Student Gets PC Confiscated For Distributing MP3s 388
MagicYoshi writes "Ziff Davis has this story about Oklahoma State University confiscating a student's PC after the RIAA complained that he was distributing copyrighted music and movies." This doesn't make any sense: why would you go after this kid? Shouldn't you sue the people who wrote his operating system and FTP server? *cough* *cough*.
Reminiscent of 1995 MIT Case (Score:4)
He was prosecuted by the federal government under federal wire fraud statutes, but the case was dismissed because the judge found that copyright infringement cannot be prosecuted under the wire fraud statute.
I wonder if the DMCA has superseded this precedent (though the Massachusetts case may not apply in Oklahoma), which seemed to make FTP sites into "common carriers" in the eyes of the law. More information here [mit.edu].
Re:I'm afraid I don't understand... (Score:4)
Drugs, prostitution, "unnatural sex acts", mp3 (Score:3)
So, just add copying MP3's to the growing list of things that people like to do but are illegal. Things that can drain millions of dollars from the economy in legal fees, court cases, high prices from artificial scarcity, costs of creating pointless encryption schemes, pointless police busts.
Doesn't it make sense that the way to create value in our economy (ie, make money) is to see what people like to do, and then figure out a way to profit from it?
Not that I feel particularly sorry for this kid, but I wonder what the RIAA is going to accomplish in their grand scheme of things.
Re:Taco... What an idiot you are!!! (Score:2)
Woz
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
you know ... (Score:2)
In fact I think I'm going to go after them myself.
The fact that somewhere some unwashed graduate student is making copies of my scientific papers (my flesh and blood, so to speak) with the quality very close to the original and shares them with other unwashed graduated students (and may be, God forbid, reads those copies in the bathroom) and public and university libraries geting shitload of money on copy fees and Xerox corporation selling those godawfull machines make me loos my sleep and apetite.
I feel violated.
regards
Excuse me but you missed another million (Score:5)
If the campus has rules... (Score:3)
Civil disobedience is one thing - but if you take it to far you may end up being a martyr for your cause.
Re:CmdrTaco, you don't "get it" (Score:2)
Woz
Re:Wrong is wrong (Score:2)
It wasnt confiscated... (Score:4)
*Not a Sermon, Just a Thought
*/
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
You're right, thanks for the tip! (Score:5)
The RIAA and MPAA wish to thank you for your insight. Indeed, we will very soon unleash our blood-thirsty lawyers on all persons who work or have worked on "Open-Source" network software, including their parent operating systems. Such software is not tolerable in a modern, free, capitalist world.
From now on, everybody is required to run Microsoft Windows(tm) software and pay a mandatory fee of $399/month as a provisional royalty payment for listening to sound and music.
Thank you.
/max
MP3 _itself_ can be illegal. (Score:2)
Compressing audio with the MP3 algorithm, storing such files, and playing them back is certainly not illegal.
If you don't have a license from Fraunhofer/Thomson [mp3licensing.com], making, using, or selling MP3 files is patent infringement.
<O
( \
XGNOME vs. KDE: the game! [8m.com]
Artists as much against piracy as RIAA (Score:2)
The content producers who own their own copyrights have spoken loud [nwfusion.com] and clear [maccentral.com] about how they feel about sharing music.
I have no idea where the mistaken assumption comes from that artists are OK with their music being pirated. it's just one of those slashdot myths I guess.
Exactly: he broke the law (Score:2)
Exactly! Nobody is above or immune from the law, not even the lawmakers. And the best way to get laws changed is to become a lawmaker!
-Citizens for the election of Andrew Dvorak to a seat in Congress representing the 1651213th Congressional District.
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:3)
Report A Crime to OKU [okstate.edu]
--
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
The unfortunate part is that life+10^20 years would be "limited" also. And if you look at the part of the constitution on copyright:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
You'll notice it says nothing about this "fair use" thing people keep talking about...
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
No, it's certainly not civil disobedience in the noble sense of the word, but comparing speeding to distributing MP3s is a strech. Downloading MP3s instead of buying the album directly affects the artist - they lose money because you didn't shell out your $17.99. Driving 75 (the speed of traffic, as noted in your example) in a 55 is a victimless crime. In fact, it is safer because the difference in speed is minimized. This is something that some people don't seem to get. As a result of the NHTSA's "speed kills" campaign, I have to deal with people merging onto the highway at 40 mph because "slower is safer."
Perhaps I'm just jumping on my pet issue (speed limits), and while I agree with the point of your post, the analogy isn't quite right.
God, I hope this was sarcasm (Score:3)
I know you all have some silly ideas, but there is this thing called holding people responsible for their actions. I know its been passe for the past 20 years or so, but it really isn't such a bad idea.
I for one would be incredibly entertained if they started going after individual Napster users for copyright violations...It would be great
Judge: Your defense, Mr. er, Eleet Haxor
Haxor: Information wants to be free! I'm stickin' it to the Man!
Judge: Interesting... (gavel slams) Guilty as Charged!
an OSU student perspective. (Score:2)
Re:It is a "Robin Hood" scenario (Score:4)
And how many of this kids 40+ gigs do you suppose was filled with new, unappreciated, or otherwise struggling artists? Or do you suppose this was 40 gigs of Metallica, Madonna, Master P and similar high-profile artists, who have no trouble making money under the current system?
