+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 02/22/2018 05:35 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  1.439 Visits   1 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
02/12/2001 09:13 PM ID: 3520 Permalink   

The end for Napster - Court makes ruling


The federal appeals court has passed down it's ruling, stating that Napster must cease it's service and could be held liable for "vicarious copyright infringement". Napster, a music-trading community with 50 million users may have to shut-down now.

Napster can however remain in business until Judge Marilyn Hall Patel completes her injunction, which was called "overly broad" by the appellate court. In the weekend before this ruling, there were an estimated 250 million songs downloaded.

Napster, trading music since May 1999, was sued by Sony, Warner, BMG, EMI and Universal, claiming that they were being robber by billions of dollars in profits. According to the president and of the Recording Industry, "This is a clear victory."

    WebReporter: JeffyP Show Calling Card    
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  What about vcr's, cdrs...  
and various other items. I don't know but people copy movies, cds etc but they don't do anything. Saying napster knew people would be infriging on copyrights is ridiculous. I see a appeals which will take time. I know the sony betamax issue will be brought up. personally I use napster to get music which can't be bought anywhere in America or music that is never released like live mixes that some people tape from shows I don't get.

I see this as not copyright infringement that the recording companies are complain about or even the issue. its about the all mighty dollar. Nothing else.

Why not sue the public libraries also they allow people to check out music. For all we know they could go home a tape them. The library "knew" people could copy these. Its a big mess and what ever will happen will change alot of laws. Especially the definition of whether a computer is consider part Audio Home Recording Act. I'm sure when it was written cdrs haven't been created.
  by: herkulease   02/13/2001 07:00 AM     
  It's interesting...  
The court which has upheld the injunction is apparently the same court that ruled against VCRs, until it was overturned by the Supreme Court - and if you look at how much VCRs have benefitted Hollywood as well as their manufacturers, I don't think that anyone could find the Supreme Court made a bad ruling.
  by: SandraG     02/15/2001 12:17 PM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: