friend's theater dropped over the months in clients, and now about only 2-3 people per day come, as opposed to about 50 or so from last year. He asked a few of his few remaining regulars why sales were dropping so much, and the usual reply he got was, "It's easy to get porn for free anonymously on the net" When he was about to close down, he showed me his business log, reporting that his yearly sales had fallen by 31% from the year before. Because of that, he decided to withdraw from his store and went to look for another job.

    I know Slashdot people object to the term piracy, but it definitely hurts others, be it artists, store-owners, or corporate suits. I know the movie industry could never collapse like that, but perhaps the events I have seen with my friend in the adult entertainment industry are harbingers of what may happen to your local video store owner as movie piracy becomes large-scale. I dislike the MPAA, but I think they have a duty to protect everyone in the movie business from potential damage. I hate to say this, but good luck in your suit, MPAA.


    "The most fortunate of persons is he who has the most means to satisfy his vagaries."

  • Re: Copyright is not an opt-out system. (Score:3)

    by Kris_J ( 10111 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @07:29PM (#916576) Homepage Journal
    And links are not a breach of copyright.
  • wierd file-first-and-ask-questions-later policy
    It's easy. They don't have to worry about winning, they have the money to tie thier victum up in court, possibly disrupt service, and incur expensive legal fees. And if the courts are actually clueless enough to give them a few wins along the way, thats a little more power than they had before. They don't need the law on thier side, just an army of lawyers.
  • When a service that's of value to the "average slashdot user" is endangered, we'll see like six articles with updates, and interviews with the agency trying to shut them down. But when the little guy is actually getting screwed when they really aren't doing anything wrong, it gets shrugged off because it doesn't affect you people.

    So what? This isn't a general news site, it's a community. It covers news that matters to the community. If we don't care about something in significant numbers, it would be inappropriate to cover it here.

    Your bitch is with CNN and the networks.

    --
  • I agree with you completely that groups such as EGO, RNS, KSI, etc. do it for the piracy. But I'd like to point out sour, who do it for the music. Most of the rippers are also DJ's who from time to time share the dubplate wealth, put out live mixes of their own or whatever is featured on KISS FM at the moment. These guys are the sole reason I've ever heard of MUCH of what I've been buying recently.

    Jungle music is one area where I think mp3 is really helping. Kinda the pirate radio of today. Really, the cost per track of stuff on vinyl is much higher than CD, so being able to check out a preview before you buy can really help. It's not really going to kill record sales either, because the ones who were going to buy records are still going to buy records; not too many people DJ mp3's seriously.

    I just had to point out, anyway, that not all "real" ripping groups are doing it solely for the piracy.

  • Hmmm. Perhaps a new tactic is needed. I think friends of Napster/Scour/etc should find some starving new artists that are using these services to spread their music. Then, if/when they are shut down, the artists can claim harm was done to them by the RIAA et all. I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds to me like they could make a decent case-- that by shutting down all music distribution, they were hurting people using it for honest work. The RIAA definitely has deep pockets for a potential plaintiff.

  • more of slashdot's BS articles (Score:4)

    by Blue Lang ( 13117 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @06:23PM (#916590) Homepage
    the RIAA is targeting companies that make a point to offer copyrighted music. there is also an interview with hillary rosen on news.com where she specifically says that they are not just randomly suing people.

    in short, the assertion that they will be going after google is goddamned stupid.

    a search for mettalica mp3z on scour looks like this [scour.com], whereas one on google gives you this [google.com].

    you can download the mp3z directly from within the scour 'interface.' that is NOT neutral.

    have a nice day.

    --
    blue

  • Here in Tampa, FL, the strip clubs are being driven out of business by constant police harrassment. (The local government keeps trying to come up with new laws designed to harrass and harm the strippers themselves, because they are seen as the "weak link" in the chain.)

    I personally know a few strippers who have been made completely broke from this, because people fear to visit strip clubs if there is the chance they will be arrested. Of course, it is no fun for strippers to have the choice of quitting, being fired or being arrested either. (They are moving away, mostly, to less repressive parts of the country, since most don't have the option to find another job that pays as well as stripping.)

