Court May Accept File Sharing Defaults As A Defense Against RIAA Suits
from the this-could-get-interesting... dept
This is fairly early in the process, but lawyer Ray Beckerman points to some of the reasoning for a court refusing to dismiss one of the many RIAA lawsuits against accused file sharers. Some of the points really aren't that surprising. The fact that the court doesn't fully understand how Kazaa works isn't a huge deal -- and it makes sense that they feel uncomfortable dismissing the case without getting a better understanding of what's going on. Same with their confusion on uploading and downloading -- a confusion the RIAA has encouraged over the years. However, what is interesting is the court seems to indicate at least some willingness to consider the defendant's defense that the file sharing was not her fault, because Kazaa's default setting shared her music files without her knowing it. This has been mentioned in the past -- though, usually in situations where people have considered suing a file sharing provider after they got hit by an RIAA lawsuit. It's interesting to see the court at least willing to consider such a defense as being valid. Of course, if it does become valid then it also could be seen as putting the liability back on Kazaa, as that default setting could be seen as "inducement" under the Supreme Court's murky rules. Either way, if this became an acceptable defense, it would cause quite a few problems for the RIAA's "sue everyone" campaign.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Surprise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Surprise...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Surprise...
But who cares if its software/music/movies or pr0n??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bush Pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bush Pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bush Pirate
Careful... the RIAA would disagree with you. That's part of the reason behind all of the DRM prgorams that rape your computer.
If the RIAA had it's way, there would be an RIAA agent for every person who listens to music. That agent would be responsible for unlocking the CD case (to which you don't have a key), loading the CD into your player and pressing play. As far as the RIAA is concerned, the only thing we can do is listen to the music... after we've paid for a very limited spectrum of listening, of course. Begs the question tho... how long until there are little yellow stars that say "music listener" that we'll have to wear.
As far as the defense... that's fine. If the lawsuit claim is that the lady uploaded, then yes, the defense may be a good one. If the claim is that she downloaded, the it doesn't matter what kind of uploading Kazaa does on its own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Bush Pirate
So the music industry wants us to buy an MP3 to play on our MP3 players, a CD to play on our CD players, a MiniDisc to play on our MiniDisc players, a UMD to play on our PSPs . . . that seems (*shudders*) reasonable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush Pirate
Same with newspapers and sites like craigslist.com, they are all reacting trying to save money instead of investing a little money in the beginning and being proactive and creating the way.
RIAA is a bunch of losers. I say if you want to support the artist, do see a show.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush Pirate
Same with newspapers and sites like craigslist.com, they are all reacting trying to save money instead of investing a little money in the beginning and being proactive and creating the way.
RIAA is a bunch of losers. I say if you want to support the artist, do see a show.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bush Pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bush Pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bush Pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bush Pirate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Select Club
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Select Club
Though I bet someone did all of this for him, no way he could do it himself(English seems a tad beyond his abilities).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get a group of computer programmers, technicians, and administrators, and make them the judge and jury.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In theory that would be the ideal situation but I assure you that the RIAA does not want anyone who is even related to someone in any of those fields in a courtroom since that would destroy their smoke and mirrors act. It is also unrealistic to have every member of the jury being an expert on the case subject, would you want to be called for every auto accident case because you were a body repair person?
At this point it is up to the good hearted individuals who happen to be "computer programmers, technicians, and administrators" to educate the people who make and enforce the laws. The most efficient means of doing that would be to create a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the future of digital rights in the U.S.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Like Eff?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Inducement
Very, very stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As a Professional Musician...
Sure, I get a decent kickback from the CD Levy pool if I want, but what's the point? Get 5 bucks a month? I can't be arsed to cash a cheque worth only 5 bucks...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Music you own...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Please Support Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please Support Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Please Support Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Please Support Us
Besides the statements made here make no sense.
Being privvy to the inner workings of the industry, I know that the artist is the last one to earn anything on what the RIAA brings in and they believe they are it is handling correctly.