People who steal from the rich (record companies) and give to the poor (college students who enjoy music) are seen as modern day "Robin Hood"s and are considered heros, just like the legendary person.
First of all, Robin Hood, at least how you know him, is a work of pure fiction. If there ever was a real-life basis for Robin Hood (something that is debatable by historians), he likely was nothing more than a common thief. The fact that he happened to be stealing from an unpopular king is probably the only thing that made him famous.
Second, let's get a little perspective here, shall we? We're talking about the theft of music CD's via the MP3 file format: a luxury item. Let me repeat that: A Luxury Item. You can live without music. You can make your own music, or only listen to music created by those who don't try to sell it at exorbinate prices. Go downtown in an city of size on Friday or Saturday night, and you can hear a live bands all night for a few dollars cover. Attend local music festivals, and hear more music than you can probably listen to.
But please, do not point at a $15 Metallica CD, and cry to everone who will listen about how wrong it is to charge such a price, and how you must steal it to defeat the evil record companies. That's just pathetic.
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
In all seriousness though, I will admit that many people download mp3's for the free music. But some people are practicing civil disobedience - hoping to draw attention to the fundamentally broken concept of intellectual property we have today. I don't want a society in which I must have permission to do anything, and get a license agreement on everything I buy, watch, hear, etc. And so, until intellectual property is fixed, I refuse to recognize it's validity, and do believe that downloading free music can be a form of civil disobedience.
So what your saying is by breaking the law you are trying to get instituted that you're practicing civil disobidience? Or are you making sure that you only download music that "should" be in the public domain? Or are you using this as an excuse to download new music and say by doing that you are trying to get the laws back to what they originally were, even though you're breaking what they originally were? The constituation says a lot of things, and a lot fo them are ignored. Do you think people in the US should have titles such as "Lord" or "Duke"? It's in the constitution, so it must be a great thing right? The constitution is a great document, and I'm glad it's there, but it is only called upon when convenient. If we have to uphold the constitution, then we have to uphold every single line of it. But that wouldn't suit your purposes, so we'll keep yelling about the part we like and ignoring the ones we don't.
DeCSS and Napster (Score:2)
I didn't mention Napster in my post at all. Napster wasn't mentioned in the story submission either. Any inferred connection between the two is a product of your imagination.
If anything, I should be guilty of -1: Offtopic instead of unwarranted linkage of the two.
do anything except claim that your desire to get music for free is some sort of noble cause.
I never claimed in my post that I want music for free; indeed, I have no such desire. For the past three years I have completely boycotted all North American record labels and music produced by such labels, but I spend plenty of money on CDs made outside of North America.
Free music is not a noble cause and is not worth the risk of civil disobedience. Free speech is.
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
And when a company goes after napster, yes, people say "no, go after the user". WHen a band goes after the users people say they're attacking their fans. What's an IP holder to do, according to slashdot? GPL it, i suppose.
That doesn't work. People have every right to determine what rights they'ed like to lend their creations to other to under. Respect their rules, and people will respect yours (not you, original poster, i'm just lecturing
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
OSU police seize student's computer [okstate.edu]
It's being spun by the OKS administration as the student trying to make money ("don't be an entrepreneur") off of the copyrights, although no evidence has been presented or found for that allegation.
--
Re:Amen (Score:2)
Just curious, but why? I love it. Negates the whole "karma-whore" accusation syndrome. You get to 50, you have all the karma you'll ever need to be able to MM, Moderate and have +2 scores, why would you want to be able to get more?
Re:Don't get confused... Think for yourself. (Score:2)
"It starts becoming a major world issue when record and movie companies buy laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act which say that I cannot even listen to SDMI music or watch DVD movies except under their terms."
Don't buy the product if you don't like the licnese. It's morally wrong for you to tell others what they should do with thier own property.
The problem is that the license not to use DVDs on unlicensed players is created by enacting criminal legislation, rather than being negotiated at time of sale, and affects more than just people who buy DVDs.
If you think it's morally wrong to tell others what they should do with their property, you should certainly agree that it's morally wrong to pass a law preventing a person, who might not have ever purchased DVDs and therefore would not be subject to any agreement with the MPRAA, from distributing a program which they have a license from the author to distribute, merely because it is possible to use that program in a way that might break some third party's agreement with the MPAA.
"It's a major issue that even if I have the technical skills to circumvent their restrictions, I can't utilize or publicize those skills for fear of turning into a Jon Johansen"
Don't break the law, and you'll not have any problems. Simple.
But the law in question, by your own statement about the morality of telling others what to do with their property, is immoral. Distributing or creating a program that decrypts CSS-encrypted material violates no one's property rights. Even if it is possible to use it in such a way, that should not be grounds for its creation and distribution to be prohibited by law.
