Can anyone remember any time in fairly recent history when any one single industry has been this successful at leading the government around by the nose?
Even as the LimeWire damages case grinds its way through the courts, a group of film and music artists led by wealthy film producer and founder of FilmOn.com Alki David are suing CBS Interactive and CNET for distributing the LimeWire application. LimeWire, whose service was killed off by the US District Court last year, was …
Maybe "I" will sue all the oil companies in theworld for making petrol (Gas for US readers), after all without it NO ONE would be able to speed in a car, commit road rage, death by dangerous driving . . . the list goes on. I could act as US style lawyer for a class action case against them all, and sue for a kersqiullion dollars per person injured / killed / upset my vehichles powered by an infernal explosion machine. Of course I'll be modest and only claim 75% of winnings, plus fees, handling charges etc etc etc
I wonder just how many of those downloads was because the people using lime wire got infect with some kind of virus and ended up having to reinstall their system. I love though how downloading the application itself somehow means you used it to download copyrighted material, sure we all know a lot of people did but then so did a lot of people using FTP clients, we dont see them going after cuteftp. I remember the days people used email to share their copyrighted files, and websites with direct HTTP downloads, does that mean microsoft and netscape should be sued as well?
Well there's 20 minutes of my life I won't get back...Fine, most accept that piracy hurts the content owners but if you're going to take legal recourse at least stick to one solid argument you can win.
Alki's case is poorly constructed - trotting out age old fallacies such as 1 download equals one lost sale. It features deliberate edits of video clips and screen grabs - displayed out of context.
I wouldn't bet on him winning any substantial damages from cnet based on that selective "evidence".
I certainly didn't see anything that was presented by Alki that would convince me that cnet had actively encouraged people to share files illegally.
On a seperate note - to all reg readers outside the UK I'd like to make it perfectly clear that although Alki sounds like he's English - he really isn't. Also, to call himself an actor is being a bit economical with the actualité.
Paris, cos she could sue me
That when tapes were used the quality of the music/film was pretty high and the companies made decent money. Now that they are churning out total crap at the rate of 5 or 6 films/songs a second no one wants to actually pay money to see/listen to them, so they don't and the recording industry needs to scrimp and save (and sue) to make sure it can still afford to send its manufactured blow job queen off to Rio in a private jet to sing a song written by some fat, lazy, untalented writer who hasn't had an original idea since the mid 70s.
It was twin-cassette machines that were targetted, and yes, Binatone was sued and lost !!
The result was that a levy was placed on all blank media sold in the UK to compensate rights holders, though you can guess how many actually got paid.
I believe that levy is still in place. They shot themselves since the levy being paid, you now have the "right" to make a copy.
Again there was no distinction between you copying the latest Yes LP and you performing your own composition, a distinction which even today fails to be made by "big media"
Gun shops were sued by all families that had lost loved ones in firearms 'incidents'.
W H Smiths were sued for selling blank CDs and DVDs (only ever used to copy stuff illegally, apparently)
Ford were sued by all families that had lost loved ones under the wheels of their vehicles
BAE Systems were sued by all families..........
(repeat ad nauseam)
Computers don't make morally or legally responsible decisions to copy, sue, rape, or kill. Nor does Limewire or other computer program. If someone used a cellphone location to stalk a person with intent to harm, who is responsible? -the phone manufacturer? programmer? Sales person? Government who launched GPS satellites-victim for having location enabled? Etc! No! Only the one lone morally compromised individual is responsible. People who illegally copy material are solely and individually responsible for their decisions to do so, not the bystanders with more money for greedy lawyers to attempt to steal from.
I agree with this.
But, the person (or company) who makes software that is intended to be used to break the law (low orbit ion cannon? sony DRM on cd's) should be held responsible.
I don't know in the case of limewire but CNET had nothing to do with it.
As far as CNET was concerned this was a legal free piece of software that it's users could download.
CNET (and CBS) has (have) deep pockets,so they get sued. Notice no one is going after the end users because it's far too much trouble to do that (even if they could). And how much extortion could ever be squeezed from individuals (there's no paycheck using this strategy).
I would expect this case to be tossed. Should it make it to trial the jurors should see through this scam (but, there are some pretty damn stupid people who sit on juries)
I believe everyone should sue everyone else for every dumb reason imaginable. (Will this crap ever end?)
Something I've always wondered... In countries where a CD/DVD piracy levy is charged, can you claim it back if you're a person that creates content and uses recordable media because it's low volume? What about if you're a person that owns a direct to DVD camcorder and uses blank DVDs to record their family holidays?
The above is not intended as a serious question - just wanting to add a point about presumed piracy.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019