This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
AOL Sued for Creating Gnutella
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Remember the good old days, when CPU was singular?
Remember the good old days, when CPU was singular?
Re:Seems to me... (Score:1)
That would be soooo funny.
Re:The 9 headed dragon awakes..... (Score:2)
You'd win that bet. AOL will be incorporating copy-protection measures (under the misleading name, "digital rights management") as part of the next WinAmp and AOL 6.0 release. The copy-protection technology is to be supplied by InterTrust.
Alert your AOL-using friends; encourage them to not install it.
Schwab
Makes sense... (Score:2)
EFF has limited resources. They need to use them where they are most urgently needed. While they may support AOL's position in this case (though I haven't heard them say anything to that effect), AOL does not have any urgent need for financial support for their defense. Their CEO could probably pay for it with the cash he leaves laying on his dresser. There are plenty of other cases, like 2600, where the defendant doesn't have the funds to mount any sort of effective defense. That is where the EFF should use its resources.
Just NOW this happens? (Score:1)
Oh... my... god! (Score:1)
Satan, whip out the longjohns! I think I just read this sentence on Slashdot!
-thomas
Appears to be silliness (Score:5)
That disclaimer aside, this appears to be a rather dumb trick. The RIAA is suing mp3board.com for providing pirated mp3s for commercial gain (putting aside the whole linking thing in the MPAA v. 2600 case). mp3board basically does do that, right? I don't want to get into the whole piracy/fair use debate here - that's not the point.
In this new action, piracy is just a red herring.
It's my understanding that mp3board.com's method of distributing mp3s is a direct download from a website (or a link to someone's website, yadda, yadda...)
So now mp3board sues AOL for creating Gnutella? WHY? In order to sue in civil court, you must have what's called "standing" to sue. Standing in a nutshell means that you have been injured by the actions of a defendant, and have the right to go into court to seek remedies to that injury.
Where the hell is mp3board injured by the mere existence of Gnutella? The only real effect mp3board might feel is that of competition - Gnuteela being a competing method of delivery. Certainly this isn't a justifiable injury. I think what they have in mind is criminal defense law - they're pointing blame on someone else who is doing something worse than they are, in the hopes that a jury will find them not liable. But that doesn't change their conduct.
Essentially, mp3board.com got caught doing 75 in a 55 mph zone. As the cop is giving them the ticket, AOL/TWX/Gnutella blows by at 100 mph. The events are unrelated - it in no way lessens mp3board.com's punishment, and in no way is mp3board injured by AOL/TWX/Gnutella's conduct. Now whether the cops (picture Ponch and John in tan jumpsuits with RIAA logos on the shoulder) pursue AOL/TWX/Gnutella is a different story.
Oh, and best of luck proving that damages caused by Gnutella are attributable to AOL/TWX. AOL's made it pretty clear that they didn't approve of Gnutella, pinning losses on them is pretty unlikely.
==
This post sponsored by the American Obstetrics Society:
Re:In this latest addition... (Score:2)
Re:Breaking news (Score:1)
--
Max V.
Re:Legal Thuggary against Engineers (Score:5)
It's not designed to give coders nightmares. Mp3board was sued for having a web-to-gnutella gateway. If MP3board loses, they want AOL to have to cover some of the costs since AOL created the thing in the first place.
It's simply a childish "but he did it first!" act. They just wanna cover their butt, not make a moral stand against anyone who creates software that goes against their personal idea of right-and-wrong (they seem pro-pirating anyway).
As a sidenote, I don't think this suit will go anywhere. If the law decides that you've done something wrong, and you did it of your own will (not entrapment or mental sickness), then you get punished, regardless of what some other party did.
It's not 'legal thuggery' (Score:4)
what I don't understand... (Score:2)
--
Geoff Harrison (http://mandrake.net)
Senior Software Engineer - VA Linux Labs (http://www.valinux.com)
next they'll sue (Score:5)
Mr. Major Domo for distributing information about illicit activities.
Freedom to create... (Score:2)
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
AOL Is Big, This is Interesting. (Score:2)
Re:Legal Thuggary against Engineers (Score:3)
And what's scarier is thet there is precident, and we all failed to notice it and arrive at your conclusion until now.
Remember the eyntomology of the word "sabotage"?
Back in the 19th century, french factory workers took it upon themselved to force a stop to any kind of automation or technological advance. When they would come across any kind of automatic manufacturing equipment, they would force their wooden shoes, called sabot, into the machinery, destroying it; hence the word "sabotage".