Why would they resort to begging understanding from a lowly board such as this one?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Please Support Us
Every time the RIAA sues a person, I download another discography. Please, think of my harddrive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Kazaa defense
I'm glad you realize the importance of that defense. It seems that most people using Kazaa and other similar file sharing programs have no clue what folders are subject to being shared, and are often given no practical way to shut off the sharing.
Keep up the good work.
Ray
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmmm...
Both are hypocritical babbling idiots that are clambering at the last vestiges of their crumbling, archaic ways of doing things.
They both remind me of the bad guy in a B movie who, after having his ass kicked, is hanging off the side of a building by his fingertips.
Don't you just want to put your foot in his face and just push? Come on be honest now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IT DOES MAKE SENCE
Ok if someone purchase a VHS of the LAST SAMURAI, it will be ok to download the movie and burn it to DVD (or many years from here) HD-DVD, of course not. If youy get a copy of something you need to pay for it on evey format you get it,
But on contraire If you purchase the cd or casstte or mp3 you should be able to listing it everywere you please (either converting the file to either format) not downloading it from another computer. Just use the ones you baught and dot use pireted or anothing like that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More on the RIAA-Nazis
Yes, it is that bad. By their actions, the RIAA is labeling me (and millions of others) a criminal and a sub-citizen based on broad generalizations and assumptions that are misread from their own propaganda machine. I was actually going to draw an allusion to christianity, but I figured I'd get less flak if I used Nazis... no one likes Nazis.
The RIAA is not struggling to adapt to anything... That's the problem. They are struggling to keep things as they are now so they don't have to adapt. Big difference.
This is all about control. The RIAA may say that they're trying to protect the money for artists, but that's BS... plain and simple. They want to have exclusive control over the distribution and use of "their" media. Unfortunately, as Zeroth404 hinted, the RIAA is trying to say that all content is their media... when it's clearly not. They didn't create music; they just gave an outlet for distribution.
And that's fine. Let them be a distribution channel. Just not the only one. Do you know what would happen if my company tried to be the sole provider of insurance? Just look at the fallout microsoft faced.
And as a distribution channel, they would be hands-off once the product was distributed. I don't see BP or Amoco pissing and moaning because I'm "sharing" the gas between a portable gas can and my lawnmower.
Look, I love being cynical... I have a lot of fun with it. I enjoy using it as a means of getting a point across. In my analogy, I wasn't so much being cynical, more sarcastic and hyperbolic. Semantics aside, if the RIAA doesn't like being referred to a Nazis, then they can stop acting like Nazis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I didn't know that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sue Kazaa?
Hmm... let me see... No. No. No. and... uh... NO!
Freakin' sue-happy people. If ever there were a need for a targeted virus to be invented...
Look. One: If someone doesn't how to 'properly use a computer' and attempts to use it anyway... that's thier fault, not Kazaa's. Two: Kazaa is not responsible for people trading music (computer-literate or not)... they aren't requiring people to use thier product. That's like saying that Glock should be sued every time some psycho decides to off someone with a Glock.
If I --CHOOSE-- (big word there, hope you caught it)... choose to download music illegally, or to upload illegally, then that's my choice.
No one is responsible for the actions you take and decisions you make but yourself.
There should be a severe penalty for bringing about a frivolous lawsuit. I'm thinkin' death... or rape. or raped to death. yeah, that works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now. Now.
Obviously Kazaa, Sharezea and Limewire should be Bitch-Slapped for stupidity, because they ought to know that the average consumer thinks a suppository is something to swallow.
I'd also pay good money to see someone punch Bush in the mouth. About just as likely.
Kazaa is an enabling technology and it is the choice of the user to break the law or not. The defense is a cop-out and the person using such reasoning should be prosecuted to the full extent.
I'd rather it be some entity other than the RIAA, but if it serves the purpose...
If it were up to Gabriel, we would lose our right to be greedy. All jokes aside. I agree that frivolous lawsuits should be banned, but think of the entertainment value. If dumb-ass 1 wouldn't sue dumb-ass 2 we would have a thing to laugh about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Unused folder
I think not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Music, music, musiic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:all this Crap
Downloading the music is illegal. Uploading the music is illegal. Having a copy of a file is illegal (unless you have paid for it). Hosting a "map" or torrent of a file IS illegal, it's like a compressed version of the file, and as soon as a lawmaker anywhere understands that all of the trackers in the us and other countries where there are copyright laws will be forced to take them down... The problem here is one of symantics. They just don't have the words yet to show you you are breaking the law...
