Cabal
Premium
join:2007-01-21
Boston, MA
| reply to Mactron
Re: Just Die
I hate to bring facts into this discussion, but...
The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story.
Is the EFF really trying to say that it's ok to try to commit copyright infringement, but only wrong if you get caught completing it?
--
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru? |
|
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
Nashua, NH
 ·Fairpoint Communic..
| No, the RIAA is trying to say that by DOING it, he committed a crime. THERE IS NO CRIME IF NO-ONE DOWNLOADS IT. That is what the EFF is saying.
The RIAA DIDN'T download any songs from him, they just got a list of songs. He OWNED the SONGS. If the RIAA had gotten PROOF that other people were downloading, then they would have a case. As it is, they are attempting to argue the mere FACT that he ripped the songs to his hard drive, he committed a crime. No proof of downloads, no foul. Simple as that.
--
Relgion and Politics don't mix! I have firsthand knowledge of what happens when ANY religion mixes with ANY politics. |
|
tcp1
Premium
join:2000-04-17
Herndon, VA
 ·T-Mobile US
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·ViaTalk
 ·Bandwidth.com
·Vonage
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal  :I hate to bring facts into this discussion, but... The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. You do know just because you say "end of story" it doesn't actually mean that's the end of the story, right?
said by Cabal :Is the EFF really trying to say that it's ok to try to commit copyright infringement, but only wrong if you get caught completing it? No, but in our legal system, that is the only way you can be prosecuted for it. You know, with actual evidence. |
|
Voyager2K2
join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal :I hate to bring facts into this discussion, but... The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. Is the EFF really trying to say that it's ok to try to commit copyright infringement, but only wrong if you get caught completing it? Right you are. The story was mis-reported.
However there is a discussion over at EFF in regards to ripping CDs you legally own.
»www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/ar···d-or-not |
|
texans20
Johama McBama 08
Premium
join:2002-09-28
Texas!
clubs:
| reply to tcp1
said by tcp1 :said by Cabal :I hate to bring facts into this discussion, but... The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. You do know just because you say "end of story" it doesn't actually mean that's the end of the story, right? said by Cabal :Is the EFF really trying to say that it's ok to try to commit copyright infringement, but only wrong if you get caught completing it? No, but in our legal system, that is the only way you can be prosecuted for it. You know, with actual evidence. You don't have to commit a crime to be accused of it. Kids are arrested and prosecuted for "hit lists" in schools. If you posses a bunch of materials to make a bomb, you could be prosecuted for a terrorism attack. If you own guns, ski masks, and pictures of a bank you could be tried for attempted bank robbery. The term attempted murder mean anything? Planning to kill a person can have the same sentence as actually killing a person, you know.
There are many examples in criminal law of people punished for not committing a crime. In this case, the guy attempted to violate copyright law.
I don't like the RIAA, but to act like this guy is innocent is a joke. If he is smart enough to rip CDs, he knew what he was doing.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempt
--
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." Thomas Jefferson |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal :I hate to bring facts into this discussion, but... The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. Is the EFF really trying to say that it's ok to try to commit copyright infringement, but only wrong if you get caught completing it? And here are some more facts for you.
Part of what the RIAA is saying that the mere act of converting an audio CD to MP3 format is illegal irregardless of whether or not he shares it. That is the main part of the argument.
In essence, it would make nearly every single MP3 player, including iPods, illegal unless all your music was bought online. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal :The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. Actually they were in the \shared docs folder. that isn't the same as a sharing folder in kazaa.
only way they could have been accessed by the outside is the file sharing ports and every isp blocks those.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
texans20
Johama McBama 08
Premium
join:2002-09-28
Texas!
clubs:
| said by dvd536 :said by Cabal :The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. Actually they were in the \shared docs folder. that isn't the same as a sharing folder in kazaa. only way they could have been accessed by the outside is the file sharing ports and every isp blocks those. Well then how did the RIAA find out he was sharing music?
--
"I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies." Thomas Jefferson |
|
ff1324
Everybody Goes Home
Premium
join:2002-08-24
On Four Day
| reply to texans20
said by texans20 :You don't have to commit a crime to be accused of it. Kids are arrested and prosecuted for "hit lists" in schools. If you posses a bunch of materials to make a bomb, you could be prosecuted for a terrorism attack. If you own guns, ski masks, and pictures of a bank you could be tried for attempted bank robbery. The term attempted murder mean anything? Planning to kill a person can have the same sentence as actually killing a person, you know. There are many examples in criminal law of people punished for not committing a crime. In this case, the guy attempted to violate copyright law. I don't like the RIAA, but to act like this guy is innocent is a joke. If he is smart enough to rip CDs, he knew what he was doing. » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempt What should he be charged with in a criminal court? Possession of music? Does having a computer, MP3 files, an internet connection, CD's, and a file sharing program demonstrate that you are intending to infringe on someone's copyright?
If that's the case, lock me up. I got it all. I don't share music nor do I download music. But I meet your litmus test for handing over my life's savings to the RIAA.