The inventor of the sewing machine, if I recall my history correctly, was run out of several towns by tailors who refused to tolerate any competition; leaving a trail of smashed sewing machines in his wake.
The RIAA/metallica vs Napster, MPAA vs everybody, and now this suit againts AOL are nothing more than the modern equivelent of that same simple, pathetic thuggery. The only difference is the lack of *PHYSICAL* violence.
In all these cases, a geek invents something that threatens to make some other, old technology or business model obsolete or irrelevent; so the now useless people, instead of adapting to the new model, simply lash out at the geek who made them useless, by trying to sue the techies into destitution.
If there is any justice at all in the world, the RIAA/metallica, the MPAA, the DVD-CCA, and the whole bloody lot of them will be smacked down like the life insurance industry was in Robert Heinlein's "Lifeline".
john
Resistance is NOT futile!!!
Haiku:
I am not a drone.
Remove the collective if
Re:Big guys get it now (Score:3)
But in anti-drug policy, isn't the philosophy not to go after the end user, but to nab the dealer? We generally say 'Leave the little guy alone.' Isn't 'sue the user, not the provider' effectively the opposite of this?
The reason end-user drug offenders go to jail is because it's easier to grab them, than to work up the chain. The reason intermediaries are getting sued is because it's easier to sue a company than scads of users.
I'm not challenging drug policy here, and I'm certainly not saying that I agree uncontestedly with it. Nor am I saying that it is appropriate to sue/prosecute intermediaries like mp3.com, napster, et. al. Perhaps, though, we need a better way to challenge unconstitutional laws.
Do we really want to sue/prosecute end users for this type of litigation?
---
"The Constitution...is not a suicide pact."
Re:Legal Thuggary against Engineers (Score:2)
Actually, I did read the article, but my interpretation had been (foolishly) slanted by the slashdot intro. Having re-read it, you are right: it is more of a preemptive strike or effort to share the blame, and being perpetrated by the subsidiary which was spun off (perhaps to take the brunt of such actions?), not the recording industry (as I had first thought after skimming the article). That of course changes the entire tone of the lawsuit. (though it is still a bit rediculous -- shall Napster sue the power company for having helped them develope their file sharing technology by providing electricity to power their servers, thus making them vulnerable to being sued by the RIAA?)
Such acts coming from the RIAA/MPAA do appear to be aimed at intimidating engineers into not developing new sharing technologies (e.g. the DeCSS debacle), but this particular case isn't one of them.
mae culpa.
I think I see a motive... (Score:5)
If they can manage to sue AOL before their case is finished, and intentionally expose they total insanity of such a case, they hope to set a precedent such that their own case may get thrown out--- or at least ruled on fairly.
Basically, they have no intention or expectation of winning. Once they lose, there's one other case to use as a reference in their own defense: "see, this case was thrown out because it was stupid!"
The hope would be that the judge in their own case might be a bit sensible and rule correctly in their favor rather than the RIAA's.
And no, I don't think stealing mp3s is right, but it's always going to happen and I for one see it as nothing different from recording music off the radio; I still want to buy the album if it's good....
RIAA are idiots, and greedy pirates. They may win a few rounds, but they've already lost the war.
Re:Legal Thuggary against Engineers (Score:2)
So what you're saying is the entertainment industry believes it has found a way to tell us, "You'll never work in this town again!!"
Sadly, I fear you may be right.
However, engineers can fight back. For example, somewhere within the bowels of Intel are a bunch of guys working on bringing copy-protection to IEEE-1394 (FireWire) devices. It simply requires the engineers to lay down their pencils/keyboards/VHDL compilers and say, "We will not build this for you. We don't want it, and you don't need it."
Yes, they will put their career at risk, but even if they are fired, they will not carry the responsibility of having created the tools by which their families, friends, and neighbors were shafted.
For myself, I couldn't live with myself if I did something like that to my friends.
Schwab
Have your fun. (Score:2)
Whether this story is accurate or not, it is a good analogy for the legal situation RIAA and friends find themselves in. Either you must ban the whole class of programs to share files of the Internet (ftp & web browsers included, after all web pages are just
Let them ban gnutella. Let them have their fun. Who gives a damn - we'll only come back stronger. RIAA, I'll warn you this: I know that everytime I revisit a programming problem, I learn, and I do a better job than the last time. I'm sure most programmers are the same. If you keep making us come up with new programs to share files, then the programs we use will just get more and more sophisticated.
cheers,
G
*(ps. I am not dutch, I don't know the situation that well, so if I'm wrong and offend, I apologise.)
