  Jason Levine Premium join:2001-07-13 USA
| reply to ossito16 Re: Get it straight
Actually, downloading is illegal. Check out the Napster decision.
The district court further determined that plaintiffs exclusive rights under § 106 were violated: here the evidence establishes that a majority of Napster users use the service to download and upload copyrighted music. . . . And by doing that, it constitutesthe uses constitute direct infringement of plaintiffs' musical compositions, recordings. A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., Nos. 99-5183, 00-0074, 2000 WL 1009483, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 26, 2000) (transcript of proceedings). The district court also noted that it is pretty much acknowledged . . . by Napster that this is infringement. Id. We agree that plaintiffs have shown that Napster users infringe at least two of the copyright holders exclusive rights: the rights of reproduction, § 106(1); and distribution, § 106(3). Napster users who upload file names to the search index for others to copy violate plaintiffs distribution rights. Napster users who download files containing copyrighted music violate plaintiffs reproduction rights. Napster asserts an affirmative defense to the charge that its users directly infringe plaintiffs copyrighted musical compositions and sound recordings.
It's just much harder to prosecute. You would have to prove each individual download and launch a lawsuit against each one. It's more effective (both cost wise, time wise and "get the files off P2P" wise) for the RIAA to sue one large file sharer than to sue a hundred downloaders. For the RIAA the question is: Do you swat at flies or get rid of whatever is attracting the flies?
Of course, that doesn't say anything about the bad PR that the RIAA gets from their lawsuits, the ridiculous push they make to settle the suits (complete with threats), or the financial inability of their targets to defend themselves.
If my opinion were to become law, there would be two classes of copyright infringement. "Commercial Infringement" would be for the CD Press operations that burn illegal copies and sell them on the street. "Casual Infringement" would be for the home user who just uploaded a copy of a copyrighted music file to a P2P group (or downloaded such a file) without the copyright owner's permission. Commercial Infringement would carry the fines that it carries today. Casual Infringement's fines would be much lower. I would also enact a law that would make the RIAA's Sue-Then-Pressure-To-Settle tactics illegal. (Settlements are ok, but the strong arm tactics they use clearly are meant to keep the cases out of court lest the RIAA lose some cases.) -- -Jason Levine My Gallery | Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com | URateit.com |