Entertainment Studios 1, Consumers 0

furrycute

furrycute

Banned
This is just great.

I am going back to buying analog tapes. :D
 
C

claudermilk

Full Audioholic
Did you read the court's ruling (the link at the bottom)? I don't agree with your thread title. They were very specific in this case that Grokster actively went after the Napster user base who they knew primarily used to service for infringement. That is what is leaving the door open for them being sued back in the lower courts (notice that the case has been sent back down). There still is a case to be tried and the studios have to prove to a court that the companies were intentionally encouraging copyright infringement. The Betamax precedent has been left untouched. IMHO it seems a reasonable balance on a tough issue.
 
Duffinator

Duffinator

Audioholic Field Marshall
claudermilk, I don't disagree with your comments and like I said, I've never used any of those services and am mostly sympathetic with artists concerns about copyright infringement on their intellectual property. But on the other hand I like the ability to backup my DVD's, rip CD's for storage to my HD, and the like. If it wasn't for companies/people like Napster and DVD Decrypter we consumers would have far fewer choices on what we can do with that intellectual property once we PAY for it. I like to think that consumers benefit in the long run when the Napster's of the world are pushing out the envelop of what is possible. If we had to wait on the record companies to give consumers what we want we'd all be carrying around turntables to listen to music on the go. So to me, in the long run, the consumers lost what could potentially be a big battle yesterday. Stay tuned as it's not over yet.
 
C

Catdaddy

Junior Audioholic
<<If it wasn't for companies/people like Napster and DVD Decrypter we consumers would have far fewer choices on what we can do with that intellectual property once we PAY for it. >>

I think that is the other way around, Duff.

The (copying) programs themselves were probably problematic enough for the content owners prior to Napster, and Kazaa, as they allowed for the potential pirating of software but I believe that Napster, and their kind, facilitated and, in a way, made more acceptable the every day (illegal) trading/pirating of copyrighted content.

Just as in most cases, tbe abusers are the ones that make it more difficult for the people who would use those programs fairly, for legitamate use.

If instead of obtaining illegal copies more people actually bought, or rented, their movies and music the cost to us for the media would probably be less and we surely would have more options to use those programs to back up our favorite movies or to rip our favorite music onto more devices.
 
C

claudermilk

Full Audioholic
I don't think this case has any bearing on you backing up your CDs and DVDs at home using local software on your PC (I am aware of the issues surrounding DVD shrink, etc). This case is specifically related to the P2P networks and rampant copying there. They are very specific as to what the scope of the ruling is. It is very specific in that there must be proof of intent to encourage copyright infringement, or that the software service is specifically intended for that purpose. And, they have thrown the case back down to the local courts to try with these guidelines. As you said, it's far from over.

From what I read in the ruling, Grokster could be in trouble over their specific actions in promoting the service. I would think other services like BitTorrent should be fine as they have not been targeting the old Napster/Kazaa user base & their habits.

It will be interesting to see how this turns out.
 
Spiffyfast

Spiffyfast

Audioholic General
I really hope they dont start targeting bit torrent. You can download things so much faster with it than off of a company's website for software for instance and it costs them less money b/c they dont have to pay for the bandwidth. A lot of bit torrent is legit software sharing so it would be a shame to see it get shut down. I know they have brought cases against sites that strictly deal with illegal movies and such which I think is completely fine b/c it makes it more expensive for the rest of us to get things the legit way.
 
C

claudermilk

Full Audioholic
I doubt that they could do anything with BitTorrent. I haven't used the service myself, bu my understanding is the main focus is open source software (yay!) and not the Napster crowd. Therefore, I would think they are safe from the studios.

Here's a direct link to the court's ruling: http://wid.ap.org/documents/scotus/050627grokster.pdf

It's an interesting read.

My impression is that the court realizes this is a sticky subject and is putting the burden on the studios to prove intent to infringe, or intent to encourage infringement. That's a lot tougher than just saying that the service happens to be getting used by third parties to infringe, therefore the software publisher is liable by default. From reading the ruling it sounds to me like there may be evidence in this particular case to point that way & is why I think Grokster may be in trouble here; and by the same token, I think BitTorrent is in the clear.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top