Тhe most important case of the internet age

[ov3rm4n]

С две думи - всеки, който реши да пише софтуер за обмяна на файлове ще трябва да доказва, че не е камила... А ако, не дай боже, се докаже, че неговия софтуер се използва от някой си в Зимбабве за обмяна на мр3-ки и филми - ще държат отговорен него, а не този който разпространява пиратския контент. При това положение на кой ли ще му се занимава да разработва такива продукти. Добре дошли в Матрицата - не мърдайте и не дишайте преди да сте доказали, че нямате лоши намерения.

 

Financial Times:

 

Supreme Court aids fight against web piracy

By Patti Waldmeir in Washington and Tim Burt in London

Published: June 27 2005 16:08 | Last updated: June 27 2005 21:32

 

The US Supreme Court on Monday handed an important victory to entertainment companies fighting online piracy, while also giving technology companies a powerful tool to defend themselves against copyright lawsuits.

 

In what legal experts said was the most important case of the internet age, the justices unanimously ruled that internet file-sharing services can be held legally responsible if they distribute products that permit illegal downloads.

 

But the court stressed that “peer-to-peer” file-sharing which permits millions of people around the globe to exchange music, films and other forms of digital information can be legal if the intent of the distributor is not to encourage illegality.

 

“We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright . . . is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties,” Justice David Souter wrote for the court. The ruling sends the closely watched case of MGM v Grokster back to the lower court, which had ruled in favour of file-sharing services Grokster and StreamCast.

 

The lower court based its decision on the 1984 Supreme Court ruling that Sony could not be sued over consumers who used its video recorders to make illegal copies of films, because the machines could also be used for lawful purposes. At issue in the Grokster case was whether the file-sharing services should be held liable even if they have no control over what millions of online users do with the software they provide for free. As much as 90 per cent of songs and films copied on file-sharing networks are downloaded illegally, according to music industry filings.

Alex Yemenidjian, the former chairman and chief executive of MGM, the studio, who authorised the 4½-year legal pursuit of Grokster, said the ruling would make it “easier to shut down Grokster in the way the music industry shut down Napster”.

 

Mitch Bainwol of the Recording Industry Association of America said: “The Supreme Court has helped to power the digital future for legitimate online businesses including legal file sharing networks by holding accountable those who promote and profit from theft.”

 

The court tried to strike a balance between protecting copyright and allowing innovation, but the subtle ruling could create legal uncertainty for new technology companies, according to Fred von Lohmann, of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an online civil liberties group. He said it would be hard for innovators to prove in court that their intent was not unlawful. A key US Senate committee said on Monday it would review the ruling for “its impact on copyright law and innovation”.

 

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/c619edee-e71c-11d...000e2511c8.html

 

More Financial Times on topic:

 

‘Pirate copies make up third of world CD sales'

By Tim Burt in London

Published: June 23 2005 16:53 | Last updated: June 23 2005 16:53

 

More than a third of all the music CDs sold last year were pirate copies, generating $4.6bn for organised criminal gangs and bootleggers, according to the trade association representing the world's largest music companies.

 

The International Federation for the Music Industry (IFPI) on Thursday accused governments and law enforcement agencies in several countries of failing to curb illegal music sales exacerbating a 30 per cent decline in industry revenues over the past four years.

 

---

 

Heroes of the internet frontier

By Eli Noam

Published: December 16 2004 20:26 | Last updated: December 16 2004 20:26

 

The US Supreme Court agreed last week to hear the music industry's case to shut down file-sharing websites such as KaZaA, Grokster and eDonkey. These operations enable users to download millions of songs from each other for free instead of buying at least some of them in a music store. In aggregate, the traffic generated by music and video file-sharing can account for more than half of all internet traffic. Music companies, their revenues in decline, have been trying to suppress these "peer-to-peer" (P2P) practices in the courts, legislatures and by spreading deliberately defective copies of songs. They view P2P users as thieves who must be prosecuted. But traditional media companies should perhaps see P2P as to their long-term advantage because it helps create new markets and forms of distribution.