Re:This Situation Is Different (Score:2)
and it was dumb, they mentioned i was stealing from so and so, and i had 1 mp3 of them. they get all pissy about the maybe 50 major label ones i had, mostly covers, and a lot of the ones they got mad about, were legit, i had the cd sitting not 6 feet from me.
since then, i leave it just for access by my friends, and we try new things out, and then we go spend tons to expand our huge cd collections. and i havn't once gotten notice about that.
i still don't know what the music industry is complaining about. i don't watch mtv, or listen to the trash on the radio. mp3 is how i hear new things. it's not the new things they want me to hear i guess.
i've bought more cds from downloading the albums, or a couple of songs, than i have any other manner. i think i've bought 1 cd from the radio, about 50 because my friends showed the bands to me. and about 150 because i checked them out in mp3 beforehand, and i buy it as soon as i have the cash and can afford the cd.
but, i guess they'd rather me not buy anything at all if they won't let me hear it. so, maybe i will just stop buying for all the good it does me.
-------
Blue Laws (Score:2)
---------------------------------
Im not trolling I brought up sex because it best illustrates my point.
Not a martyr, but disobedient (Score:2)
Your claim that they don't care to pay for music doesn't pan out in light of the record profits posted by the music industry since the introduction of mp3 technology and Napster. Students are still buying music, they're just listening to mp3's as well. On the other hand, if music sharing is in part a form of protest against documented price fixing by the industry, or protest against what are perceived to be unjust copyright laws, then there is clearly an element of civil disobedience. Protesters, however, should be prepared to pay the price for their cause.
Having to borrow a friend's machine to play Unreal probably doesn't qualify this kid as a Martyr. If he were incarcerated for several months without a trial, then perhaps he would be, even without a cause. Ask Kevin Mitnick about it.
Re:I'm afraid I don't understand... (Score:3)
The sarcasm went right over your head. (Score:2)
This is all about the *RIGHT* way to go about protecting copyrights rather than the way the RIAA is persuing MP3.com and Napster, or the MPAA is persuing DeCSS.
--
Ben Kosse
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:2)
When computer equipment is involved in a criminal investigation, it is always seized. And in Canada anyway, if that computer is on a network, the cops can legally seize all of the computers on the network too.
When I learned that (from one of the two guys responsible for "computer crime" in Ottawa Carleton (and yes, that includes theft)) I pointed out to the guy that taken to extremes, he could confiscate the entire Internet... (or at least the Canadian part).
I asked why they wouldn't just take the hard drive or something - his response: "it's more efficient to take the entire system". And then he followed up the conversation with a chilling example of this business guy whose entire network of computers was seized for some reason or another and it turned out he was innocent. So, they returned the stuff (a year later) - but by that time it was too late - he'd had to declare bankrupcy as he couldn't replace the entire network, and still make his lease payments on the original stuff.
I thought this concept was really outrageous. But it's completely legal. The cop did say that in order to get the paperwork to be able to seize the computers, they have to jump through a lot of hoops (which I happen to believe).
But it still sucks that if I turn a blind eye to my roommates illegal shinanigans (even if you don't agree that it *ought* to be illegal, it still *is*..) then I'm risking any equipment I have that is on the same network...
Re:My ramblings. (Score:2)
THe AHRA specifically does not apply to computers.
As for #2.. why condescend on me? It was simply a question, not a statement.
As for an ecnrypted HD.. siezing a computer and telling the jury 'look, i'ts encrypted' is a LOT different than telling them 'look, he has all these mp3s'
As for confiscation.. they would have confiscated it anyway. THe point is they would be able to do less with it once they got it.
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:3)
1. Greedy already rich system having its rights violated is not really bad.
2. Greedy company is unfairly using something donated to the community to profit is bad.
People trading music over napster don't really make money in their copyright violation.
Sun was trying to increase the popularity of its platform(and therefore make more money) by using community donated work without releasing the information it was supposed to.
It isn't so much hypocrisy, just the thought that one group is different than another. I guess it depends on what you believe in more. Freedom of information/giving to the community or IP rights/capitalism(?).
The whole thing about this mp3 issue is that no one is handling it delicately, as it should be. Artists see their rights being violated, yell at fans, fans get angry. I haven't seen anything here where the artists have asked fans not to download off napster and support them. What about a simple link on their website that says "If you have downloaded mp3s by our group, please support our group and pay us xxx cents per song/click on a banner/fill out marketing survey" Now wouldn't that be better than saying "YOU HAVE VIOLATED MY RIGHTS! STOP AND/OR PAY UP!" because, really, most people using napster don't see anything wrong with downloading songs. It isn't that they want to violate artist rights, it is just that Napster is a much easier way of getting music than buying CDs. If they only cared about free music, they wouldn't bother with buying anything and just tape everything off the radio. Yes artists have the legal right to defend their copyright rights, but that doesn't mean they have to use lawsuits.
Re:I'm afraid I don't understand... (Score:2)
Solved that problem: encrypt the disks.
--
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:3)
Obviously, once it stops promoting "The Progress of Science and useful Arts", it should stop being copyright.
I think that the current copyright laws have hurt consumers in the music and computer industries, and therefore are not promoting useful Arts anymore. Therefore, under the constitution, they should no longer be copyrighted.
Anyone want to use this as a basis for a Supreme Court case to reform copyright? (or is anyone out there ACTUALLY a lawyer who has some better ideas, and can tell me exactly how stupid that was...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [ncsu.edu].
Wrong is wrong (Score:2)
WTF are you talking about? There's no pleasing you (Score:3)
This student was no different from the average w4r3z d00d. For the past few months Slashdotters have been saying the RIAA shouldn't go after Napster because they are providing a service, now the RIAA goes after a person who is distributing thousands of MP3s of copyrighted work and advertizing for his wares in chat rooms and the RIAA is still wrong?!?