Re:Wait a stinking minute..... (Score:2)
Re:EFF To Help AOL? (Score:2)
Just because they are the "big guys" doesn't make them any less of a victim than one of us...
This is a PR Stunt.... (Score:2)
Grumpfish
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
You probably haven't noticed that I am not American and don't know everything that's going on there (Do YOU know all the news in Canada?). My point was to say that if the ones who make napster/gnutella/DeCSS are guilty because you can do illegal stuff with them, then the firearms manufacturers are even more guilty, because the worse you can do with firearms is far more damaging than the worse you can do with DeCSS.
Welcome back to Earth, and please immerse yourself in current and past events before posting on Slashdot
So you think you know everything or what? I know I don't know everything going on in the US (should only US citizens be allowed to post on slashdot, since most stories are about stuff going on there?) and I'm very pleased to be told where I'm wrong. I have, however, a problem with your attitude.
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
Perhapds you are unaware.... (Score:2)
This happened in New York state. The gun makers lost. I believe it was Smith & Wesson that chose to leave the consumer gun market as a result.
Or perhaps you were just being ironic, and I missed it.
Denial of service? (Score:2)
If so, why not charge RIAA, MPAA, and others that file frivilous lawsuits for denying citizens expedient use of public services (the legal system)?
(Yes, I know the article does state that it is the MP3Board suing AOL and completely understand the irony of it...but everyone here keeps bringing up RIAA over and over again =)
A Script (Score:2)
Scene: The Courtroom.
Pot and Kettle enter, stage left.
Kettle: Hey! You! Pot! You're... black!
Pot: Racist barsteward! I bet I can pirate more than you, anyway!
Judge Stallman: You're both in contempt of court (and freedom, as in speech), and I hereby order your wits melted.
Pot & Kettle: You can't melt what we don't have!
Judge Stallman: In which case, you are hereby committed to Jerry Springer's audience for life.
Pot & Kettle: ARGH!
Re:Legal Thuggary against Engineers (Score:2)
AOL = Guilty obviously (Score:2)
So obviously, by promoting this open not-controlled-by-the-RIAA file exchange system, that AOL is necessarily guilty.
Re:AOL's liability (Score:2)
But no, that's the truly hilarious thing, they aren't! The lawsuit should be (it doesn't list the specific Cause of Action in the news article, but this is the legitimate one) negligence. You can't show that AOL intended to aid music piracy, because I don't believe they did. What you can show is that they were grossly negligent in allowing it to happen.
Think about it. It's like you're a biochem lab researching different compounds and virii, and you authorize your researchers to take any new samples and just dump them into the general populace without your even checking them first. Then when you find out from all the deaths that they developed a disease instead of the cure for cancer, you tell them to stop.
AOL granted their programmers (Nullsoft) the access to publish on the web any new tool that was created, and didn't require that Nullsoft's tools be approved by AOL. When they found out what Nullsoft had done, they shut it down, but they should have known what it was before publishing it.
Now the other hand is that you can't hold ISP's responsible for the content they allow to be published, but AOL wasn't just Nullsoft's ISP, they were the employer. And if a security company hires a felon who was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon and murder, then gives him weapons and leaves him in a building lobby, they take some of the legal responsibility when he goes on a killing spree. Sure, it wasn't their official corporate decision to kill people, but they were grossly negligent in allowing their employee to do so.
Disclaimer: I like Gnutella. I'm just pointing out that there is legal merit in the case.
Re:Big guys get it now (Score:2)
Drug dealers KNOW what they're selling illeagle things. That's the entire point of what they do.
A better anology would be the USPS. They dilver mail and postcards and other legal things. It can also be used to send drugs through the mail. I've seen it done! Should the USPS be sued because the facilitate the transfer of illicit substances?
Of course not! Just the same gnutella doesn't know if what it's transferring is legit or not, it just provides a way to transfer it.
In any event, all these anologies are poor. Oh well.
I wonder... (Score:2)
How long do you think it will be before one of these huge conglomerates ends up suing some portion of itself over something like this?
Not Smith & Wesson (Score:2)
-saintalex
Observe, reason, and experiment.