I am a programmer, but I also know more than a little about the law... What you are trying to say is ok is already illegal, the lawers just need to clarify for the world what is actually taking place IS ILLEGAL! If I downloaded your car in the middle of the night and just wanted to "share" you wouldn't have so much trouble thinking it was wrong????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:all this Crap
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:all this Crap
Having a copy of a file is NOT illegal. You're grouping all things together as horribly as the RIAA does. If I purchased a file (music, program, whatever) and I copy that program for my own backup purposes, it's not illegal. If I purchase a song, rip it MP3 on my desktop (I store 99% of my music this way because I've had CDs stolen before), and then put a copy of that CD on my Laptop;that's not illegal. It's my freakin CD. I can do with that as I please, so long as I do not give others copies of that song without permission from the copyright holders.
"The problem here is one of symantics. They just don't have the words yet to show you you are breaking the law..." - Will anyone ever learn
So let me get this straight- even if there's not a law against it yet, it's already illegal? Does that even make sense to you? "I don't like what you're doing. It should be illegal, so I'll prosecute you even if there isn't a law against what you're doing".
Sorry; until they "have the words to show me that it's illegal"... i.e. write a freakin law against it... it's legal. Being an asshole bastard isn't illegal.
"If I downloaded your car in the middle of the night and just wanted to "share" you wouldn't have so much trouble thinking it was wrong????" -Will anyone ever learn
Apples to oranges here buddy. I own my car (well, the bank does, but I'm workin on it). I don't own the music I purchase; I own the copy I purchased and the media on which it came (the physical CD itself). If you illegally copy music from me, you're not taking my music; you're taking someone else's music. You're just using my copy to gain access to something that you would have otherwise had to pay for.
Sorry to poke holes in your theories here, but come on.
You may want to ask the RIAA to raise your paycheck. I don't think they're paying you enough for this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:all this Crap
No I dont give a crap if you copy my car, house, furniture, CD's, movies, games, clothes, appliances, just as long as I still have my original in my possession.
Do you jaywalk? OMG jaywalking is ILLEGAL!!!11one
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:all this Crap
kinda off topic, but it's illegal in my city for women to walk around in public without wearing a belt. I shit you not. it's on the books. So much for "against the law" being the reason to not do something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:all this Crap
Oh snap! Someone call the BIAA!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ignorance is an excuse?
Not that I agree with the RIAA. Its just that this is a bs defense. Sounds like someone in clear violation clutching at straws. RIAA's tactics are thuggish and wrong, but that doesn't make every file sharer they attach an innocent babe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Little Guy
Mass Speculation.
$$ wins.
Giant waste of time.
The main issue here is whos propetry belongs to whom. Record companies and the RIAA claim that even though you pruchased a CD the songs on it are still owned by the record company. Because of this you shouldn't be able to reproduce or repliacte them in any fashion, and thus it's illegal to do so.
The problem with this is that there are other laws that exist that say you can backup media you own. If you have legitimatly purchased something you may make a backup of it for your own use, such as almost anything. It's why the disclaimer you see on any DVD or video says "Do not make illegal copies...." Otherwise it would just say "Do not make copies..."
Like any case that's brought to the medias attention you're going to have people talking about something that they're pretty much oblivious about. Then these people talk to more people, and more to more, and so on and so forth, until everyone's perspective is so diluted that no one really knows that the issue at hand is. So, what is the issue at hand? Well I don't pay much attention to these sort of things, because file sharing will always exist, just will; deal with it or make your life a living hell trying to fight it (Giant waste of time).
The judges presiding over these cases, know the law well (at least we'll assume they do). Sadly, that's about all they might know in relation to the case. So any other information conveyed to them is probably going to be biased. It's hard for the judge to take the complaints from the defendants, mostly because they're all young. And it's safe to assume that any judge who might be dealing with such a case, has had his fair share of dealing with today's youth. In this country more so than most if you're young, you might as well be insignifgant. So defendants try to get older, more well established people to make their complaints for them. This is where the corporations get into the mix, and it's all downhill from here. The company or corporation who invests the most $$ into researching the law's governing the legality of the case and getting them to twist it to their favor is going to win.
