Judge: File-swapping tools are legal !!!!

CNET ^ | 4/25/2004 | John Borland

[ArcLight]

A federal judge in Los Angeles has handed a stunning court victory to file-swapping services Streamcast Networks and Grokster, dismissing much of the record industry and movie studios' lawsuit against the two companies. In an almost complete reversal of previous victories for the record labels and movie studios, federal court Judge Stephen Wilson ruled that Streamcast--parent of the Morpheus software--and Grokster were not liable for copyright infringements that took place using their software. The ruling does not directly affect Kazaa, software distributed by Sharman Networks, which has also been targeted by the entertainment industry.

"Defendants distribute and support software, the users of which can and do choose to employ it for both lawful and unlawful ends," Wilson wrote in his opinion, released Friday. "Grokster and Streamcast are not significantly different from companies that sell home video recorders or copy machines, both of which can be and are used to infringe copyrights."

[ArcLight]

Holy Moley!

[k2blader]

Whoah.

[yonif]

Can I download the ruling on Kazaa?

[GraniteStateConservative]

The RIAA are a bunch of Democrats anyway.

[The Old Hoosier]

Well, that means you can kiss the recording industry--and rock music--goodbye permanently.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

[js1138]

This will not directly affect users who actually download the files, or who offer copyrighted material to be uploaded.

[tutstar]

ping

[CaptainJustice]

word!

[Principled]

No, it means you can kiss the recordng industry's and rock music's outdated business model good-bye.

Music will always be here.

[The Red Zone]

This is just a district court. The 9th Court of Appeals will get it next (and God [void in pledges of allegiance where prohibited] knows what they'll do with it)

[P.O.E.]

Isn't Verizon fighting a ruling to disclose the identity of downloaders, as well (privacy issue)?

[smith288]

Whatever happened to those "artists" who always say "I do it for the looooove, maaaan".

[Cogadh na Sith]

Rock is dead....

Long live rock!

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

This Chicken-Little scenario was also floated when video-cassettes became popular 20+ years ago.

[mitchbert]

It will be interesting to see the results of any appeal that makes it to the Supremes. The video recorder comparison is drawn from Sony's successful defense against the movie studios in the Betamax case, the victory that legalized home video taping. I work for their electronics arm and remeber telling one of our VP's that our stance on file sharing would ultimately be defeated by our own prior arguments. Very interesting.

[Billy_bob_bob]

Don't worry, they'll just appeal it again and again and again until they get the ruling they want.

As far as rock music going away permanently, that just isn't going to happen. Music existed for centuries before record labels came along, and it will exist for centuries to come, music industry or no music industry.

Look at the basic paradigm. It used to be that just to record a song took tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment to record anything you would want to listen to. Then promotion, distribution, etc. all of which cost big bucks. Nowadays you can put together a very decent home studio for a couple of grand, and you can distribute and promote your music for free on the internet via MP3.com, IUMA and others.

I have an extensive collection of great songs that I've put together over the last few years, all off of the internet. I've paid nothing for any of those songs, and I've stolen nothing because every song I have was given away for free by the artists. Some of them I liked enough to actually purchase albums from them, so they accomplished their goal of making money, and I've accomplished my goal of finding new music.

Who needs a music industry when their idea of "great art" is bands like Linkin Park and Limp Biskit? Is anyone going to be listening to these bands in ten years? Who needs the opinion of some "program director" when I can audition and program artists myself?

[nina0113]

Too bad the recording industry wasted their efforts trying to hold back technology - if they had been the first ones on to the bandwagon, selling the files themselves, they would have seized market share and held it. Now the culture is used to getting songs for free, and it's way too late to put THAT genie back in the bottle.

[The Red Zone]

"Grokster and Streamcast are not significantly different from companies that sell home video recorders or copy machines, both of which can be and are used to infringe copyrights."

Well this is kind of like saying you can't sue gun manufacturers even though some people use them to rob banks. Who woulda thunk it?

[narby]

Well, that means you can kiss the recording industry--and rock music--goodbye permanently.

I really think that the current situation is much inferior to what we might get should things open up. There are lots of bands that are very good, yet they get very little publicity or income because the big companies promote a handful of groups that are part of the "in" crowd.

What will happen is that music will have to earn its way by live concerts. They can't sing one tune in a recording studio, and make money off that work for decades. They'll have to work every day to make a living, just like the rest of us.

Besides, the original intent of copyright laws was to allow a right to publish for a limited amount of time. I think that's right in the Constitution. And yet these people have successfully lobbied the congress to set that "limited time" to virtually forever. It's an abuse of the copyright principle in the Constitution.

[mitchbert]

Ugh.

remeber = remember. Preview twice, post once...

[The Red Zone]

The technical problem would exist even if copyrights lasted but one year.

[Petronski]

I think I'll go download Beethoven's Ninth Symphony!

[shadowman99]

A happy GNU day!!!!

[The Red Zone]

So the Betamax decision has survived the new copyright law! Very interesting.