What the fuck do you want? The RIAA shouldn't go after a service that is a haven for music piracy and they shouldn't go after music pirates? Maybe you'd like them simply to spend millions of dollars producing, promoting and distributing music then give away CDs just like AOL.
Frankly as a college student, who frequently sees network bandwidth eaten up by people like this kid who had 10000 songs on his hard drive then advertized for total strangers to come saturate his campus' network, I have no sympathy for him.
Re:Public safety (Score:2)
No, I'm much happier with a police force specifically for a campus than with a municipal police force. First off, think about how many potential crimes go on at a university. The police blotter at my school was always at least ten times as long per week as the municipal one. If I was a city cop, I wouldn't want to take part in that either. Secondly, campus police have, first and foremost, the protection of the student body in mind, not the protection of the city government (which I think is a bigger conflict of interest). Thus, you find that campus police are much more lenient on matters than their municipal counterparts. Finally, you don't have to deal with those nasty bureacratic funding deals. University cops get paid largely with university funds.
And besides, I guarantee you that those university cops aren't doing the forensic analysis of that kid's hard drive, unless of course, their analysis amounts to 'Quick, Jimbo, download all this kid's music before the Feds get their hands on it'.
Hmm.. (Score:2)
I'm afraid I don't understand... (Score:5)
The fact that this guy was advertising in chat rooms for his wares (*cough*) makes me lose any sympathy. It's one thing to copy some movies and songs and share them with your friends on an ftp server, I do it and I'm sure many other slashdotters do the same. But the wholesale distribution to anonymous people is just plain silly. And I'm sure that the university's computer policy doesn't allow people to run ftp servers or distribute copyrighted material.
No sympathy at all.
So? (Score:2)
On a different note, the wording of the statement amused me slightly.
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Amount of substance? They make it sound like he was distributing drugs. Maybe they're checking the hard drive for traces of white powders
What if he used Linux? (Score:2)
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:2)
If the police damaged his stuff he can sue. Those responsible could also be criminially liable for vandalism.
Even for undamaged stuff, there might be some grounds for a lawsuit, such as depreciation, loss of use during the time it was seized, etc. A good civil lawyer would be very helpful....
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
You can say that Ghandi's followers were going to the sea to get the salt just because the salt was cheaper there. You can say that was Rosa Park was doing was just illegal, she was just tired and wanted to sit where she wanted. Any deliberate breaking of a law which is not there for a good reason _is_ civil disobedience. And I disbelieve your argument, free software is just that free, I can download it, I can modify it, I can give it to my friend. If let's say Sony Music places licenses on it's records, it's not just protecting the music from being distributed for money, it's taking away it's freedom.
Forensic review ? (Score:2)
So we can assume those movies refered to were Adult in nature can we? They're unlikely to want to review his Metallica collection after all
Student Has Fingers, Eyes Seized by RIAA (Score:5)
"It's very simple," said an RIAA spokesman. "He was distributing MP3s and violating copyright. And, in line with our new `zero-tolerance' policy, we will be seizing the tools of copyright violation: in this case, the fingers he used to type with, and the eyes he used to confirm his crime with. The surgery is scheduled for next week."
The spokesman denied that this was too harsh a punishment. "Oh, give me a break. It's in the Bible, after all. And don't forget that this is a temporary seizure. We will be keeping the eyes and fingers in cryogenic storage, and after one year we will return them to the student. We even pick up the tab for the surgery. Pretty sweet, if you ask me."
Free Software Foundation guru Richard M. Stallman could not be reached for comment. A source close to him said that he was "frantically trying to uninstall his copy of Gnapster."
This Situation Is Different (Score:5)
In the process of building up his collection, this student was hogging bandwidth that could have been used for academic or less bandwidth-intensive personal applications. Every once in a while, the network at my campus slows to a crawl and I *know* it is because somebody planning a party has decided to download 50-100 MP3s within the span of a few hours.
I would be upset if the RIAA harassed a casual MP3 user with only a few hundred files occasionally shared over Napster. But, this was an "always-on" FTP server with an inordinate amount of bandwidth. When somebody is so blatantly disrespecting all parties involved, I have no sympathy.
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:3)
This student wasn't the only one... (Score:2)
Incidentally, the dorm that this student lived in had just been wired with ethernet [ocolly.com] and was one of the last dorms on campus to have this done.
=================================
Re:Don't get confused... Think for yourself. (Score:2)
So what? (Score:3)
I can guarantee that if someone distributed Linux without proper permissions, violating the GPL or something, you'd all jump on his back.
I support the distribution of music over the Net wholheartedly. But, the music and movies do belong to someone, and taking it from them is stealing.
Defending people who are obviously guilty just because it deals with "the Internet" serves no more then to dilute the cause and make you look like fools.
NOTE: My apologies if there is another post here with the same subject - a minor misclick on my part.
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:2)
Back when I was reading up on the hacker scene (5+ years ago) there were many stories just like this. I'm sure there was exaggeration, but the fact that police actions like this get reported so often is proof enough to me that it does happen.
And quite frequently. Most of the seizures were on kiddies who were charged with some kind of fraud. And when it's a well-known corporation doing the legal action, you can bet that this kiddies life was pretty much ruined, record-wise.