Side constraint to first principle of lawsuits (Score:2)
Sometimes, it's more effective to sue little people who cannot contest your suit. If your utility function is something like $=(assets)/(countersuingpower) where countersuingpower is a function of assets, then the maximum of $ is perhaps suing someone with midrange assets.
You're also forgetting that the purpose of these lawsuits is not to maximize $ but to maximize legal restraint of the party sued. That requires a whole 'nother system of equations.
Breaking news (Score:5)
GNUTella? What about AOL itself? (Score:3)
Wait a stinking minute..... (Score:3)
Re:Meanwhile on IRC . . . (Score:2)
People want a simple point-and-click interface to download MP3's, not an endless stream of "j00 @r3 #49800 in d@ qu3u3" messages from your friendly neighborhood script kiddy. IRC, Usenet, FTP sites -- all of these confusing old "standards" are no match for the point-and-click clients that get millions of people into "sharing."
The Circle is Complete (Score:3)
Okay. So the RIAA sues MP3board.com, which sues AOL, which owns Time Warner, which owns Warner Music, which is a member of the RIAA.
Around and round we go...
The real money is in digital music lawsuits! (Score:3)
- John
Re:Meanwhile on IRC . . . (Score:2)
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
Several major US cites (New Orleans is one) are currently trying to sue firearms manufacturers for making an "unsafe" products.
Be careful what you use for sarcasm, no matter how unbelievable, it may be true!
Hey, lawyers DO understand technology! (Score:2)
No, I'm serious - look at it this way:
- RIAA (including Time/Warner) Sues Mp3Board
- Mp3Board Sues AOL, which may (God forbid!) own Time/Warner soon
Don't you see?They've invented Peer-To-Peer Lawsuits!
Now all we need for poetic justice is some good anti-silly-lawsuit legislation, and perhaps we can get a class-action-suit going against Congress for creating this lawsuit-sharing technology...
Joe Sixpack is dead!
Re:I'm not officially confused. ;) (Score:2)
For some reason, this brings forth an odd image of lawyers in a Hong Kong martial arts movie. It's all legal kung-fu.
The RIAA has thrown the first legal punch at mp3board.com. The energy from that hit needs to be disapated somehow and mp3board.com doesn't have a way to strike back at the RIAA. But there's an available conduit - Time Warner, one of the major RIAA members. Time Warner is AOL. AOL is also Nullsoft. Nullsoft made Gnutella. Go after Gnutella, therefore Nullsoft, therefore AOL, therefore Time Warner, finally striking the RIAA.
I'm not sure how practical all this is. But it does make for some amusing coreography.
Don't Worry Taco... (Score:2)
--
MS should jump in (Score:2)
Let them attempt to get sued by RIAA and have MS's almightly legal team have at it. Get the big guns in. hate MS all you want for their legal teams and legalsese, but this time let them work for you! They could make up some fancy story on how it is no different than a user's transfer directory, but with added search features.
I'm not officially confused. ;) (Score:4)
WWJD -- What Would Jimi Do?
This is the same web site that.. (Score:4)
I have to admit that mp3board.com looks pretty much like it's *just* a search engine, but the various categories that it includes *does* make it look bad. (I. e. "illegal MP3s", etc.) Also, the "Top Ten Downloaded" MP3 list including nothing but big name bands also can't be good.
Still this is funny, unless mp3board is counting on the bad publicity to help drive hits before they get shut down. (Suicide pact?)
IANAL but the basic premise of the lawsuit seems to be hilarious and pretty similar to "I'm going to sue the phone company for servicing phone lines because I'm getting phone threats." Or, take the "Napster is nothing more than a service provider and not liable for content" theories and apply to Gnutella.
BTW, if Gnutella was never officially sanctioned by AOL and AOL pulled the plug on it, can they be held responsible for the open sourcing of it?
And, not to mention, that MP3Board allows searching of "HTTP" and "Gnutella". Ack?
We use your service, let's sue the person that created the original, which was reverse engineered and created clean room, because we don't want to be held responsible for our own actions.
Wow, this is jumpy.
Talonius
AOL's liability (Score:3)
Disclaimer: If you take any of this post as any type of legal advice and you get burnt in the buttocks, don't come crying to me.
_______
Scott Jones
Newscast Director / ABC19 WKPT
Re:Wait a stinking minute..... (Score:2)
And hence, you get the blame game...
Re:AOL's liability (Score:2)
This is a pretty disturbing argument, in terms of its implications, tho. Imagine that an employer allows its employees to put up web pages over which they (the employee) have complete content control, and stipulate that that content is to be generated not on work machines during work time.
