Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Universal Music Sues MySpace 116

Posted by Zonk
from the hey-that's-our-money dept.
Grooves writes "Universal Music is suing MySpace for copyright infringement. Universal threatened to sue YouTube before the Google acquisition was announced, so now it looks like they have moved on to the next target. Ars speculates that Universal is really after a piece of the action. 'On the morning of the Google-YouTube deal, Universal — along with Sony BMG and CBS — signed a licensing agreement with YouTube. If MySpace were to sign a similar agreement with the label, there is little doubt that the lawsuit would disappear.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Universal Music Sues MySpace

Comments Filter:
  • ...the TV networks and sports commissions (MLB, NFL, the English FA and the like) start on this type of legal saber-rattling?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by kfg (145172)
      They are the driving force behind the broadcast flag.

      KFG
    • Now (Score:1, Insightful)

      by NineNine (235196)
      Wow. More myopic IT people. If some of you guys would read about things OTHER than IT, you'd realize that this stuff happens every single day in all industries, all over the world. These lawsuits are in no way, shape, or form, unique. The sports companies (they're not commissions... they're private companies that are treated like public institutions) are very, very sue-happy.
      • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

        by Schemat1c (464768)
        Wow. More myopic IT people. If some of you guys would read about things OTHER than IT, you'd realize that this stuff happens every single day in all industries, all over the world. These lawsuits are in no way, shape, or form, unique. The sports companies (they're not commissions... they're private companies that are treated like public institutions) are very, very sue-happy.

        The fact that it happens everywhere makes it okay? A bunch of "myopic" IT people see a pattern as their/our minds are trained to do a
        • by zotz (3951)
          "All we did was build a communications network that spans the globe and allows even the most insignificant person to have access to information that less than a generation ago was the domain of governments and billionaires."

          See, that's where you go wrong, that network of tubes was invented by political types and put together by plumbers. Get real!

          ~;-)

          all the best,

          drew
          http://www.ourmedia.org/node/262954 [ourmedia.org]
          Sayings - Deterred Bahamian Novel
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by NineNine (235196)
          Big deal. Plumbers created and maintain basic sanitation. Give somebody a choice between having a toilet and having an Internet connection, and the toilet is going to be chosen every single time.

          I wouldn't, however, expect plumbers to change our entire legal and political system any more than I would expect IT people to. Although with that being said, I've met several plumbers that are more in touch with the real world than most IT people could ever hope to be.
          • by bhiestand (157373)
            Give somebody a choice between having a toilet and having an Internet connection, and the toilet is going to be chosen every single time.

            Followed by...
            Although with that being said, I've met several plumbers that are more in touch with the real world than most IT people could ever hope to be.

            Obviously you haven't met very many IT people. Most of the IT people I know would rather give up the toilet.
  • by slobber (685169) on Friday November 17, 2006 @08:45PM (#16892878)
    Google doesn't maintain a lawsuit defense fund for nothing. Rumor has it that it grew to $500M after youtube was acquired. Apparently google was aware that likelihood of lawsuit would go up dramatically. It looks like Universal decided to test legal waters on MySpace first before tackling Google.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Salvance (1014001) *
      What's really unfortunate is that the lawsuits' end result is that the music industry gets significant licensing revenues from the deal, but the agreements are setup in such a way that the individual artists never do. Many of these are artists would be more than happy to share their music (or some subset thereof), but not in a situation where everyone is making money from their music except the creators.
      • by loid_void (740416) *
        "the end result is that the music industry gets significant licensing revenues"


        And bad karma, that ultimately leads to their early demise. The sooner the better.

    • Didn't read the summary did you?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      hit right on the head. I mean the big 5 studios are looking at all the options from drm to clearances--they're getting attacked by both sides (distributors who want to open things up like youtube as well as content creators wanting music-like licenses).

