MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-03-28 |
| FROM | From: "P.Robert Marino"
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] File Sharing P2P
|
This may also effect free software directly
because it could be used as president for very costly law suites were we
may have to prove
GNU/Linux and other free software is primarily use is legitimate
purposes. now this may sound crazy but could you just imagine if
Microsoft or SCO decided to sue all of the writers of a free software
application individually. if they did this for a few hundred
applications it could do some very real damage to free software. how
could you prove OGG is primarily used for "legitimate use" who's
definition of legitimate the IRAA's, the DMCA's, or maybe Microsoft's.
the IRAA could try to sue every one named in the change log because ogg
dose not have DRM.
On Mar 26, 2005 08:03 PM, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
> Posted on Sat, Mar. 26, 2005
>
>
> Grokster case pits tech innovation vs. Hollywood's rights
>
> By Dawn C. Chmielewski
>
> Mercury News
>
>
>
> Silicon Valley and Hollywood face off before the Supreme Court on
> Tuesday in a closely watched case that could determine if technologies
> like TiVo and the iPod are developed in the future.
>
> At issue in MGM vs. Grokster is whether the makers of file-sharing
> software should be held liable when people use their products to
> illegally download copyrighted music and movies.
>
> The court ruled in a 1984 case involving the Sony Betamax
> videocassette
> recorder that as long as a technology has a substantial legitimate
> use,
> manufacturers cannot be found liable for copyright violations
> committed
> by people who use their products. As music, movies and other
> entertainment became so many 1s and 0s easily reproduced at the touch
> of
> a button, the Betamax standard allowed companies to develop CD
> burners,
> DVD players and other technologies without fear of being sued every
> time
> a customer makes copies of a song or TV show.
>
> Now the entertainment industry wants to change the rules of the game.
> It
> has asked the Supreme Court to revise the Betamax standard so that
> only
> companies whose technologies' ``primary use'' is legitimate can be
> shielded from being hauled into court.
>
> The distinction may sound trivial, but Silicon Valley companies say it
> could jeopardize their ability to create the next big thing.
>
> That's because no one knows exactly what consumers will do with any
> new
> technology. If companies risk being sued for developing, say, the next
> iPod, they might choose to play it safe, according to Lawrence Lessig,
> the Stanford University law professor who has written extensively
> about
> copyright in the digital age.
>
> ``The practical effect of the rule that they're trying to get the
> court
> to adopt would be to impose extremely high costs on innovation,'' said
> Lessig.
>
> Jason Krikorian, co-founder of San Mateo's Sling Media, agreed.
>
> ``It's very difficult to guess how consumers are going to use the
> product. People are very creative. I just think it's an undue burden
> on
> entrepreneurs,'' said Krikorian, whose company is making a device that
> lets consumers watch television programs from anywhere with an
> Internet
> connection.
>
> With the Grokster case hanging over their heads, small companies like
> Kaleidescape in Mountain View now have their lawyers peer over their
> engineers' shoulders.
>
> Kaleidescape Chief Executive Michael Malcolm said the company's
> attorneys advised changing the design of its home entertainment
> computer
> server, which stores thousands of movies, so that it would be
> impossible
> to copy rented or borrowed DVDs.
>
> ``My fear is if a company is faced with having to carry on a long
> litigation just to demonstrate that it has done everything it can to
> prevent infringing uses, it's going to kill most companies that would
> be
> innovating,'' said Malcolm.
>
> Venture capital firms have already begun to avoid certain types of
> investments deemed too legally risky, said Hank Barry, a partner at VC
> firm Hummer Winblad Venture Partners who served as the CEO of the
> original Napster.
>
> ``Not only at the venture level, but at the entrepreneurial level,
> what
> this has done is make people very reluctant to invest in these sorts
> of
> technologies,'' said Barry. ``The problem is that when you're in a
> start-up, even if you're right, it doesn't matter. Because you can't
> afford to litigate. And if you're an investor, you don't want all your
> money to go to litigation.''
>
> The entertainment industry rejects the idea that it is trying to quash
> innovation, saying it just wants to hold responsible file-sharing
> services whose main business is to profit from the illegal downloading
> of other people's music and movies.
>
> ``What we are trying to do here, we're trying to set some standards
> that
> encourage responsible behavior of citizens in a responsible society,''
> said Dan Glickman, president and chief executive of the Motion Picture
> Association of America. ``You can't get something for nothing.''
>
> Entertainment-industry attorneys also note tech companies could avoid
> liability by taking technological measures to halt piracy.
>
> But Donald M. Whiteside, Intel's director of technology policy,
> worries
> that other companies could be sued for enabling copyright infringement
> through file-sharing services.
>
> ``We know that everyone who's a peer-to-peer user is using a PC,''
> said
> Whiteside. ``Sixty million people aren't accessing it through
> teleportation. That's what really brings this home for us.''
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Contact Dawn C. Chmielewski at dchmielewski-at- mercurynews.com or (800)
> 643-1902.
>
> ____________________________
> NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
> Fair Use -
> because it's either fair use or useless....
> NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
>
____________________________
NYLXS: New Yorker Free Software Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
NYLXS is a trademark of NYLXS, Inc
|
|