Please, don't ever run for congress.
--
What do you want to do to the world, Ronald?
Burn it all.
See you next year, Ronald. |
|
megladon
@hoola.com | reply to Cabal
I could be wrong, and maybe i am, but i thought that some sharing programs before would auto scan for music or whatever for your share folder, or atleast ask you where you kept it, and then used whatever was in there to share by default? |
|
NoOneButMe
join:2001-08-24
Coldspring, TX
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Cabal
one other thang here is just becuse a file is in your shared folder dont meen it was shared he could have just been useing it a play list editor and even then did he have the app setup for that folder ? .... the fact it was in a shared folder meens nothing becuse you can have shared folders that no one can get to heh |
|
gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA
·Cruzio Internet
| reply to moonpuppy
I prefer lossless audio files when I rip my Cd's.
In the future, I plan on putting all my media files on a network drive so I can access them from my LAN.
AFAIK I am not infringing and will not be as long as I don't make them available from the WAN for anybody but myself.
The EFF is right on this one, they have to have proven infringement to prosecute the guy.
The RIAA could have just gotten hold of a file list which are common on servers, that doesn't mean you can actually download them.
--
‘Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts,
Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit,
With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will
We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish.’
Solon |
|
NoOneButMe
join:2001-08-24
Coldspring, TX | you guys know if the RIAA wins this thay can sue you for just copying your cd to mp3 even without a share |
|
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
Gainesville, FL
| reply to Cabal
said by Cabal :I hate to bring facts into this discussion, but... The guy took CDs he bought. He ripped them to mp3. He then loaded those mp3s into some file-sharing program for the purpose of distributing them. End of story. Is the EFF really trying to say that it's ok to try to commit copyright infringement, but only wrong if you get caught completing it? Actually he probably downloaded a file sharing program, clicked next next next next through the entire setup process in turn automatically sharing all the music files on his computer. He probably also set (the default option) the filesharing program to load automatically on Windows startup.
--
Am Heimcomputer sitz' ich hier, und programmier' die Zukunft mir |
|
GlobalMind
Domino Dude, POWER Systems Guy
Premium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx :The RIAA DIDN'T download any songs from him, they just got a list of songs. Well....I agree with the EFF's point that the act of placing the ripped MP3s into a "shared folder" isn't infringement in any way. My rationale is that I could have a "shared folder" on my local home network and not have it be infringement.
The difference here is that I think what they're saying is he also was sharing that folder on some P2P app. I think that's a different story. That's probably enough to claim intent to distribute, which is a problem. Somehow they got a list of what he was sharing. So either it was available publically or they hacked his PC or network.
said by karlmarx :He OWNED the SONGS. Actually no he doesn't. You never do. He owns the physical media (the CD), not the content on it. Thus you don't have rights to distribute the tunes, which really is in my view the RIAA's one and only valid argument.
--
TheGlobalMind.com | Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go? | Trust the instinct to the end, though you can render no reason. Ralph Waldo Emerson
|
|
elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
 ·Mediacom
| reply to texans20
if that is true the only way the RIAA could see that folder from out side this guys networks is to use some kind of backdoor or rootkit
and if that is true the RIAA could be in some real hot water
copyright infringement is civil law but IF that is what the RIAA did there is real jail time for them |
|
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
USA | reply to Cabal
HAHAH,
Cabal... Nice try! Nice 'twist'on words. |
|
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
USA | reply to moonpuppy
moonpuppy,
I'm on your side on this issue. Please don't use "irregardless" as a word. It's not a word. |
|
tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
edit:
January 14th, @12:05AM
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx :No, the RIAA is trying to say that by DOING it, he committed a crime. THERE IS NO CRIME IF NO-ONE DOWNLOADS IT. That is what the EFF is saying. The RIAA DIDN'T download any songs from him, they just got a list of songs. He OWNED the SONGS. If the RIAA had gotten PROOF that other people were downloading, then they would have a case. As it is, they are attempting to argue the mere FACT that he ripped the songs to his hard drive, he committed a crime. No proof of downloads, no foul. Simple as that. All they gotta do is show INTENT. Same argument used many times in court.. "assault with INTENT to kill". "Possession with INTENT to distribute". The argument would be something like "John Doe had 200gb's of music on his PC in a SHARED folder and running some P2P software". Don't think it would be too hard to provde intent but I hope he gets some judge with a pair that tells the RIAA to FO.. |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to GlobalMind
said by GlobalMind :The difference here is that I think what they're saying is he also was sharing that folder on some P2P app. I think that's a different story. That's probably enough to claim intent to distribute, which is a problem. Somehow they got a list of what he was sharing. So either it was available publically or they hacked his PC or network. Ah. So if I walk around town with a pistol openly carried on my hip, you know that I have the intent to use it on somebody. That is actually legal, under state law in California; open carry. Might be different under local laws, but that is the state law.
"Intent" is damned hard to prove, absent an overt act.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