      Myspace is owned by FOX. Studios suing studios never happens. They always strike a deal as it's the industry that needs to be protected. This is testing the legal system against Google, MS and Yahoo--new media poo-poos old media cause it's all about the co

  • Extortion (Score:5, Insightful)

    by anubi (640541) on Friday November 17, 2006 @08:47PM (#16892886) Journal
    Looking at all these Slashdot reports of suing, it looks like this is the standard practice of corporate extortion.

    This way, the "barriers to entry" can be set to any level the more powerful entity desires, so they can maintain their monopoly.

    Smaller companies simply do not have the financial stamina to fend off litigation attacks like this.

    The strongest ( most well funded ) entities will do well under such a system.

    The rest of us... well... better do it in another country.

    • by udderly (890305) *
      This is why tort reform as it pertains to Intellectual Property needs to be addressed.

      Here's why it will never happen: http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.asp [opensecrets.org]. If money buys influence--and it absolutely does--then what group has the most influence? That doesn't even account for the fact that most Congressmen and Congresswomen are lawyers themselves.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Looking at all these Slashdot reports of suing, it looks like this is the standard practice of corporate extortion.

      Another option for those being sued might be to not base their revenue on copyright infringement and other obviously illegal practices. You make it sound like the only reason Universal is suing is because they have tons of money, which means they can make up their own laws. It may actually have to do with the fact that they actually have a case.

      • Re:Extortion (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ClassMyAss (976281) on Friday November 17, 2006 @11:05PM (#16893632) Homepage
        Except that they really shouldn't have a case as long as MySpace is taking infringing material down as soon as it is brought to their attention. By my reading, the safe harbor provisions were specifically put in place to protect exactly the type of thing that MySpace has going on, a webpage hosting service that they cannot be expected to police entirely. The fact that their software automatically does a format-shift when people upload videos isn't (or at least shouldn't be) relevant at all.

        This is more of the same - someone provides a tool, some people abuse the tool and do illegal things with it. Too many people to police means that the provider cannot afford to make sure everyone is acting within the law. But the people whose copyrights are being infringed upon can't afford to go after the individuals for both PR and practical reasons, so they look for someone with fat pockets to blame. Frankly I'm confused about what is so different about a tool on a web server somewhere and a tool on my hard drive - if I used Winamp to convert a copyrighted video and then uploaded it to a GoDaddy hosted server, nobody would be blaming Nullsoft or GoDaddy for my crime. It would be my fault, 100%. It is ridiculous that the courts continue to allow these types of suits to continue without any clarification as to what the law actually means when it comes to hosting user submitted content.

        I've got to say, I really thought MySpace would be immune to this type of thing, as much as I'd love to see it implode. The fact is, they don't base their revenue model on infringement in the least. If you removed video hosting altogether from MySpace, I sincerely doubt if anyone would even notice, considering YouTube's success in that venue. It's looking more and more like the only safe user content to host is plain old text, and I think that's a damn shame. The record industry middlemen seem to feel that it's more than appropriate to expect everyone on the net to protect their copyrights as fiercely as they do.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Frankly I'm confused about what is so different about a tool on a web server somewhere and a tool on my hard drive - if I used Winamp to convert a copyrighted video and then uploaded it to a GoDaddy hosted server, nobody would be blaming Nullsoft or GoDaddy for my crime.

          The difference is that MySpace actually generates revenue from advertisement - so they materially benefit when people perform copyright infringement using their tool, and can quite easily be shown to have a vested interest in not vigorously

          • The difference is that MySpace actually generates revenue from advertisement - so they materially benefit when people perform copyright infringement using their tool, and can quite easily be shown to have a vested interest in not vigorously policing their site.

            But using that argument, anyone that hosts ad-supported user content is screwed unless they have the time, staff, and knowledge to filter out every possible infringing item before it is publicly displayed (which is, needless to say, absolutely imposs

            • I completely agree with this. Hopefully the court will be able to add some much needed nuance in how to deal with these cases. As you point out, it is important to determine to what degree of infringement is occurring. How much infringing material is being hosted here? Personally I don't know.

