Kazaa Turns The Table on RIAA/MPAA

C

CounslerCoffee

Registered Senior Member
This isn't in A&C because it's not about music, it's about ethics.

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A U.S. federal court has cleared the way for Kazaa file-sharing software owner Sharman Networks to sue the entertainment industry for copyright infringement, Sharman said on Friday.



Sharman, targeted by studios and record companies because its software is used to trade music and video files, has sought to turn the tables on the industry, accusing it of misusing Kazaa software to invade users' privacy and send corrupt files and threatening messages.
Click to expand...

Article

For what I remember, the RIAA sent out viruses and fake copies of music to fool users into downloading them, and causing damage and wasted time. Did the RIAA have the right to go vigilante?

(Tiassa, you can move this if you feel the need to. I hadn't an idea on where to put it.)
 
I never actually saw any reason to think the RIAA actually sent out viruses (or even how they'd do that). It was just a comment by someone who didn't know better.

They did (and admit) putting fake copies of music online. This is in no way illegal in itself. The only way I can see this being illegal is if the software has something in the license agreement to shoot down this type of usage.
 
Mod Hat (and other stuff):

I think there are plenty of aspects to this topic which place it comfortably in this forum.

On a personal note, I think this might be a chance to set a new standard reminding people that money is not an excuse to break the law. I mean, it's well enough to tell the folks downloading that, but hey, the RIAA just isn't that important. And if Metallica or anyone else wishes to lend comfort to the RIAA's actions, their fans will respond accordingly.

In other words, just remember that Metallica is on the side of the people trying to sabotage the internet with viruses. How's that for an ethical quandary?

-bd
 
Last edited:
They did (and admit) putting fake copies of music online. This is in no way illegal in itself. The only way I can see this being illegal is if the software has something in the license agreement to shoot down this type of usage.
Click to expand...

Persol, it isn't illegal but it is a waste of resources. Imagine the strain put on the server from having to a legit copy of Britney Spears' "Don't let me be the last to know". In a way, it's the same argument with SPAM. Spam mail uses up server space, and bandwidth. So basically what the RIAA is doing is putting spam out there to ruin bandwidth productivity.

Tiassa:
In other words, just remember that Metallica is on the side of the people trying to sabotage the internet with viruses. How's that for an ethical quandary?
Click to expand...

The RIAA is causing more damage everyday trying to get money from people who illegally download music. What bothers me is the invasion of privacy that some have experienced. But that all stopped when a Judge over-ruled the RIAA and stopped them from suing people.

Information
 
Last edited:
If the RIAA did send viruses into the system, then they should be slapped with a nice juicy fine. That is damaging ppl's personal property, two wrongs simply doesn't make a right. I find these measures of the RIAA to be Soviet-esqe in nature, and totally inapproiate (sp).
 
CounslerCoffee said:
Persol, it isn't illegal but it is a waste of resources. Imagine the strain put on the server from having to a legit copy of Britney Spears' "Don't let me be the last to know". In a way, it's the same argument with SPAM. Spam mail uses up server space, and bandwidth. So basically what the RIAA is doing is putting spam out there to ruin bandwidth productivity.
Click to expand...
IThis is the reasoning that seems somewhat common, but is flawed. A bank having a combination (or 2 vaults) , 'honeypots', safety deposit boxes, etc are also a waste of resources... but only if you go out looking for them. This is completely different from SPAM as this effects everybody. These honeypot files only waste the time of the person illegally trying to download content. The server space argument is also flawed, as this only take up the server space of the RIAA and those who decide to download these files.

IMO, their use of honeypots should be completely legal and completely correct. Their legal attempts however are pushing the line.

In the end however, their actions will only cause people to develop and use better networks.
 
Undecided said:
If the RIAA did send viruses into the system, then they should be slapped with a nice juicy fine.
Click to expand...
Well it's probably a good thing that nobody has shown that they did it.
 
I am just wondering but shouldn't these investigations be done by legal authorities not some vigilante corporations? Where is it in the law where it allows this to happen? I mean I could understand "Private Eyes", but they are merely presenting facts, here it seems to be much more overt, and even bullying. I am sorry but a for profit NGO doing this seems well beyond the grasp of the law.
 