    I'm sure they will go after the porno stores next, as soon as it is considered possible to do so.

    What's my point? What the government giveth, it can also taketh away. If you let individual freedoms be eroded to protect copyright, then you erode the same freedoms that would allow a porno store to remain in business.

  • How about a law that says search engines can only index HTML pages?

    I see no reason to add such laws, if I want to build a search engine, I dont want to have to go ask a lawyer all the laws that I must abide by. Is that really the kind of internet you want to be browsing in the future? What next, ban hyperlinking?

    Oh wait forgot, the MPAA is already trying to do that as well...

    I think that would be fair, since most multimedia is pirated.

    How about we just make mp3s illegal.. i mean, since most of them are pirated. Or maybe get Carnivore to do some blocking of websites and services that are known to give access or show where pirated material is at. Or just maybe, just maybe, the digital media world will figure out a way to use the internet in a good way, pretty much cutting distribution costs way down, just making a profit off of copying a file from them to you. In any case I dont like any of it, I have a feeling after all this Napster/DeCSS stuff gets over with we are going to have some interesting changes in how things are working..

    There are a lot of places that search on things that aren't html pages, ftpsearch is a good one. What about lycos and mp3.lycos.com. Heck on Ebay you can buy burnt copies of software and im sure movies, not sure on that one. (my friend from work just bought an old game off of ebay, it was a burnt cd along with a list of other software that I could get from him on CD-R's. Heck, I think just about any search engine I can find mp3's, movies, etc etc its just the nature on how search engines work. Face it, no law is going to stop people from copying something that someone else bought. Some people will get whatever they can for free, before buying it for themselves. Cd and DVD recorders certainly dont help the situation, and neither does high quality digital video cameras that you can go down to Sears and buy, they are quite small, and sneak it into a movie theater and just record the movie as it plays. (from what ive seen, it seems like some of the movies are shot from the room that is playing the reel of film, maybe even patched into the machine that plays it, or video cameras are a lot better then I thought)

  • Linux independent? What a joke! (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It cracks me up. Really. The whole idea of Linux as being "independent" of Big Corporations. You do remember who owns Sladshdot, don't you? And Freshmeat? That's right: a Big Corporation.

    Between the huge number of Linux web sites owned by VA Linux, Internet.com, IDG, and others, it's laughable that anyone could consider these sites to be less biased than say, CNet or ZDNet. They still have advertisers, and they are still responsible to their stockholders to bring in huge profits. I think it should be well known to Slashdot that they idea of a "socially responsible" corporation is laregly a myth. VA Linux wants to sell you Linux machines, and if that means promoting it in an unethical way,

    But is it more than just the media? Think of how many Linux "celebreities" work for Big Companies: Torvalds at Transmeta, the huge number of people at Red Hat (Alan Cox, etc), Larry Wall working at O'Reilly ("the biggest parasite on Open Source", according to Bruce Perens). Are these people truly independant? It's hard to be when you know where that check is coming from.

    I really think that this whole "no bribes here" attitude, especially coming as it does from the supposedly "community-based" Linux sites, should be taken with a grain of salt the size of a Buick.


  • "Bah! When the Harry Fox Agency shut down OLGA, nobody cared. "

    I cared. Was that 1995? I *still* haven't purchased an EMI product since then, and I dramatically curtailed my CD buying after that, in general. I have stood my ground on the boycott. To me, it seemed unprecedented. An attorney representing a group of people in Great Britain made an order to an American university to shut down one of its libraries, and the university COMPLIED! That incident seems to have marked the beginning of a chain of events which has brought us exactly here.

    I continue my boycott of EMI, and strive to avoid buying any label represented by the RIAA, at least "new", but this is obviously quite difficult.

    Since 1995, I've also cut broadcast and cable Television out of my life completely, and I think I've seen maybe 5 films in theatrical release during that time.