              And you certainly summarized MySpace accurately here!

              MySpace's primary purpose is now, and to my knowledge always has been, to allow people with no technical skills to put up really obnoxious looking websites and let

        • by zotz (3951)
          "It's looking more and more like the only safe user content to host is plain old text, and I think that's a damn shame."

          http://musicians.opensrc.org/DrewRoberts [opensrc.org]

          Some people are making works that should be safe to host. Fund the creation of more stuff with licenses you like and host those works.

          You will get a positive feedback loop going and things may have a chance of being different.

          Talk to your local bands about funding some of their songs under Free licenses.

          all the best,

          drew
          http://www.ourmedia.org/node/2 [ourmedia.org]
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by makomk (752139)
          It's looking more and more like the only safe user content to host is plain old text, and I think that's a damn shame.


          How quaintly optimistic. I take it you didn't notice them threatening lyrics sites a while back, then?
          • by anubi (640541)
            Even lyrics now, huh?

            These are PUBLICALLY exposed words.

            I wonder if I own a property, say a building, I also own copyright to any images taken of it? They are, indeed, hardcopy representations of MY building!

            When I typed my first entry, I was still pissed upon reading that a patent for something I had been doing for quite some time had been issued. It seemed so damned obvious to me - as an analog engineer - to watch AC solenoid current to see if the solenoid "pulled in", and if there was something wr

    • You are the first of a couple people who spoke of extortion. So, you get the reply. From m-w.com [m-w.com]:

      Extort
      to obtain from a person by force, intimidation, or undue or illegal power

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but suing MySpace really means suing News Corp, their parent company. While I think the settlement issues with people are definitely suspect of extortion, when Universal is threatening to sue someone big and powerful like MySpace-News-Corp (which ought to at least have the backing of News Co

    • Respectfully, all public held businesses have a requirement to protect their business or they are not meeting their responsibilities to their shareholders.

      That said, they obviously (to most of us) need to modify their business practices and change their business model to satisfy both their customers and their shareholders. If some of these executives got their heads out of their asses they might see they have fallen way behind the times. If they don't...things will continue the way they are for a while do
      • by anubi (640541)
        Thank you for a thoughtful reply.

        I agree with your observation that business leaders must do whatever they can to protect the interests of their shareholders.

        My primary concern is all this law is being passed which promotes useless litigation instead of productivity.

        Economic races should be won by those who run the fastest, not by having our Government promoting one entity's success by encouraging his cleverness in tripping up his opponents. To me this is like telling the schoolkids that the first one

  • noooo (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by nickheart (557603)
    What will we all have to complain about if MySpace goes away?

    Oh PS3 launched today...

  • by MrNonchalant (767683) on Friday November 17, 2006 @08:51PM (#16892912)
    What is it with companies starting with "Universal" [utube.com] and web 2.0 litigation?
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You could say it's a Universal habit with those companies...
  • by User 956 (568564) on Friday November 17, 2006 @08:59PM (#16892942) Homepage
    If MySpace were to sign a similar agreement with the label, there is little doubt that the lawsuit would disappear.

    And the legalized extortion continues. I wouldn't care so much except that they also persist in extending copyright terms.
  • by h4ck7h3p14n37 (926070) on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:01PM (#16892960) Homepage

    I really hate this crap. Small company does some innovation and becomes popular and the next thing you know, they're being sued by a multi-national corporation that's really just hoping the other company will settle the case so they can get a piece of the action.

    I don't understand how MySpace would be liable for copyright infringment that's committed by users of the service. Doesn't MySpace classify as a common carrier? Of course no one ever goes to court to fight the big guys, *sigh*.

    • Which is the small company? Is it Universal or News Corp (owners of Myspace)? I can never remember which of the global media conglomerates is the small guy.

      Swi
      • Isn't it obvious? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by XdevXnull (905214)
        The "little guy" in this case is the legion of 13 and 14 year old kids who are uploading videos they saw on MTV.
      • These are the sacred rules of Slashdot to decide which of the two opposing parties is actually the good one in any given fight. If both parties are equal, proceed to the next step.

