i'm gonna go download the web now
hope it don't slow anyone down!
Posted on 04/25/2003 11:59:07 AM PDT by 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."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.com ...
What happens in the interim, I do not know.
i'm gonna go download the web now
hope it don't slow anyone down!
It's not you versus the music people.
You may not see it, but you're next...
If the drug industry had this kind of paradigm, no one would ever get well.
Empirically, it is easy to show the above is not true: There were drugs, and music, long before there were patents, the FDA, or the DMCA. Would you take a bet that both would continue to exist if the current intellectual property models stopped existing? How large a bet would you be willing to take, and would you give odds?
BINGO! For 1,000s of years, musicians and other entertainers supported themselves through live performances. In retrospect, the technology of the last 100 years, which provided actors/musicians with a means to scale greatly beyond live performances, will prove to be only a temporary blip.
Up and coming acts would dearly LOVE to have people download their music just for the publicity. Basic human nature means people are always looking for something fresh and new - they would really like to get out and see young performers instead of the decrepit older acts (like Great White) trolling the local music clubs.
Say what? There are hardware and software tools available now that can produce near-perfect audio recordings on a home computer. It takes a good ear, but it can be done.
We see it. Big time.
That's one reason you are starting to see programs delivered by application servers. Keep the code out of the hand of the consumer as much as possible.
They will, if they're willing to do it for free.
Remember that a vaccum will not last long in nature -- people want music and will endure, no question.
Absolutely, spare-time weekend garage bands will always be around.
I agree that the music industry is full of scumbag middlemen with no added value. But more important than them or anything else is the right of property, which everyone here seems willing to toss out the window. If the industry disintegrates as an industry, and there is no money in it at all, then it will be an all-underground operation.
From a musical perspective, that may not be a bad thing. But from the perspective of the rule of law, it is very bad. And the economics of it won't be good either.
Well the bloated, coke and ego driven horror of the big five controlled industry, maybe. So? Rock music? Well it will live on forever on certain FM radio stations, or at least until all the boomers who like Classic Rock die off. And the spirit of simple and loud music made by self trained amatures for their own amusement will continue long after MCA/Universal/Sony have died off. Can't scare me 'cause I don't care.
Next nothing, when it comes to illegal copies distributed over the net we were victims long before the musicians. That is why I do support copytrap laws...the point of the ruling is who should be held accountable for breaking the law.
On the contrary, if the ruling went the other way, perhaps the musicians would be next. Do they want to be held accountable for things like a fatal traffic accident because someone was driving recklessly while listning to their music?
If they're good, they will have a number of sources of income
The question is trademark law. Music existed before there was a solid tradition of trademark law because musicians had royal patrons feeding them.
With few exceptions, drugs, contrary to your assertion, did not exist and were never developed in any meaningful way before trademark law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.