Police raids upon law-infringing hackers have been known to range from simple bangering of the suspect to an all-out SWAT Team raid with guns and gas masks. (This, in a low-income apartment building.)
And you might think that the police tactics are at least somewhat proportional to the crime committed, but that's not the case. I don't feel sorry for the script kiddie who tried to gain a little cash on the side, but I DO feel sympathy for the hacker who's learning got both him and his family harrassed, embarrassed, and these days, physically hurt.
Anyway... what? MP3's? Oh sorry. Disregard the entire above.
Oopsie (Score:2)
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:2)
Feh, "bangering" should have read "badgering".
(Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs! Don't forget the http://!)
Going after College Kids isn't New. (Score:5)
I got busted back in 97 for running an FTP out of my dorm just like this kid. The coolest part was that the RIAA actually faxed my univeristy president about me! I was listed by name and IP address. I felt so special.
I first became worried when I noticed attempted logins from the Network Security Office at our school. I prompty booted them out and shut down the server. But alas, it was too late. 20 minutes later I noticed my connection was gone. And a week later I was in Judicial Affairs getting bitched at by some old woman with bad breath.
I lost my dorm connection for an entire year because of that. So now I no longer distribute MP3s, I just take them. I paid my dues dammit!
So anyway, my whole point is that the RIAA has been going after individual students for at least 3 years now. This is the first I've heard of a confiscated computer though.
Re:I thought it was mp3s? (Score:2)
Re:precedent setting... (Score:3)
about Robin Hood (Score:2)
However, the "evil taxes" he fought were one of the best things that happened for the people anywhere in Europe for a couple of hundred years in either direction. These taxes were tto fund the King's courgts founded by Richard and John's father (whose name I forget. Another Richard?), which were the basis for teh little guy having at least *some* chance. Previously, all matters were heard in baronial courts--so you sue your evil overlord, and he gets to be the judge as well. The courts funded by that tax developed the Common Law of England, which ewe use today in almost all the english speaking countries.
While I'm at it, Richard (the "good" king in the tale) was one of England's worst, but he ameliorated this by being out o fthe country for almost all of his reign, while "evil" Prince (later King) John was probably one of the better ones--he also signed the Magna Carta, albeit at spear point. And Maid Marion? a fictional character from a french poem a centruy later, who somehow left that poem for the greener pastures of a legend about a nobleman turned brigand who stole the people's chances at justice . .
hawk
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:2)
The obvious problem is that where the crook is a cop they are likely to also have access to good lawyers who can get them off on a technicality.
Re:This pisses me off... (Score:2)
They probaly go for the "soft" targets in order to make it look as though they are doing some kind of decent job.
Re:Civil disobedience in the information age (Score:2)
Re:This pisses me off... (Score:2)
Indeed with the current situation you are very unlikly to get laws representing majority views
Professional lobbying and campaign donations have diluted the laws passed from being good for the nation to being good for one's supporters.
Some of the organisations doing this represent big business, but by no means all.
It is most certainly possible to buy votes, and that is the way our legislative system works now and will work for some time.
The fault is as much with the police and judiciary. A simple refusal to operate such laws would send a stronger message than any ammount of lobbying.
A better, though less likely solution would be the conviction, for High Treason, of any legislator who puts lobbiests before the state. (In the Case of the US the "state" is, or at least should be, the written constitution.)
Re:So what? (Score:2)
But, the music and movies do belong to someone, and taking it from them is stealing.
At the risk of sounding like a troll... I don't believe you've been keeping up on the RIAA vs Everyone case. I will agree that in *this* instance, the kid was dumb and rather deserved to have his FTP shut down. My main reason in supporting the electronic distribution of music (yet, even copyrighted ones) is that I personally use the MP3s I download as an evaluation of the music before I buy it.
And I just thought of something rather interesting regarding the copyright laws as a whole. I am under the impression that copyright originated as a way of authors to prevent the plagarism or misuse of their creative work. Were this true now, Napster, et al would be breaking no laws, as no one that I know of is making absurd claims that THEY were the ones who wrote and performed songs that are up Napster or FTP sites.
But I suppose Copyright is just another term for "If you listen to this song without paying ME a large amount of money, then I reserve the right to kill you."
Going back to the original statement you made, I'd like to point out that your use of the word "stealing" is inadequate since the RIAA's member companies still hold the masters for every song they produced. If it WERE stealing, then I'd be stealing music every day (albiet legally), by listening to my car radio and changing the station whenver a commercial came on. Which I do.
Book 'em, Danno.
Could RIAA prove this? (Score:2)
If they could prove any of this, then I have no problem with what they did. In fact, I applaud them if they had proof of wrongdoing; this is how such cases should be handled. Punish the guilty ones, rather than just everyone.
If, on the other hand, they had no proof, and simply sent a baseless accusation, then this is nothing more than presumption of guilt, and I can't support that. It's unconstiutional, and even if it weren't it would still trample the rights of innocent people, now in danger of being arrested just because some fat-cat record execs think you might be stealing from them.
----------
Re:This pisses me off... (Score:2)
Whatever the failure rate of "civil disobedience" the ability of ordinary people to overturn laws (especially those backed up by a powerful lobbying group) is very, very, very limited, Regardless of how unjust they might be, regardless of what some written constitution might say.