If you disagree, quit posting in forums such as this, get out on the street. Talk to people who are as equaly pissed off about it as you are, and then form a group. Get this group to talk to others, and whada ya know you have a giant group of people, with one very big voice. Too lazy? Me too. So fight the silent battle by continuing to download illegal music, then when they call you up on charges, bitch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All Technicalities Aside
It's wrong to take a picture of someone else's tree, then send it to a friend.
It's wrong to read a storybook to a four year old.
All those freaks in costume at the Star Trek Conventions owe money to the production companies.
It's wrong play CD's at a party.
Music is an assemblage of pre-existing elements and has been traditionally held to belong to everyone.
The value of tapes and CD's comes in the labor and materials needed to provide a durable, quality product (which is why it's legal to sell them).
File sharing is legal under what was once known as "the spirit of the law." Then the Republicans bought out all the judges.
Of course, the RIAA leans on the artists as the "victims" of file sharing. The music companies have become the robber-barons of the 21st century.
It has not been definatively shown that file sharing hurts music and movie revenues. Until it is proven, the RIAA owes a lot of settlement money back.
A million lawyers' eyes are lighting the skies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Long Winded Rant (IANAL)
Now that there is a new product on the loose that they knew they would not be able to control reliably they first ignored it. When they realized that would not work they tried to make it known that "it is illegal to copy CDs" but they failed to mention the exception of "fair use." In the case of this medium fair use constitutes making backups and/or conversions of a legally purchased product (the music). Once they realized that the very misunderstood fair use clause that caused them so much trouble with cassettes had become a world-wide distribution system that they could neither track nor profit from they dropped a brick in their collective drawers and immediately called out the hounds (or is it degrading to canines to compare them to lawyers?).
I love listening to music alot, though there are only a few artists that I would consider being worth my time to listen to. Given that I have a small range, I would rather click a paypal/credit card donation link on their homepage than buy CD that might make my computer vulnerable to the latest wave of virii and hackers.
Back to the RIAA... What are they doing to fix the problems in their business model? Nothing. What are they doing to patch their dying distribution model? Adding software to audio CDs that will kill most computers and sueing the pants off some of their best (and worst) customers. What are they doing to address the money they aren't paying to the artists for sales on those works? Using the lawsuits as smoke and mirrors to keep their artists blind to the fact that the RIAA has stolen more money from the artists since it's inception than all the downloads, taped radio, burned CDs, and legal free radio combined could have possibly lost them.
On a technical level the RIAA is in the right here, at least as far as the law goes. That is in part due to the fact that they use lobbyists to get laws in their favor passed and laws that are not in their favor not passed. That reminds me of another rant, but I'll save it for a political board.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wyndle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
True Passion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: True Passion
I can be that sure because I know that I am anti-RIAA and I don't just want free music (I am a cheap-ass though... eh, it's a flaw).
The RIAA, supposedly, wants to protect the copyrighted materials that are under their purview. And that's fine. That's understandable. The thing that I have a problem with is the way in which they are going about this protection and the extent they are going.
Let's look at a similar argument from history. You're immediately going to attack this analogy because it's an extreme one that you'll say doesn't fit the context. It does though, if you look at it.
There was once a governmental leader that wanted to make sure that his people were the best they could be. He wanted to make sure, that in the worlds eyes, his people were the cream of the crop; the best the human race had to offer. In order to do this, he had to do a bit of trimming to remove what was viewed as some slight impurities.
That's a very noble goal to want that for your people. Unfortunately, this leader went to some severe extremes to reach that goal. Killing millions in the name of his 'superior race'. Killing millions who were guilty of nothing more than being impure in his eyes. Got an idea who I'm talking about?