        1. Small business = good, big business = bad
        2. open source = good, proprietary = bad
        3. rootkits = bad
        4. suing people = bad
        5. lots of patents = bad
        6. internet related = good
        7. given all above items are equal, put on wizard's cap and role 16-sided die for one party. If it is even they are good; odd is evil. first poster to declar
        • As long as your making lists

          0. Microsoft = Bad
          0.1 Apple = Good
          0.2 SCO = Really Bad
          0.3 IBM = depends on yesterday's barometric pressure in Terra Del Fuego
          0.4 George Bush = So absolutely, completely friken bad that you just want to spit

        • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

          by Per Abrahamsen (1397)
          #1 should come after #6, or IBM would be on the bad list.
    • by Lord Kano (13027)
      Doesn't MySpace classify as a common carrier?

      No. Myspace censors content all of the time. Although I hate the heavy handed tactics and extortion schemes of the *AA, MySpace couldn't possibly claim to be a common carrier.

      MySpace terminates accounts of you post pornographic content. If they can police porno, they can't then claim to be unable to police copyrighted content.

      LK
      • by muuh-gnu (894733)
        > If they can police porno, they can't then claim to be unable to police copyrighted content.

        Actually porn is copyrighted content itself, so they just selectively delete copyrighted content that contains nudity, and let the music videos stay.
        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Lord Kano (13027)
          Actually porn is copyrighted content itself, so they just selectively delete copyrighted content that contains nudity, and let the music videos stay.

          If someone produces their own pornographic imagery and releases it to the public domain...

          Regardless, MySpace's willingness and ability to police one type of content belies any claim that they are powerless to regulate their users' content.

          LK
    • One of the only good things that the DMCA brought us was to take care of this exact situation.

      MySpace is not liable for unmonitored uploads done by its' users as long as it complies with takedown notices from copyright holders.

      This is open and shut.

      MySpace still however might settle with Universal, unfortunately.. preventing the precedent from being set.

      Sigh, indeed.
    • Actually, from what the article says, the lawsuit does have merit.

      Myspace isn't being sued because their users are pirating, but because they are actively assisting in that piracy by reformatting the music file for the user. That makes them a participant rather than just a carrier.

      Whether this has legal merit is for a judge to decide, but from first glance of the article and the details in it, I think Myspace may actually be in some trouble here.
      • by KDR_11k (778916)
        I don't think an automated system that is not infringing by itself counts as actively assisting. After all, providing a server to put files onto is just as active.
  • This shouldn't surprise anyone at all in the world, but the implications are damning for those that like to share what they like: Stop it, and stop it now unless you pay for it. Oh, you like XYZ? Where can I find XYZ's song to see if I like it? You can't, it's locked up in litigation. Why? The licensing requirements are steep, so it only shows up on one site only. Stifling? Oh yes. Legal? Very much so. They are so deep in the trees that they can't see how much Myspace can help smaller bands, and ar
    • by kfg (145172)
      They are so deep in the trees that they can't see how much Myspace can help smaller bands, and artist discovery.

      The hell they can't. That's exactly what they're trying to prevent.

      KFG
      • by phreaki (725521)
        Sometimes I forget that we must take the same artists over and over until we are 60 years old. We only have enough money to keep giving it to one person. Funny how all the reports are that the artists get nothing for the plays on Myspace, just the label. How wonderful for just one entity.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by nomadic (141991)
      Oh, you like XYZ? Where can I find XYZ's song to see if I like it?

      The radio? Amazon.com? BN.com? Jukebox? Listen to it at a friend's house? Listen to it at a record store listening kiosk? There are plenty of perfectly legit ways to try out songs before you buy them.
    • by ScentCone (795499)
      The licensing requirements are steep, so it only shows up on one site only. Stifling? Oh yes. Legal? Very much so. They are so deep in the trees that they can't see how much Myspace can help smaller bands, and artist discovery.