Re:This pisses me off... (Score:2)
Possibly a majority of those legislators who actually voted on the issue.
A small majority of American people actually vote, and those who do are usually voting against someone as opposed to for someone.
Also remember that organised political lobbying groups typically have far more infuence over legislators than voters anyway.
A collection of knowlegeble comments: (Score:2)
Contents of the post are that the student used a DSL line at home to run an FTP server for his friends, not anonymous, that collected and shared rare acoustic music.
It's kind of hard to judge these comments in a vacuum. I wish that there were some more run of the mill comments on MoooKow's page. Something smells.
Re:Don't get confused... Think for yourself. (Score:2)
However in that 200 odd years the concept of copyright has been modified drastically. The original drafters would never accept the current length of copyrights, restrictions on "derived works", the ability of corporate entities to masqurade as people. Let alone just about any part of the DMCA.
Re:I'm afraid I don't understand... (Score:2)
Basically, you can't say "Look, I put a lock there!" when protected your collection of illegal songs. But you can do that to prevent people from "walking off with" your latest tune/book/painting/creative expression. Keep in mind - even if he was "just giving out live/accoustic/rare" stuff, it's still illegal. What you do with that's your own choice, but remember - in our current system, giving away perfect copies of copyrighted material is illegal . Since I don't really wanna get in a debate as to whether it should be legal, I'm just going to repeat the main point:
You can only use the DMCA to protect your own copyrighted material from a "circumvention device." If you put a lock on someone else's material, then it's OK to break it - they choose how it's protected, not you.
Re:Actually they wouldn't be sharing anything (Score:2)
But not much has survived because there really wasn't a method of musical notation yet (that was developed by monks and took a while to become widely used) nor recording music.
In the realm of art and literature much more has survived, and all of the works of the ages (including the vast majority that did not survive due to fires, need for construction materials, religious wars etc) were copyrightless. Copyrights didn't exist (at least not the kind you're thinking of) until the 17th century. Are you telling me that there were NO creative works until then?
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
Only in the case of tracks which were on an album in the first place...
Even if the downloader were to directly send the artist several times what they would have got (Wonder how much of that $17.99 ever gets seen by the artist.) there would still be a problem.
Re:It wasnt confiscated... (Score:2)
Apparently Oregon's Not the Place to Pirate (Score:2)
Re:Hmm.. (Score:3)
- Compressing audio with the MP3 algorithm, storing such files, and playing them back is certainly not illegal.
- Like most media (game cartridges, software), if I purchase some sort of media I am entitled to duplicate it for archival purposes, in the event of a media failure. The law's such a bitch, ain't it? There's not a thing the RIAA can do to me for wanting to protect my investment.
Yes, distribution of said archives is illegal (just like "oh here, I'll just copy this new Metallica CD for you!" is illegal). Honestly, though, I hope this guy fights back like a sunuvabitch and hits as hard as he can. Illegal or not, I absolutely can't stand some big nasty company (or gov't agency) strongarming someone just to "make an example" out of him/her. You want to make an example, RIAA? Fucking set one. Let's see you get sworn affidavits from each and every employee on your rosters stating they've never copied a cassette or CD. Let's see a drop in CD prices. Let's have an honest answer to the nearly-constant charge that record labels royally screw artists. Does anyone remember back when compact disc technology was new and still-not-accepted yet? Remember the promises? "Oh, CDs are just expensive now because they're new. Before long, they'll be cheaper than cassettes!" Remember the last time you took two copies of an album, one on cassette, and one on CD, then compared the price tags? Hope you've still got your tape decks, folks, because that "archaic" technology just happens to have cheaper media available for it. For that consumer screw right there, I have never, and never will, feel any sympathy for the record industry whatsoever. Artists? Certainly feel bad for their situation -- they produce good tunes for us to enjoy, and get raped in return. But the record industry? Fuck 'em. With Napster, etc., I can frankly do just fine without them.Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:4)
Is it civil disobedience when I drive 75 miles per hour on the highway? Would you consider me a "martyr" if I get a speeding ticket for driving 75 in a 55 zone, even if I was driving with the flow of traffic? People are breaking the law here. Don't trivialize the achievements of MLK, Gandhi, and Rosa Parks by throwing out legal buzzwords. You don't have a right to take other people's music without their permission, just like commercial software vendors don't have a right to take [slashdot.org] open source stuff without obeying its license. Stop the hypocrisy already.
Precendent Schmecedent (Score:5)
You guys think this case is bad? This is nothing. I wish more people knew what is going on.
A family member of mine works in the Office of General Consul for the California State University system. The RIAA sends their requests for student information to this family member. The RIAA was told to go get a subpeona. So guess what? The RIAA got its friends in the California legislature to give them the power to issue their own subpoenas. I am not kidding. The RIAA has the power to issue subpoenas in the State of California.
Re:Amen (Score:2)
This makes karma worthless as a "reputation" system, which was the orginal idea anyway. Just give the +1 based on seniority.