MP3Board's argument, as explained in your post, is that the employer is, in that case *still legally responsible*. IOW --- if you don't keep your employees muzzled, we will punish you for it.
This is yet another dark shadow on the wall of the net. Our economy doesn't actually seem to believe in free flow of ideas any more, if it ever did.
Melvil Dewey, that rat bastard! (Score:3)
Can you imagine the Library of Congress' reaction when next year, under the auspices of the WIPO, they are confronted with a global class-action lawsuit for maintaining their catalog!? People of Earth v. US Library of Congress!
Every year thousands of school children all across the US have simple access to pronographic materials like "Catcher in the Rye" and such because of such indexing systems. It's nice to see this madness is finally coming to an end.
"Who wants to be a Millionare??!!" (Score:2)
[Cheesy rip off Who wants to be a millionaire theme music].
"Today's defendant is AOL, being sues my the Mp3board"
"How you doing AOL?"
"As always you have your life lines...
Phone a friend, 50/50 and get out of jail free"
Now lets play, "Who wants to be sued!!!!!"
[Cheesy rip off Who wants to be a millionaire theme music].
Who should really be sued in all this... (Score:2)
Trying to bring AOL against Warner (Score:2)
My feeling here is that MP3Board is trying to force AOL to be on its side against Warner and other MPAA members. The idea being that if MP3Board is declared guilty, then AOL will have to pay an even larger sum. So having AOL "on their side" would make enforcement against Gnutella because there would always be the possibility of annoying AOL... Would be nice if a lawyer could comment on this?
Seems to me... (Score:3)
--
Re:Wait a stinking minute..... (Score:2)
I get it (Score:2)
Worse yet I downloaded Napster with Netscape as well as many other things I will refrain from mentioning here/now.
But if we really want to get into this, I have used WinAMP to play some of my illegal MP3s (I have also used XMMS, but that doesn't go towards my current point) and AOL owns WinAMP too. Wow, I think we can solve all of the worlds problems with this one.
Devil Ducky
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
You know, you're right. Sure, technically, Gnutella and Napster *themselves* are not doing something illegal. But it could be argued that they are *aiding and abetting* illegal activity. Napster sure isn't being *all* that aggressive in preventing people from doing illegal things. No matter how much people don't like it, some sort of responsibility comes in proportion to the potential or actual illegitimate activity perpetrated on a system. For most small systems, this is negligable...carriers can entirely disclaim responsibility. But in others it's just unethical. Take for example, a small private airplane company who leases planes. Now what if it so happens that every single one of their clients uses their planes to traffic drugs. Sure, they are only in the business of leasing planes, but if they know what is going on and just ignore it and pretend they are ignorant, that is just plain unethical and they should be called on it. It's at least a gray area.
As seen on SlashDot fortune ... (Score:2)
Use an accordion. Go to jail.
-- KFOG, San Francisco
Share a file. Go to jail
Design a file sharing app. Go to jail
---
Re:Ourobos.. (Score:2)
Don't be surprised if AOL botches the defense.
The value to the AOL monopoly of the court precedent set by losing this could be worth far more than the value from gnutella and the net payout losses combined.
In other words, this entire court case could be a setup for a high level con game.
Re:next they'll sue (Score:2)
Re:Ourobos.. (Score:2)
Re:Wait a stinking minute..... (Score:2)
Re:Don't Worry Taco... (Score:2)
Don't people grow up any more? this sort of thing might be tolerable among 12 year olds in the playground, but for adults??
All these millions getting thrown around in cases that in the end only argue pretty much bugger all but minor semantic points. I thought the millenium dome was a waste, but think of the actual good, betterment-of-mankind, causes that the money and resources could be going to.
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
Maybe I should reconsider... (Score:2)
d'oh
Meanwhile on IRC . . . (Score:5)
I wonder whats going to happen when Hillary Rosen and her pal good ol' Jack discovers IRC.
" . . . and thats why sharks don't get cancer. In totaly unrelated news, the RIAA has sent threatening letters to several operators of IRC, a totaly new way of trading pirated MP3 files over then Internet. The RIAA has posted losses of $300 bazillion due to this new service."