 

P2P is part of a large family of "grassroots" activities in the media. In the early years of broadcasting, radio amateurs congregated on the airwaves in the absence of commercial broadcasters. In the 1970s, personal computers were built by enthusiasts who successfully created the challenge for International Business Machines where giants such as RCA and the government-subsidised Bull had failed. Today, the open source movement has created Linux as an alternative computer operating system. The internet is perhaps the best example. It cannot be said that such voluntarist arrangements are more efficient than a market-based system. In theory at least, most of the arrangements listed above could be better created by companies with professional management, financing and marketing channels. Yet the frequency with which these grassroots movements emerge suggests some solid economic reasons behind them.

 

What all these activities have in common is that they are network operations. The more participants, the lower the activity's average cost and the higher its benefits to every participant. When the size of such networks is small, per-unit costs are high but benefits are low due to the small number of participants. Hence in many cases, the cost exceeds benefits and buyers will not show up, meaning insufficient "critical mass" for self-sustaining growth.

 

If an activity is ultimately desirable, one way ahead is for government to step in with subsidies, as in the early days of the internet. A second way would be for a company to underwrite the early deficit and then profit from subsequent growth. The problem is that competitors could access such a user base and share the benefits even though the early provider bore the costs of the original investment.

 

The third alternative is the community approach. For each member, belonging to a leading-edge group while beating the establishment becomes its own reward. Financially, the community activity lowers costs by contributing free labour to the common endeavour, such as skilled programmers' hours, and by sharing pirated content. Together, these efforts lower the number of participants required for critical mass. From there, the activity will often grow to a size sufficient for profitable commercial entry. Examples include commercial radio in the early 1920s; commercial internet providers in the 1990s; and, most recently, Apple with iTunes, its wildly successful music download service.

 

When such commercial entry takes place, private companies almost inevitably push aside the community that made it all possible. We can decry such evolution as a business takeover. Or we can celebrate it as part of the innovation process, in which community entrepreneurship plays an important but under-appreciated role.

 

Established media companies therefore should value the community efforts that create the user base for their own entry. While upholding the copyright principle, they should accept some early messiness in new applications in order to grow future markets. Twenty years ago, some of the same companies that are today challenging P2P also fought before the same Supreme Court against the video cassette recorder, citing the same piracy potential. They narrowly lost, but the VCR enabled widespread home video use that has proven immensely profitable to these companies.

 

It is not only about music. Today, with broadband internet emerging around the world, there are enormous secondary benefits to the economy and to innovation from rapid deployment of high-speed networks.

 

Entertainment uses are the "blockbusters" for broadband that will make it attractive to millions, thereby creating beneficial "network effects" that will enable other applications and future innovations. Suppressing P2P activities that prime the pump for subsequent commercial activity will only harm users, media companies and the digital economy as a whole.

 

The writer, professor of economics and finance at Columbia University and director of its Columbia Institute for Tele-Information, is a contributor to FT.com's New Economy Policy Forum, www.ft.com/techforum

 

---

 

Hollywood steps up battles to squash web piracy

By Scott Morrison in San Francisco

Published: December 14 2004 23:51 | Last updated: December 14 2004 23:51

 

Hollywood movie studios on Tuesday stepped up their fight against internet piracy by pursuing lawsuits against people in the US and Europe who operate servers that relay digitised movie files across computer networks such as BitTorrent.

 

BitTorrent is one of a handful of new internet ?peer-to-peer? file-sharing services that have gained popularity after the music and movie industries started cracking down on networks such as Kazaa, Morpheus and Grokster. Hollywood is concerned about BitTorrent and eDonkey, also targeted by the lawsuits, because the software was designed to let internet users quickly share large files such as movies or video games.

[netrootbg]

Ами най - много и p2p да минат в нелегалност . Няма спиране пиратството. Като добавим и че "пиратите" действат много по динамично от "закона" .....

[ov3rm4n]

Проблема е, че става почти нелегално да се разработва такъв софтуер - като не могат да хванат пиратите, удрят по хората които разработват софтуера. Естествено и те могат да "изчезнат", но това няма как да не се отрази на софтуера... Абе изобщо - Обединени Полицейски Щати. Типичен пример за прехвърляне от болната глава на здравата. Да ударим програмистите, щото е трудно (и по-скъпо и по-бавно) да ударим пиратите. Хитро.