Slashdot did not always have karma. There was a period when there was moderation and no karma. People got the positive reinforcement for posting something acceptable, but there weren't folks like waldoj and Shoeboy keeping score. IMO, the S/N ratio was much higher.
campus police (Score:2)
ANd then there's University of Chicago, a private school with an actual police force--it was part of teh deal that kept it from moving west and merging with Stanford. The local constabulary was famously corrupt at that point, and UC demanded the separate force (paid for by the city and/or county, iirc) as a condition.
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
Considering that ammount of "borrowing" and cover versions in the music industry putting things back to 10-15 years might well benefit artists.
Re:Who is MooKow? (Score:2)
Public safety (Score:3)
Thank GOODNESS that this threat to public safety has been removed. We all know that distributing MP3s can lead to date rape in fraternity houses, underage drinking, and alcohol poisoning.
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Oops! Sorry about that irony up there, Eaton. I didn't realize he was distributing illegal substances. My mistake - good thing you jumped in there!
BTW, am I the only one who is bothered by the fact that state colleges have their own police force? I can see the practical need for policing a large group of people, but I see a real conflict of interest here, from the perspective of the surrounding community (college police are controlled by the college) and the students (police and professors, all working together...)
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:2)
OTOH, if you're using an analog system or a digital system with rights management you _can_ copy music under the AHRA. Napster is trying to use this... perhaps they'll get away with it b/c of the single instance of generational loss when ENCODING the mp3 in the first place, though I doubt it. Still, better to support them than the RIAA.
However, you're wrong IMHO about the life+70 being constitutional. Firstly because the trend of constantly lengthening the duration of copyrights retroactively makes them de facto unlimited (a 'jam tomorrow but never jam today' sort of deal)
Secondly because it's very arguable that a duration like that does not promote the useful arts and sciences - do you argue that it does? Well in order to be constitutional it has to do that as well.
And there's the third criteria (which is far more applicable in the DVD cases than the Napster case though it shows up there too) wherein the rights must be held by the author or inventor. An author who WANTS to use DeCSS on their own copyrighted work must be permitted to, or else some of their exclusive rights require the permission of third parties like the MPAA. (and also using it on Public Domain works, of which there haven't been any for a long time, and may never again appear if the MPAA and RIAA have their way)
Fair use was created by the Judiciary ~150 years ago (and the doctrine still takes precedence over anything Congress says, as it derives from the Constitution) and serves in order to promote the useful arts and sciences. The classic examples are educational use but there are others. Despite not being named in the Constitution, it's pretty clear that if you can't quote some work legally, or resell it, or use any means of choice to use it, the laws aren't constitutional.
Re:I'm afraid I don't understand... (Score:2)
This pisses me off... (Score:4)
And yes because some money-hungry corporation gets a law passed then the already-thin police budgets now have to spend hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars on a professional forensic analysis of some student's hard drive.
Is this what the founding fathers had in mind when they penned "no unreasonable search and seizure"? You know he won't see that hardware returned until it is no longer worth its weight in scrap metal.
What if some company passes a law that not tying your shoelaces is a crime? Are the police gonna start prosecuting that one?
This seems like a breakdown in separation of powers. How many blue laws are still on the books but wholly ignored by the police? Laws about sodomy come to mind, or spitting on the Sabbath. Sure, the legislative branch handed us this piece of crap we call the DMCA, but I blame the executive brance for becoming a private army at the beck and call of corporations. If I was a police chief and some company called to complain about a kid sharing music...I'd tell them to take a number and where to stick it.
Feh. Just my two cents.
Still, makes you want to go install Scram Disk [clara.net] as soon as possible.
- JoeShmoe
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re:Amen (Score:2)
Karma shouldn't be an incentive to post, though. I see it more as an equalizer to keep people with something to say that the majority thinks should be heard from being drowned out by those who have nothing to add to the discussion.
Re:Yer an idiot (Score:2)
Ah, but by going after the guys who wrote Napster, they're *essentially* going after "the people who wrote his FTP server".
If it's absurd to go after one, it's absurd to go after the other.
Electrons... (Score:5)
"It was a real tragedy," admitted Everett Eaton, public safety director at OSU. "Fortunately, I was across town at the time, so I wasn't caught in the blast as the resultant plasma explosion wiped out half the campus, leaving the remainder a radioactive wreck that won't be fit for human habitation, let alone study, for about 50,000 years. The boy did not survive the procedure, of course, but do the crime, do the time, I always say."
Hmm... (Score:2)
"We're doing some forensic review of the hard drive and determining what is there," Eaton said. "After we finish that review, we will evaluate the amount of substance he was distributing."
Sheesh, you'd think he was a crack dealer or something. What I wanna know is why the cops don't seize the servers of GPL violators, if they're so concerned about copyright violations
On another note, am I correct in recalling that the police in the US aren't allowed to seize a TV from a residence because it's the main method for obtaining public information? Would there be any chance of getting a ruling like that on PCs? (God knows I get a lot more information from my PC than I do from my TV...)
This wasn't just some kid with a Rio... (Score:2)
We're not talking about someone with a few dozen, or even a few hundred MP3s, from his personal collection.
The computer they confiscated allegedly had, even in this day, a large amount of storage (40 Gigs of content was shared, more than 100 Gigs installed). You don't buy 100 Gigs just to keep copies of Encarta available.
The student allegedly made regular requests to the users of his system to send any songs that he wasn't already offering. If he were making the request to fill in a few blanks, like "I haven't heard that new Smashing Pumpkins labelless vinyl, send me some," this wouldn't be seen as a piracy enterprise.