**Insert sounds of geeks laughing so hard at the reporter's technical illiteracy here**
------
This lawsuit is smart as hell. (Score:3)
Also since AOL/Time-Warner is part of the RIAA, they won't get sued by the RIAA. Basicly this lawsuit devides the RIAA on this issue, because conversely, any argument the RIAA uses to kill Napster/MP3Board, is one that MP3Board can use against AOL.
Ta Da.
Re:Seems to me... (Score:2)
Freaking morons. Smells like they don't want to take responsibility for their actions, to me.
--
Also in the news today... (Score:2)
The Apache Software Foundation, Microsoft, Netscape, Lotus, and many other http and ftp server software developers are being sued for making it possible to distribute copyrighted materiel...
argh...
Re:I get it (Score:2)
Devil Ducky
EFF To Help AOL? (Score:2)
Re:AOL Is Big, This is Interesting. (Score:2)
In other words, that company is covering their ass.
All three companies have disowned the project as soon as they realized the consequences of it. I think this is a liability lawsuit.
The Next Ask Slashdot... (Score:3)
Anonymous Coward asks "Hi, I'm an executive of a rather large Internet company, and we just had a suit filed against us because of some file-sharing software we created that happened to be used for sharing MP3s. I'd like to ask the community - What do you think we should do as far as a defense goes?" (insert some random, half-sensical comment from Taco here)
Dear my! What are those things coming out of her nose?
Spaceballs!
I think they expect to lose. (Score:5)
No, really. Think about it.
If MP3Board LOSES this case... then there's a legal precedent set about what's allowed and not allowed as far as the liability of the writer of a piece of software. And it's got a very large company involved in it, which means the company has an interest in making sure other jurisdictions know about it. While it's not a binding precedent nationwide, it WILL become a referenceable case for other suits about the responsibility of a software author for the software they right and how it gets used.
And that... that's where it goes. In New York District Court. Where the DeCSS trial was held. We could see this suit turn around the other one's presumptions. It could lay down completely opposite precedents in the same court district.
IANAL, but I think that's the sort of thing that makes Appellate courts go crazy. It may very well be the thing that makes them toss the DeCSS verdict out.
Unfortunately, if this backfires, it's going to be very, very ugly...
----
Re:next they'll sue (Score:2)
Can AOL Really Be Held Responsable? (Score:2)
"Sweet creeping zombie Jesus!"
Re:Can AOL Really Be Held Responsable? (Score:2)
Where's the harm (Score:2)
--
Ourobos.. (Score:5)
The RIAA is suing mp3board, who is suing AOL as a responsible third-party, who owns Time-Warner, who is a member of the RIAA...
(desired) Net Result: The RIAA sues itself out of existance, taking the AOL-Time-Warner monster out with it...
Re:Don't Worry Taco... (Score:2)
Whether any judge in the country is going to accept that is anybody's guess. I, for one, think it highly unlikely. We can hope, though, right? Basically, if this thing doesn't get thrown directly out of court, it becomes a win/win situation for supporters of peer-to-peer networking tech: either AOL/Time Warner loses, thereby biting themselves in the ass with the legal teeth of their anti-Napster arguments, or AOL/T.W. wins, in which case the future of peer-to-peer tools looks a little brighter.
Plus, either way, they're going to be involved in a nice, hyped, confusing legal action which will obscure their anti-swapping message for months. I can see the first-time Net users reading the AUP for their service now:
AUP: "...any use of these services for the purpose of knowingly violating copyright or patent protection of intellectual property is strictly prohibited; these uses may include, but are not limited to, the sharing of copyrighted media files, software, or proprietary information (see MP3s, FTP & Me on p. 3)."
User: "...uhh, but didn't AOL do a bunch of that stuff? I saw it on the news, I think, so they must mean something different than what I think they mean...so where's that stupid Noo-tella site? I want me some tunes...
This has happened before - with Tobacco and Guns. (Score:2)
Some tobacco companies were sued for the health problems of smokers that started smoking AFTER the warning labels were placed on the packaging: http://www.cnn.com/2000/LAW/07/1 6/tobacco.smokers/ [cnn.com]
Some gun manufacturers are being sued for crimes using guns: http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/08/09/ crime.guns.reut/ [cnn.com]
Re:As seen on SlashDot fortune ... (Score:2)
...get out of jail!