[plain talk]

Oh really. There have been massive changes in the home recording industry over the last 5 years. One still cannot get the quality of a real studio recording at home unless you're willing to buy $5,000 limiters for each channel but its getting closer and closer to the 'pretend' studio point where its getting harder for a layman to tell the difference. Kids already can't really tell the difference between an .mp3 and a .wav file anyway. The recording industry will still exist as do $50,000 grand pianos but the home studios (and sampled keyboards) continue to make big inroads. Kids no longer want to buy whole CDs. They want the ability to string together individual songs from a 100 bands. As you can see on mp3.com, there are thousands of artists now, many of whom record at home studios. There will be smaller pool of the big acts and huge numbers of half-arsed acts. The pyranmid is flattening. It's getting more dispersed and less concentrated. I don't feel sorry for the musicians, most are stupid liberals anyway.

[Stentor]

Well, that means you can kiss the recording industry--and rock music--goodbye permanently.

Ba-bye.

[July 4th]

Well, looks like the court nailed it. Not bad...not bad at all.

[The Red Zone]

So the Betamax decision [MIGHT] survive the new copyright law... [duh]

What are the chances that Congress "fixes" this???

[BJungNan]

Finally, a common sense ruling. It is about time.

[The Old Hoosier]

the original intent of copyright laws was to allow a right to publish for a limited amount of time.

Yes, but think about it: the very minute my band publishes a song, I no longer can charge anyone for it, because it is already FREE on the internet. So who can make a living writing or playing music?

If the drug industry had this kind of paradigm, no one would ever get well.

[BJungNan]

Well, that means you can kiss the recording industry--and rock music--goodbye permanently.

Surely you joke.

[ArcLight]

Seamole, you a fool...LOL!! :-)

[kaylar]

And cassettes, too. Remember "Home recording is killing music" ? That was c.1983.

[The Old Hoosier]

Now the culture is used to getting songs for free, and it's way too late to put THAT genie back in the bottle.

I disagree. It's a matter of simple economics that no one pays for what they can get for free.

As soon as artists stop writing songs--the logical economic conclusion of this ruling--then people will not be used to getting them for free any more.

Read my lips: no new music.

[a_Turk]

Tools are legal, illegal use is not.

Guns are legal, murder is not.

Simple..

[Rifleman]

The Old Hoosier wrote:
Well, that means you can kiss the recording industry--and rock music--goodbye permanently.

Rifleman Replies:
Then there is no down side at all!

[William McKinley]

It's not already free.

Those who bootleg can still be prosecuted.

[Principled]

Whatever happened to those "artists" who always say "I do it for the looooove, maaaan".

They got busted....

[firewalk]

bttt

[GalaxieFiveHundred]

[Giddyupgo]

I wish they had done that with Napster.....I sure miss it.

[george wythe]

it means you can kiss the recordng industry's and rock music's outdated business model good-bye.

Music will always be here

Correct.

Let the marketing gurus loose and unleash the power of the market forces.

You will see business models that convince people to buy music using different formats.

For example, "free" products like potable water are being sold for a premium in the form of "spring" water or "clear" water. One of the most expensive brands, Dasani, admits in its label that it is just municipal water.

Or look at how many people are loyal to AOL even when dialup Internet access is free or much cheaper from other providers.

The Chicken Little types are just rigid oldtimers who do not want or do not know how to adapt to the new market.

[The Old Hoosier]

No one pays for what they can get for free. We now can get free music with CD quality. Therefore, no one except very honest, scrupulous people will pay.

Soon, there will be no money to be made in music. So people won't be able to make a living writing or recording it.

So enjoy the free music you're stealing, because as soon as artists stop writing songs--the logical economic conclusion of this ruling--then people will not get music for free any more.

It's the same argument for prescription drugs: if you make them free or force them to be cheap by refusing to respect trademarks (a la Canada), then no one will develop new drugs.

[The Red Zone]

The industry is going to have to sue infringers for actual infringements. A few ugly examples will not stop the song stealing party altogether but it will dampen it. Even if it loses the Verizon case, the industry still would be able to have a judge issue a force-identification subpoena for downloaders or sharers from a sting operation. Isn't the Verizon case ultimately about the DMCA self serve subpoenas?

[dark_lord]

Yes, but think about it: the very minute my band publishes a song, I no longer can charge anyone for it, because it is already FREE on the internet. So who can make a living writing or playing music?

This is the same problem facing anyone who tries to produce software for money. I suggest some ways to make money for musicians in this situation:

(1) Give the music away on the Internet. Charge for giving concerts.
(2) Make the music available for free on your website. Charge for tee-shirts, coffee cups, and anything else you can "brand."
(3) Sell music to PC & video game makers as background and scene music.
(4) Provide music as scene music to "indy" film makers for "free" in exchange for a cut of the take. Which means a cut of the video tape sales and rental income.

[kevao]

Those who bootleg can still be prosecuted.

Even if I do the bootlegging in my bedroom? What about my constitutional right to privacy?

[William McKinley]

heh heh heh heh heh.

Not sure if you know this or not, but I have been heavily involved in a debate or two over that whole affair, so your comment really gave me a chuckle :-)

[The Old Hoosier]

I don't even necessarily object to the death of the industry--my favorite bands are broken up already.

All I'm saying is, you don't know what you're unleashing. it's not the free market, it's a world in which property rights are not respected.