Though his school doesn't block Napster, the school does have a duty to check into allegations made about its students actions, if they're potentially legal. If they didn't, the school would be complicitous, or worse, an accomplice, to any actions proven to be illegal.
Remember, the word alleged means that a claim of guilt has been made, but not proven. That's why stuff gets confiscated in the investigation phase of a criminal case, to use as evidence in the case. If charges are pressed, then he'll face the courts, and that evidence is used against him. If he's found guilty, it will be the elected judge (and jury if selected) that sentences him. If he broke the laws, it was laws passed by elected legislators and executives.
Re:Wrong is wrong (Score:2)
That said, though, people usually do have to go to trial before they're found guilty.
Still the ultimate truth about MP3 (Score:4)
Priorities (Score:4)
Within the next four months, a student or "other individual found downloading illegal MP3 tracks" will go to jail "as a clear signal that piracy will not be tolerated in the US."
So my question is, do American jails have enough room for 20 million pirates?
Matt
Fairtunes [fairtunes.com]
Re:This pisses me off... (Score:3)
Is this what the founding fathers had in mind when they penned "no unreasonable search and seizure"?
Could you please explain what you mean by "unreasonable search and seizure"? I would assume that the university had logs of his Ethernet usage. He was probably sucking up a lot of bandwidth running the FTP server and advertizing it over the Internet. That'd be a red flag if I were monitoring usage of my network. Remember, the connection is the university's property, not the student's.
Also, if OSU is anything like my university, you have to agree to some TOS before they give you Ethernet access. I'm sure there was a clause in there prohibiting using your connection to commit copyright infringement, especially serving illegal MP3s [0] and movies. Heck, technically you aren't supposed to use it for anything but academic purposes, but most if not all universities non't care too much about what you download. Running a server, though, is another matter entirely. So, he would be in violation of school policy.
If they didn't confiscate his computer, how much do you want to bet the student wouldn't have immediately deleted all his MP3s, his FTP server, and use something to continually wipe his free disk space until he was investigated? You can't allow someone suspected of violating the school's policy to have direct access to the evidence!
Oh, I forgot though, pirating MP3s etc. is *good* because it screws The Man. But make software that allows you to violate the GPL [slashdot.org] and you get crucified.
[0] Note that I'm not saying MP3s themselves are illegal. However, I'm willing to bet he didn't have permission from the RIAA or the artists themselves to offer those MP3s to anybody and everybody.
--
Civil disobedience in the information age (Score:5)
It starts becoming a major world issue when record and movie companies buy laws such as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act which say that I cannot even listen to SDMI music or watch DVD movies except under their terms.
It's a major issue that even if I have the technical skills to circumvent their restrictions, I can't utilize or publicize those skills for fear of turning into a Jon Johansen.
It's really a major issue when a judge dictates to me that I can't even post a hyperlink to a file named decss.tar.gz (as in the Kaplan ruling), just because it might constitute contributory infringement.
I'd like to change the laws within the system if I could, but at this point our so-called democracy is so corrupt with corporate influence that frankly I don't have much chance of achieving anything legitimately.
Re:Answer: Self Destructing Hard Drives? (Score:4)
You could build a more basic system based on the concept -- just build a really basic, thin electromagnet and tape it to the drive itself. When the Gestapo comes to your door, just press a button to zap the drive. Or, you could include a battery and have it rigged to zap the drive if the case is improperly removed, or whatever.
Probably are legal ramifications to this, what with destroying evidence and all. Still, remember that Mitnik is only loose now because the cops couldn't read his hard drive ("No, your honor, it's not erased -- it's just very heavily encrypted").
This is still only a band-aide. The megacorps have become the modern tyrants, and we're moving towards a world where we won't have any wiggle room to protest -- government and corporations working in together to keep you as a slave. They'll control what you see, hear, learn in school and (thanks to the first three) what you think.
Solutions? There's only one -- if government can't protect us (which is what governments are supposed to be doing in the first place), perhaps it's time to strike back in the same way that people have always struck against those who would control them, the tyrants. Protest as all of those who would be oppressed have finally been forced to, and force the hand of your master -- by any means necessary.
Not that I'd advocate violence -- government and the TV say it's bad, so it must be. So, don't think in that direction. Go about your day, smile about your $20k in stock options and your car and your existance. Don't care if your kids are being raised with corporations controlling their schools, or if all your news comes from the same parent company. Ignore the fact that money is speech, and politicians are bought and sold. At least you can barbeque on the weekends and buy expensive little scooters for your 1.5 children.
Apathy is just so conveniant.
----
Re:If the campus has rules... (Score:5)
I get tired of people crying hypocracy when an open forum appears to draw hippcritial conclusions. These are not the opinions of individuals. They are the opinions of those within a group who cry the loudest.
Some people scream about how much the RIAA sucks and how copyrighted music should be free, others scream about the GPL and how it is being violated. There is no reason to believe that these are the same people.
Personally I love the GPL, it lets me write derivative software at work without losing my soul. I hate the RIAA, because I can no longer bear to listen to the radio, television or CDs.
Honour copyrights, not the people who use them to exploit others.
Pirating bad music taken from exploited musicians doesn't help anybody.