      But the bands can certainly choose not to release their material in a way that restricts distribution. If you're a garage band looking for attention, you've got every mechanism in the world to put that music out there in a way that will not, cannot, get anyone in trouble for spread
  • Sue Sue Sue, I love you!

    More pertinent is once all these fat lazy dinosaurs finish with each other we will get some real entertainment and not another farcing sitcom.

    I guess Google scares Universal, cowards.

    MySpace, big piranha are after YOU!

    You don't thing Google isn't getting into entertainment in a bigway do you? Got old news, they are...

  • by linuxci (3530) on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:09PM (#16893026)
    Remember Universal are getting money off Microsoft for every Zune sold. Perhaps this deal was done in order to give them a bit more money to go after Google. Just like MS did with their SCO Linux licences.

    I don't know why so many people are lenient on MS, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice and all that... MS have fooled many people, many times but some people associate anything bad said against them as coming from a zealot.

    Personally I think their track record means they deserve to be thought of badly, they have to prove us wrong not the other way round.
    • by linuxci (3530)
      I'm tired, everytime I read MySpace I was thinking of YouTube. Both sites that I don't frequent very regularly.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by lilfields (961485)
      Why would Universal go after Google? Myspace is owned by News Corp...which just so happens to own rival network and movie studio Fox. Google's Eric Schmidt sits on the board of Apple...Apple has i-tunes...Universal sells videos/music on i-tunes. This law suit has little to do with video, but to do with music that people upload for profile songs. Myspace saw this coming as they added music fingerprinting. Myspace will get a slap on the wrist, and be forced to enforce rules that should have been enforced to b
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by quanticle (843097)

      The fact is, most people are completely unaware of the track record regarding Microsoft's intellectual property claims. And, as for lenient, you have to be lenient when you're locked into a proprietary platform with increasingly steep costs for switching.

      Most people dislike Windows. They dislike that its an insecure platform. They dislike that its hardware requirements seem to increase dramatically with every iteration. They dislike the fact that the install slows down over time to the point that a sys

      • by dangitman (862676)
        What about Apple? Looking at Apple's hardware (especially after the Intel switch) one sees that you could get the same hardware for a lower price when ordering from Dell.

        Actually, in many cases the equivalent hardware from Apple is cheaper than buying it from Dell these days.

        The fact that Apple's software is better doesn't help all that much when you need to make a large upfront investment in hardware to get some potential benefit from the software.

        But it makes a big difference in making judgements abou

    • Remember Universal are getting money off Microsoft for every Zune sold. Perhaps this deal was done in order to give them a bit more money to go after Google. Just like MS did with their SCO Linux licences. So, they got an extra $20. What's that gonna get them, another 30 seconds with their lawyers?
  • by Ryan Mallon (689481) on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:17PM (#16893056)
    Universal Music, RIAA, etc should stop thinking so small. All this pirated, or copyright infringing content is on the Internet right? Why not just sue the Internet and get it over with ;-).
  • A battle of equals (Score:4, Insightful)

    by NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) * <ray.beckermanlegal@com> on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:19PM (#16893066) Homepage Journal
    At least this one will be a battle of equals. One corporate titan against another. The interesting copyright issues that need to be decided here can be fully briefed on a full and complete record. That is a plus.
    • ray - you make a good point, we really need these kinds of battles to be decided in the courtroom to set a precedent. this way we will know where the law stands. all of these agreements before anyone sues or out of court settlements just avoid the issue. im just worried this one will go the same way
      • Why should you worry? It's in a good court. There will be good lawyers representing My Space. They will have all the time and all the resources to make a good argument. No reason to think we will wind up with anything other than a sensible result and sensible rulings.
        • by PHPfanboy (841183)
          Ray - couple of questions for you: 1) Any idea why it's UMG who are always suing? What's with the other 3 majors? 2) How do these law suits bubble up? Do you think it's a business objective looking for more revenue streams? Is it UMG's lawyers pro-actively pushing a list of targets?