This goes far beyond simple viruses and law suits. This is a corporation suing college students and 12 year old girls. Not only that, but they threaten people with viruses, cluster bombs, hacks, etc.

RIAA, MPAA Threaten Software Cluster Bombs - The Register

And of course, you've got this:

But two other programs freeze the user's system or delete music files determined to be illegal. Another proposed idea is basically a DoS attack against downloaders. I guess the RIAA believes the law only applies to their enemies.
Click to expand...

RIAA Plans Cyber Warfare - Slashdot
 
Yeah, and sometimes burglars get shot while trying to make off with someone's stereo equipment. Thievery is a dangerous game, if you don't want to risk the consequences of your actions, then don't go out stealing people's shit! They have a nasty habit of trying to defend it, even if it means stooping to some pretty ugly measures. You can't have your cake and eat it too, I'm afraid.
 
CounslerCoffee said:
This goes far beyond simple viruses and law suits. This is a corporation suing college students and 12 year old girls.
Click to expand...
If a 12 year old girl walks into your store and steals a box of candy do you just throw your arms up and say "She's 12, what can I do?"
Not only that, but they threaten people with viruses, cluster bombs, hacks, etc.
Click to expand...
If you actually read the slashdot comments you will see that many agree this is a case of the right hand not knowing what the left was doing. Regardless, they have the right to research whatever they want. Using it is a different case... and they haven't actually used it.

All of these articles were based on comments from 1 RIAA representative. It was just such a stupid comment that it kept being repeated.
 
"If a 12 year old girl walks into your store and steals a box of candy do you just throw your arms up and say "She's 12, what can I do?"

Yes, thats true- but you cant send viruses into peoples computer becasue the computer will be totally screwed up. I mean, imagine if someone downloaded illegaly whilst at work on a network computer, and they sent in an amazing virus. It is likely that this could spread to every computer on the netwrok quite easliy- effectivly shutting down the buissness until it gets sorted.

Although this is extreme, if it is true they are idiots for doin' it then.

However- if the artists back the process of free downloads then who the hell are these guys to stop it (e.g. metallica mentioned above)
 
Leviticus said:
Yes, thats true- but you cant send viruses into peoples computer becasue the computer will be totally screwed up.
Click to expand...
Agreed! But they aren't doing this, so that is besides the point.
 
Ah, the technology will get better and better at facilitating the reality that we share all. This head in the ass, private property psychosis that afflicts perhaps most of humanity will pass or we will pass.
 
Persol

I agree with your assessment but, a commercial enterprise who uses the services of another commercial enterprise - public or private - for whatever reason, without compensation, can "hypotheticaly" open the door to litigation. no?
 
Only if they are breaking the 'rules'. If what they are doing is not disallowed by the license of the free software then they are in the clear.

The problem is not 'without compensation'. It is if compensation was required IN THIS CASE.
 
you are ignoring a simple fact is it ethical for a private person oooh lets say a company representative solicit "private "persona "information" without you knowing and giving permission for it. Is it ok for them to scan your computer break into it and check out what you got and whats your name?.... Cause basicly what they want is an access into your home to check weather the products you buy are legal or not.
Access into your home without your permission or knowledge. Search and siezure of inromation without any due process whats so ever nor your rights.
 
They aren't "Breaking into your computer" in fact they don't get your name at all by looking at anything you own, your private property isn't even considered. All they need are the logs from Kazaa's own servers to see who downloaded what when, and then once they have your IP addy from those logs they can trace it easily (I mean this, like 5 fucking seconds) to your ISP who can then be sent some sort of legal order or request to caught up your personal information (usually your billing info) and then where they go from there is kind of up to them, I suppose. At no time are they “hacking into your computer” or anything stupid like that, imagine how completely inefficient and workable that sort of scenario would be.
 
Mystech said:
Thievery is a dangerous game, if you don't want to risk the consequences of your actions, then don't go out stealing people's shit!
Click to expand...

In all of the MPAA trailers telling people not to distribute movies over the internet, they don't call it theft. They say (I believe) "If you take a candy bar, that's wrong. If you download a movie off the internet, that's wrong."

But they don't ever call it stealing. As far as I can tell, legally it's not stealing, or it would be prosecuted in criminal court, not civil court. Not so?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top