A Chink in Kazaa's Armor? → What is a significant amount

"Given that Sharman's software has been downloaded more than 143 million times, it would be mere cavil to deny that Sharman engages in a significant amount of contact with California residents," Wilson wrote

I am wondering what a significant amount equals?

1% = 1.43 million
.01% = 143,000
.001% = 14,3000

Is 1/1,000th a significant amount?

Where did the judge get the numbers to say that out of the 143,000,000 downloaded copies (which may be exaggerated but unlikely) that a significant amount went to California? Couldn't the RIAA then sue all California residents for?

Someone correct my math if it is wrong.

Is 143,000,000 accurate? How many of those are updates? I don't think the Kazaa website, 'resets' the counter when a new version is released?

One more point, why don't judges speak in English? What does "mere cavil" mean?

cav·il ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kvl)
v. cav·iled, also cav·illed cav·il·ing, cav·il·ling cav·ils, cav·ils
v. intr.
To find fault unnecessarily; raise trivial objections. See Synonyms at quibble.

v. tr.
To quibble about; detect petty flaws in.

n.
A carping or trivial objection.

...which just so happens to be what you're doing... His point is that people in California get the program, and enough that it's not worth saying Sharman doesn't distribute to the United States.

us in california are ruining it for everyone. =P

Ruining what?

All this is going to do is help them get rid of the thieves, so that those of us who use P2P networking for purposes other than to steal won't be hassled anymore. They have to get rid of Kazaa so they can move on to the hardcore thieves, and then the other P2P networks will be open for us to send our open-source games and such to each other.

That's exactly what people lacking intelligence said after the demise of Napster.

But Kazaa is much larger than Napster, and much of what happened with Napster was the publicity surrounding it was what spurred a lot of people to become the criminals they became. I don't see that happening again, as, while the numbers can still grow, they won't be as drastic a change as we saw after Napster went under, as most people already logged on.

Will Morpheus or something else rise in popularity? Sure. But now there will be a precedent set making going after them easier. It will be easier to go after these filestealing networks, and then go after the true thieves that ruin it for the honest among us who don't steal from others.

I hear you, but I really dont see many legal uses for P2P. If it somehow can be used for only legal files, who will use it, and for what?

That's why I really don't mind Kazaa getting shut down. The only stuff I download off of it is stuff like amateur pr0n or Jackass-type stuff put up by the owner, but I can likely find that anywhere afterwards. I'd say, with 90% confidence, that the vast majority of Kazaa users are thieves.

Sounds like the masked debator is also a masked wanker......

or a Master Debater

If Kazaa falls, the next big P2P application will be implemented. What if someone develops a version of Freenet that is simple to use? Or something that no one has thought of yet. Innovation will always happen, and as long as Millions of people want to trade their files, they'll find a way.

said by WASTMD$:

---

Ruining what?

All this is going to do is help them get rid of the thieves, so that those of us who use P2P networking for purposes other than to steal won't be hassled anymore. They have to get rid of Kazaa so they can move on to the hardcore thieves, and then the other P2P networks will be open for us to send our open-source games and such to each other.

---

+

quote:

---

spurred a lot of people to become the criminals they became.

---

i got to ask you one thing only:

whose ass has your head been up for so long? take it out and smell reality.

ps. so the 90% being thieves, that leaves the 10% being what; thieves in self denial?

Aww, a couple guys... prove they don't quite understand my name...

I do appreciate the insults, which I apparantly only deserve because I'm against people hurting each other.

Might I add this story: My 10 year old sister was going over to her friends house one day, and she wanted to bring a burned CD with 2 songs on it. Her friend's mother said that she could not bring the CD to her house because it was "illegal." Everyone in my family, my dad, my mom, and myself were laughing our asses off at this.

Back to my personal experience, and batting down your twisted views -

Sure, some have put up the case that music artists may be made "homeless" because of online trading killing their music sales. This is pure crap.

Again, theives of what? People willingly put up this media on their computers for others to download off of them. At some point, the CD or movie was legitimately purchased, whether trough buying the CD, or buying the DVD, or buying the movie pass and taping the movie in the theater.

And, can you please tell me how we are hurting each other by downloading music off of each other?

Well how do you know that your "amature pr0n" isnt something that someone paid for, and you are downloading it and not paying?

I dont mean to target you in particular, but my point is that p2p is hardly ever completely legal. And I dont see kazaa staying around if it goes legal. people will move on to a free system, just like what happened with napster

Exactly -

I know in every way shape and form there are many laws and regulations against distributing for public use. I personally think of it a little bit bizzare that people cannot think outside the box here. Remember what prohibition was in the 1920's? Prohibition was one of the most violated federal laws in history. I have no doubt that sometime, if not already, digital media acts will be up there on that list.

These are the same people that I worry about - those who cannot think outside the box, and think about what is going on here, rather than acting like some uptight conformists.

They can keep prohibiting p2p, kazaa, abc, xyz, 123, 456 or whatever you call it BUT people who isn't willing to pay $15 per cd (I for one is not willing) will continue to invent ways to distribute music to each other - unless of course they kill the underlying electronic network between each other, AKA the "internet".

Another solution would be to add all the costs of prohibition through the years (with interest) and give it to everyone so that everyone are all millionaires so they don't mind paying $15 bucks for a cd.