[afx]

Е да ама.. все едно няма да се появят достатъчно много и организирани анонимни програмисти. Никой не може да спре пиратството. Стремежа към свобода е заложено в хората така че.. унищожаването на p2p просто ще доведе до появата на нещо ново.. и още по хитро Ще видим какво ще е то.

[ov3rm4n]

Естествено, че ще се появят. Въпроса обаче е принципен. Стъпката е в грешна посока, нищо че изглежда безобидна и дори смислена. Кое ще е следващото?! Да дадат разрешение на "органите" да ти пускат троянци, за да проверяват дали нямаш незаконен контент на компа?! Ще задължат производителите на хардуер да ти вграждат бекдоорс със същата цел?! Ако се продължи в тая посока ще стане страшно. Просто гледайте напред - какъв път проправят такива решения. Какво се задава зад ъгъла.

[afx]

Кое ще е следващото?! Да дадат разрешение на "органите" да ти пускат троянци, за да проверяват дали нямаш незаконен контент на компа?!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Все едно това не се прави в момента. Просто си инсталираш един Windows и го включваш към Internet.

 

Лошото е че почти нищо не можем да направим.. Е да и аз се включих в петицията против софтуерните патенти ама.. какво от това?! Парите владеят света.

[DeZoeker]

Нищо чудно и дотам да се стигне... Дано Европа да не им върви по свирката само, макар че покрай историята с патентите...

[ov3rm4n]

Направо до там ще се стигне. Просто не могат да се преборят с прогреса - нови техники и технологии винаги ще излизат.

[simbata]

...и аз се включих в петицията против софтуерните патенти...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Link ?

 

 

Колкото се знае за катинарите, толкова се знае и против тях...

[ov3rm4n]

http://www.noepatents.org/index_html?LANG=en

 

Defend the European Parliament's Directive!

This petition is directed to the European Parliament and to the European Council. Its goal is to warn European Authorities against the dangers of software patents. This petition is supported by the EuroLinux Alliance together with European companies and non-profit associations. Please make this petition well known to everybody concerned and do whatever else you can to help our ongoing struggle.

 

I am concerned by current plans to legalise software patents in Europe, considering their damaging effect on innovation and competition.

 

I am concerned by the possible use of software patents to patent business methods, education methods, health methods, etc.

 

I am concerned by the current track record of abuses from the European Patent Office, especially by their tendency to abuse their judicial power to extend the scope of patentability.

 

I am surprised that no economic report has ever been published by European Authorities to study the impact of software patents on innovation and competition.

 

I urge decisionmakers at all levels in Europe to enforce the Law, which clearly prohibits patenting pure computer programs, instead of changing it.

 

I urge decisionmakers at all levels in Europe to reconsider their current plans and to make sure patents are not abused to prohibit or restrict the dissemination of computer programs and intellectual methods.

[break]

Ами какво му е трудното да се направи софтуер който да не разпространява файлове с .mp3 .avi .mpeg и другите подобни формати. То пак става. Един рар на файловете и готово. Тогава не би трябвало да е престъпно...майче.

[w00x]

Ами какво му е трудното да се направи софтуер който да не разпространява файлове с .mp3 .avi .mpeg и другите подобни формати. То пак става. Един рар на файловете и готово. Тогава не би трябвало да е престъпно...майче.

 

Защо да не е незаконно? каква е разликата между разпространяването на архив с пиратска песен в него и самата пиратска песен без архив? Те хората не са против разпространението на медия във вид в който може да се повреди при трансфера, а против разпространението на медия изобщо

[Godfather]

Проблема е, че става почти нелегално да се разработва такъв софтуер - като не могат да хванат пиратите, удрят по хората които разработват софтуера. Естествено и те могат да "изчезнат", но това няма как да не се отрази на софтуера... Абе изобщо - Обединени Полицейски Щати. Типичен пример за прехвърляне от болната глава на здравата. Да ударим програмистите, щото е трудно (и по-скъпо и по-бавно) да ударим пиратите. Хитро.

 

ov3rm4n, просто разработката на софтуер ще се измести в "по-нормални" страни, като братска Канада (то вече даже се усеща , някои офшорни зони, че дори и в братски Китай - при технологиите празно няма