Yeah... I know I've run the RIAA/Nazi thing into the ground, but the similarities are there. We a have a governing body who is "looking out for their people", using strong-arm tactics against weaker people to enforce their will (which is legally-questionable), in whole-sale fashion against anyone this body finds against them. The only difference here is that one group used mass murder and genocide, while the other uses lawsuits for money.
Say what you want Nunya, but I'm just pissed at how the RIAA is doing their stuff here. I do disagree with some of their motivation. But hey, it's a capitalist society that motivates and rewards greed, so who's surprised there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: True Passion
And you said " I'm not going to argue what is obviously an opinion." and proceeded to argue it, "Let's look at a similar argument from history." Like I said, I love the entertainment value.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: True Passion (some of the
--"I am forever amazed at the debates that follow an article which points out that people will do anything or say anything, even claim ignorance, to get something for nothing. "
You are giving the impression that you assume this person is guilty without knowing all of the facts. Are they claiming ignorance? Yes. Is it possible that they really were ignorant and really didn't engage in illegal file-sharing? YES!
--"The following debate became quite humorous to me, and I apologize if I hit a nerve."
Yup, it's very entertaining... and no, you didn't hit a nerve. I wasn't pissed in my previous post and apologize if I gave that impression. You and I have had some great debates in the past and I don't want either of us unnecessarily on the defensive.
--"The RIAA is not a governing body, it is a trade group."
By their actions, they are claiming all rights to govern the traffic of the media under their "control". I perhaps should have said that they are a self-proclaimed governing body. I know that they are not, legally, an entity that is supposed to have any real power; just influence.
--"They do not care about their people, they care about money."
No argument here. But if you listen to the RIAA propaganda, they are all about protecting the artists. Hitler wasn't really interested in bettering the race, he wanted to get rid of those things that were inferior. The RIAA wants to get rid of all things that challenge their control... which, in their opinion, would make the world a better place for artist.
--"I cannot attack your analogy because it is not an analogy."
Perhaps I used the wrong literary word, but I always hated English in school anyway. I was making a comparison of similarities between the RIAA's actions and the actions taken by the Nazi regime. Was analogy the wrong word? Allusion, perhaps?
--"And you said 'I'm not going to argue what is obviously an opinion.' and proceeded to argue it, 'Let's look at a similar argument from history.'"
I wasn't arguing (what appeared to be) your opinion that, as I said, "anyone who is anti-RIAA is a thief or a cheap-ass who wants to get free music." You've stated that you too are anti-RIAA, so perhaps my initial impression was incorrect. Nice to see that you don't generalize like that.
What I did want to argue is that not all of the arguments against the RIAA are an attempt to claim that file-sharing is legal. Some (perhaps a majority? Dunno) are about how the RIAA is going about their work.
Sorry if this seems a bit slap-dashed, but I'd doing this at work and keep getting interrupted mid-stream and it's really hard to keep my mind on-point.
Meh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: True Passion (some of the
But I also belive ignorance is no excuse, plain and simple. I agree that the RIAA propaganda is sickening, but someone has to pay the bills and music is big business, and not all artist get screwed. Still I think it is wrong to make allusions or analogys to the Nazi's, they were beyond extreme. I hate when my forum contributions keep getting interruped with work too, but let me repeat myself-Ignorance is no excuse- if it were the laws would be in more trouble than they are now, with criminals suing victims and all, this mess has to stop, and I hate to see one more case of stupidity win out over the laws, even if I do not totally agree with them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Last bit of True Passion
I agree that ignorance is not an excuse. I can, however, be a reason. Yes, people do need to be held accountable for their ignorance. Hopefully that will help give incentive to people to be more diligent in their actions.
All I'm saying is that there are circumstances where such 'excuses' should be allowable. They may be extremely rare, but to assume that there is never and will never be a reasonable situation where this could be acceptable... that's just foolish.
The trouble, of course, is that it's nearly impossible to make a dividing line between those situations and still have it be "fair". Philosophers have debated this kind of thing for ages... justice and fairness being in the eyes of the beholder, and such. Having people be --gasp-- accountable for their own actions won't fix the problem, but it'll damn sure help. On that, I agree with you.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go fight some histamines... Damned Florida pollen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bush
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bush
[ link to this | view in chronology ]