    Call me a luddite, but please realize, all this was a MAJOR change, and I was driven to do it by the garish commercialism of all the media (bundled with low quality), plus all the civil liberties being eroded by these legal actions of the multinational corporate meanies.
  • idunno. I think what's interesting about the OLGA isn't necessarily the precedent it sets, but the model it should be seen as.

    Get this, harmony central [harmony-central.com] has quite a large database of tabs from the OLGA. They've managed to stay open for business throughout this mess. What's that mean? This kind of information can't be shut down - and those that try only make themselves look foolish. Unfortunate as it is, there will always be victories for those who feel that everything should be bought and sold at the prices they themselves have set. But those victories are becoming fewer and farther between....I have to say that I look at the good side of the OLGA. Even though it's a shadow of its former self at harmony-central. It's still there. And IMNSHO, we've only seen the tip of the iceberg (metaphor, titanic, etc.)


    FluX
    After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
  • So which one are you?

    --
  • Ok... so I goto this site and look for chicken run and it comes up 3 times in VIVO format? Yeah and so why not go after the sites that have it up or am I totally missing something here? THis looks like another version of kill the messenger. I hope they rot in hell with the RIAA.

  • Ah yes... (Score:3)

    by Mr. Flibble ( 12943 ) on Thursday July 20, 2000 @06:29PM (#916624) Homepage
    Mmmm The good 'ol MPAA
    You have to love quotes like this:

    "This lawsuit is about stealing," MPAA president Jack Valenti said in a press conference this morning. "Technology may make stealing easier, but it doesn't make it right."

    I find it funny just how vocal he can be... In the press that is.
    Get him into a courtroom and you hear things like this [2600.com] and (real audio version) like this. [2600.com]

    Nevermind the megacorporation influence. Anyone this evasive is IMO extremely untrustworthy...

    Wait... He heads the MPAA you say??? WELL I NEVER!!!
  • "It's easy to get porn for free anonymously on the net"
    Not that I know, but much of that is given away free by the creators. This is not a copyright issue, it's an oversupply issue.
  • Remember MPAA's proposed surcharge on blank video tapes a few years back, to reimburse them for revenues lost to piracy? Was any of that surcharge to be distributed to independent videomakers?

    That is nothing compared to what we have here in Finland (yes, the land of Nokia, Mr. Torvalds and other cool high-tech stuff). We have a law-enforced added cost on recording media (Blank VC:s, CD:s & CD-RWs, MC:s, MD:s, I don't know what else) due to the supposed copying occurring at homes.

    Quote from www.teosto.fi [teosto.fi], first paragraph, translation by me:
    The copying occurring at private homes causes economical losses to the copyright holders. Therefore, in the copyright law, there are rules about a cassette payment (should now be media payment..) from which the makers, performers and producers get a payment from home recording.

    Now, essentially this means that everytime I buy a CD-R to record DATA in, buy a blank MD to record a performance of the choir in which I sing (I do that a lot) OR I buy a VC to record a program from free-to-air TV, I am supporting the recording industry of Finland.
    And you thought RIAA was evil...
  • See... I hate this argument. It's a strawman argument.

    Things change.. get over it. When the TV came along, a whole bunch of people in radio lost their jobs. But whole new careers opened up, TV producers, soundtrack directors, foleys, costume designers, etc, etc.

    The money is now in the broadband, the cable companies, the media providers. A job in the network infrastructure business would be a good place to be in the near future. This is just change happening and the world dealing with it.

    The second argument I despise is the "potential sales" argument.
    The money never "leaves" the economy because it was never there in the first place. You can't say "we lost 15 million dollars" in potential sales from piracy. Potential sales of what? If you whipped up 10,000 copies of MS Office, but didn't sell them because they burned in a fire, what would your losses be? A CD costs less then a dollar to physically make, so that's $10,000 dollars that you've lost. You can't count "potential" revenue until you've actually made it. Period. Until you sell it, there are no "potential sales."

    Of course, there are many arguments that the pro-(freemusic/abortion/legalization) side makes that aren't sound. See if you can find them.

    The most the record companies are going to do is draft a whole bunch of laws... Soon there will be people being arrested for "copyright violations" and thrown in jail.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.

Close