          • 1. It's all 4 majors. UMG no more or less than the others.

            2. I don't know how they bubble up... I just know that they are targeting the wrong people.

            3. It's the RIAA's lawyers, not UMG's lawyers, who are involved, and it's not the lawyers that are controlling it, it's the RIAA. The lawyers on this case are attack dogs. They attack who they're told to attack, and don't stand up to their clients at all. Good lawyers don't just follow orders. These lawyers just follow orders. I don't know how they live with
          • I didn't realize you were asking about the MySpace case in particular. I thought you were talking about the RIAA v. Consumer cases. I do not know anything about the lawyers handling the MySpace case, so my opinions of the RIAA's lawyers should not be extended to them, unless they happen to be the same lawyers, which I doubt.
  • Seems like a lot of these big companies are using their litigious prowess to force smaller, innovative companies into mergers they wouldn't otherwise agree to....doesn't much seem right to me.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Wild Wizard (309461)
      You must of missed the memo or the previous post in this story.

      MySpace is owned by News Corp one of the largest media companies on the face of the planet.

      There are no small companies or individuals involved in this lawsuit.

      http://www.newscorp.com/investor/index.html [newscorp.com]
      News Corporation (NYSE: NWS, NWS.A; ASX: NWS, NWSLV) had total assets as of June 30, 2006 of approximately US$57 billion and total annual revenues of approximately US$25 billion.
  • by zoftie (195518) on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:23PM (#16893088) Homepage
    They should move myspace servers to russia. Look they can't even stop all out piracy, why do you think they'd care about some teens posting imitations of britney spears?
    Or elsewhere, where there is no copyright, enforcable one. Get a few of those Sun containers and ship them around the world.
    • by dangitman (862676)
      Why would they do that? News Corp is a huge company that has great stakes in copyright laws. They wouldn't want an anarchic system. They want to sue people over copies of The Simpsons as much as the music companies want to sue over copies of Britney.

      Furthermore, being a US-based (formerly Australian) company, moving the servers to Russia would probably not limit their legal liability.

  • by JoeCommodore (567479) <larry@portcommodore.com> on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:26PM (#16893118) Homepage
    Make a licensing/IP agreement then sue everone else.
  • by no reason to be here (218628) on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:41PM (#16893212) Homepage
    is this about trying to get a licensing agreement, or are they maybe thinking they could destroy a website that has proved to be an excellent avenue for unsigned and indie musicians to get exposure?
  • by Kylere (846597)
    It is amazing, at a certain point the comglomerates will pass around dollars via lawsuits. The winners each year will post larger revenues and their shareholders will cheer, the losers will point to it being inevitable and the shareholders will be appeased, then one legal cycle away the plantiffs and defendents will change tables.

    It is like Web-boom Accounting Practices, or Enron Math!

    1. Do anything
    2. Be sued
    3. Lose money, adjust taxes
    4. Sue
    5. Profit
  • by ewe2 (47163) * <ewetoo&gmail,com> on Friday November 17, 2006 @09:58PM (#16893326) Homepage Journal
    "You should never forget what a fundamentally strong position we are in. We are like the sexiest girl in the world. And all of this bad behavior on the Dentist's part is just his way of showing that he wants to mate with us."
    "And control us."
  • by 8127972 (73495) on Friday November 17, 2006 @10:07PM (#16893368)
    Here's how the phone call went....

    MySpace: Hello?

    Universal: MySpace? Nice website you have there. It would be a shame if anything happened to it.

    MySpace: What?