Re:AOL Is Big, This is Interesting. (Score:3)
MP3Board [mp3board.com] is currently getting sued by the RIAA [riaa.com] for copyright infringement by distributing MP3s. MP3Board has turned around and sued AOL [aol.com] because their subsidiary, Nullsoft [nullsoft.com] created Gnutella [gnet.ath.cx]. MP3Board wants AOL to share some of the liability for music piracy if MP3Board is found guilty. MP3Board's reasoning is that piracy wouldn't be happening as much if AOL's subsidiary hadn't created Gnutella.
---
NEWS: Metallica Sues Descendants of Alan Turing (Score:5)
".. And Justice For All," Vows Furious Drummer
LOS ANGELES, CA (AP) - In a legal move that is likely to set a precedent for many portions of the entertainment industry, the rock group Metallica today brought suit against the living descendents of Alan Turing, who is widely regarded as the father of modern computing. Claiming that Turing's work spawned the creation of "unabashed piracy machines," Metallica is seeking unspecified millions in damages.
Though Turing had no children of his own, he is survived by a large number of great-nephews and nieces. Spike Turing, the owner of a Starbucks' franchise in El Paso, Texas, told the Associated Press that he recieved a letter from Metallica's legal firm, Dewey, Cheat & Howe. "The letter claims that great Uncle Al is responsible for the destruction of the economies of the Western world," explained Turing. "They're taking us to trial."
"This is bullshit," stated a confused 84-year old Bertha Turing, who is a retired seamstress living in a cozy London suburb. "These Metallica fellers sent letters like this to all of us."
Lars Ulrich, who is Metallica's drummer, has taken the lead in fighting against what he claims is "a coordinated band of pirates hell-bent on obliterating creativity and musical freedom." Ulrich expressed hope that the Turing lawsuit would send a message to the rest of the community. "Um, we want people to understand that file sharing is not to be tolerated," explained Ulrich. "Open source is not to be
Dr. Dre contributed to this story.
Silly Suits (Score:2)
I am not a lawyer, but I play one on TV
First principle of lawsuits (Score:4)
What's missed is that this may well have a knock-on effect, where legal blame gets transferred to the original author. This is kind of a fallout of the DeCSS case, except there the author was clearly a citizen of another country. Makes you kind of surprised that there isn't some sort of international civil suit against Johansen. (Is there such a thing?)
There could be a chill here regarding writing GPL software "that could be used to do Evil," as defined by some big company. Of course this suit has to succeed. Won't it be odd to see Slashdotters rooting for AOL?
You're forgetting someone. (Score:3)
kwsNI
The point is simple. (Score:2)
The point is, both are rediculous.
Re:Breaking news (Score:2)
I am now officially announcing my intent to sue Compuserve for damages done to my frail innocence cause by implicit images compressed using the
Devil Ducky
The days of yesteryear (Score:2)
Ahhh, Sonny...Remember the days when the Internet was used for sharing information?
I do. But remembering them is like remembering a dream.
I'm so sick and tired of corporations bullying eachother over who has the bigger dick. I'm not involved, so I don't care. I just want to learn, socialize, and have fun.
But this can't be done anymore without seeing banner ads, or spam, or "X is suing Z because they created Y", or "Corinthians isn't a book from the bible, it's a soccer team! That's OUR rightful domain!", etc.
It's time for an underground internet, to take back to the sense of community the internet once had. Leave your commercialized, greedy asses on this internet.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
Re:AOL Is Big, This is Interesting. (Score:2)
-B
In this latest addition... (Score:2)
Seriously though, they have started televising small claims court room dramas, they should start doing this crap. Hey it could be bigger than day time tv. No more "Young and the Restless", here comes "The Rich and the Whinny".
Re:Seems to me... (Score:2)
From the CNET article [cnet.com]:
Or, as the LATimes puts it [latimes.com]:
And... (Score:2)
sulli
Legal Thuggary against Engineers (Score:3)
It is designed to put the fear of [insert deity here] into any software engineer harboring dreams of developing the next generation of file sharing technology.
I don't recall if the original developers of GNUtella still work at AOL or not (if they do, you can bet they're in a whole heap of trouble and their opportunities for advancement just went to zero), but it isn't really relevant.
The message to employers (and independent contractors) is clear: if your employees develop software we don't like, we're going to sue you.
The message to engineers is: we're going to give your employer every incentive to shitcan your career.
The message to everyone is "don't invent technology we don't like or we'll destroy you, and we have more than enough money to do so."
Our message, in response, should be "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" in the form of boycotting their products as well as supporting and embracing the technologies they are trying to suppress.
This isn't an attack against AOL. It is an attack against all of US.