techdirt.com — "lawyer Ray Beckerman (famous for defending plenty of people accused of file sharing) got the court to ask the record labels in the case to explain how employees at the labels actually used peer-to-peer file sharing apps in sending songs to radio stations."
Sep 11, 2006 View in Crawl 4
dragularSep 11, 2006
Because the RIAA sued Napster, Limewire, ect. based solely on the fact that they're file sharing applications, claiming left and right that there were no legitimate uses for the programs. Seems like the RIAA has demonstrated themselves a legitimate use.
teradomeSep 11, 2006
it _should_ amaze you, because if someone could easily figure it out, that person could manipulate it and use it to their advantage.instead, you should allow it to amaze you, and then you will see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.oh, wait.
Closed AccountSep 11, 2006
YO HO HO and a bottle O' rumyou can't stop us......
klawzSep 11, 2006
wrong - it's not illegal for you to download, it's illegal for you to upload (and share with those you don't know) - e.g. fair use allows you to share songs with friends and family, you know, 1-3 people, not 100s. Downloading isn't what's illegal here. And don't forget, this is CIVIL legal, not criminal legal.
vectorprimeSep 11, 2006
@ Tobey, you're half right. It's not really a grey area, and it's probably not illegal. Most courts would rule that in placing a file on a p2p network the record company was willing to accept the obvious and intended resut of the song being downloaded. Thus they would have knowingly and willingly distributed that song and could not reasonably press charges.
crackhammerSep 11, 2006
there is no spoon...
dhanksSep 11, 2006
test
opusagogoSep 12, 2006
funny, wikipedia itself practices censorship. thats mighty hypocritical of themhere is one exampleWhy is Wikipedia Censoring Me?<a class="user" href="http://serendipity.li/hr/bacque_on_wikipedia.htm">http://serendipity.li/hr/bacque_on_wikipedia.htm</a>also see whatreallyhappened.com, if you don't agree with the wikipedia version of events you are anti-semtic and pro-nazi
krinthekuzSep 12, 2006
you're all wrong. take a copyright law course.despite what the content industry would have you believe, downloading and hosting files is not illegal in america. what IS illegal is downloading a song you do not have possession rights to, or supplying someone with a copyrighted work that they do not have possession rights to (although there are a few courts that do not acknowledge this as fair use). and yes, there are both civil and criminal liabilities involved. however, rarely in intellectual property, are criminal charges ever made. the content owners usually dont want you to go to jail - they just want your money.of course, my facts are accompanied by me calling out you guys talking out of your ass, so this comment will probably be buried in 20 minutes.
poipoipoiSep 12, 2006
@darkstar - you got more diggs, which means you're wrong, but people wish you were right. i stand by my claim. :)