    Universal: You could make this "problem" go away if you gave us a "donation." Otherwise, something bad is going to happen. Capiche?
  • by benicillin (990784) on Friday November 17, 2006 @10:12PM (#16893380)
    the most interesting thing about these pre-suing agreements that have been arranged (ie. the youtube payout) is that these companies are circumventing the legal system. originally you have a legal battle that ends in a decision. then we started seeing one company sue another but settle out of court (so that no decision on the issue could be rendered by the judicial system.) now we are simply seeing arrangements made before anyone sues, the grandest way of avoiding any real legal decision on the issue. very interesting how they work things out without even deciding if they fall within the laws of the country. we'll never know if it's any kind of infringement, cause they'll never get to court in the first place.
    • by slapys (993739)
      Now we are simply seeing arrangements made before anyone sues, the grandest way of avoiding any real legal decision on the issue.

      Hmm, this sounds familiar. Novell and Microsoft, anyone?

      What is especially interesting about this development is how the corporations in question circumvent not only the entire American judicial branch, but also the executive and legislative branches. M$ has remained largely untouched by the many antitrust lawsuits brought against them, at least here in America. And of course
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Peyna (14792)
      One of the many goals of the legal system is to encourage people to fix their problems without going to court. A huge percentage of criminal AND civil cases are settled without a trial. Many of them never even get close. This is a good thing, not a bad thing.
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by benicillin (990784)
        on the other hand, a case heard by lower courts and brought up by the supreme court is a perfect example of when the justice system wants an issue cleared up. i understand your point, but i feel that sometimes a decision by the court system is necessary; even if it's just reaching out to the legislation to clear the problem up, it helps.
      • by jovius (974690)
        Isn't it a problem that you can buy yourself out in certain cases if you present enough money and authority ? It's not an equal system for everybody, and certain entities or persons willingly use it to just for the financial benefit, at their price. Universal is seeking $150000 for each song and video posted on the site. If the basis of these claims is never researched and tested in the courts, the system will go on forever by the fiddle of the corporations. The court becomes a financial tool. The corpora
        • by Peyna (14792)
          We could always raise taxes to support appointed counsel for civil cases. I have a strong feeling that will not happen anytime soon.
      • Because just settling for him just to say guilty, is a great thing.

  • Well, you want to know where the money is going from gootube to pay off the copyrighted material on youtube? Assuming Mark Cuban's source is right and google/youtube paid $50 million to each of the head media corporations then that would explain the recent lawsuits. You know, the only way MPAA and RIAA are going to loose is when we stop feeding the cash cow to make it happen. Google is handing them major money to go after more companies and more individuals. Why can't someone pull a Fight Club sequence
  • PARADOX! (Score:3, Funny)

    by XnavxeMiyyep (782119) on Friday November 17, 2006 @11:20PM (#16893704)
    I want MySpace to lose money, but I don't want Universal Music to get money by suing people.... well, I guess if I support lawyers, then I win no matter what!
  • by assassinator42 (844848) on Friday November 17, 2006 @11:22PM (#16893710)
    Who's named as the defendant? "MySpace", Intermix, or News Corp?
  • What are they claiming NySpace infringed upon? I've never heard of any MySpace ad on radio or tv...so it can be that... Doesn't someone or entitity have to use something to infringe upon it? Assuming it is about music...how does anything music go about getting uptight about copying? Music is all about copying and modifing.
    • by timmarhy (659436)
      i doubt if you really questioned them, they wouldn't be able to name a single specific case of infringement and show evidence to back it up.
  • From now on i see record labels, universal emi and such as public enemys. i place them in the same position as the aristocracy before french revolution.
  • IMHO, the Mafia should sue these Universal, RIAA and MPAA people for copying their business practices, and then should gather them all in a dark warehouse, break their fucking thumbs with a hammer, then kill them all. problem solved.
  • Isn't MySpace protected by the Safe Haven section of the DMCA? It was my understanding that YouTube was safe because it was hosting user-submitted content, so wouldn't MySpace be the same?
  • If MySpace were to sign a similar agreement with the label, there is little doubt that the lawsuit would disappear.

    If they enter a contract saying they won't be sued, they probably won't be? Legally, we call that a settlement, and you can't continue a suit once you've settled it.

* * * * * THIS TERMINAL IS IN USE * * * * *

Working...