The United States Supreme Court ruled today, in MGM v. Grokster, Internet services used by consumers to exchange songs and movies for free can be sued.
This decision is a major win for the entertainment industry and a massive defeat for technology companies. The recording industry as well as Hollywood movie studios add this ruling to their legal firepower to combat piracy.
Software and hardware companies can now be held accountable for Internet piracy. To date, this is one of the largest and most important rulings to help stop Internet piracy.
From the WSJ "The high court said that Grokster Ltd., StreamCast Networks Inc. and other file-sharing companies can be responsible if their software is intended to swap copyrighted music and movies. The unanimous decision reverses two lower-courts rulings, and is a key victory for the recording industry and movie studios. The case was brought by 28 entertainment companies, including giants like Metro-Goldwyn- Mayer Inc., Walt Disney Co. and Time Warner Inc"
Ok music industry, you *missed* the boat back in the mid 90's when people were sharing files via a program called Napster. Right there they should have created their own "Napster" and offered incentives on why people should share online. They should have been proactive. Commericials, Famous artists who downgrade illegal filesharing...just pure advertising.
Instead what did they do? THEY STARTED SUING. SUE SUE SUE. They sued the programs itself, the people who uploaded the music, and instead of monitoring what the artists said, they let their mouths run free. Good job RIAA for letting the beetles and metalica seem like those old men who tell kids to get off their yards. Everyone knows the way to stop a revolt is to speak calmly about the situation and gain the trust of those who downloaded "illegally" instead we got forcefed about how artists were losing a lot of money....THE AVERAGE ARTIST ONLY GETS AROUND 5-10% OF RECORD SALES.
It took apple a while to catch on, but in the meanwhile these fat cats are still oblivious. Why do people bootleg? #1, CD's are still expensive. I went into 3 stores in town for one CD...all around 10 dollars. Let it be known the CD isn't popular and was released about 5 years ago.
#2, those who just want a couple of songs. Why pay near 15 dollars if you just want the popular songs? People would gladly pay 50-a dollar for the rights to it.
#3, Hard to find CDs. Self explaintory. Everyone knows if you live in the south, getting some northern music will be much harder. Getting country living in urban chicago is a challenge. Internet breaks stupid barriers.
To sum this up, this is the worst ruling the SC probably handed down. IT now gives companies the right to sue because they weren't effective enough in providing for the growing customer. IF they just hopped on the internet music bus back when this started, they wouldn't have ANYTHING to worry about. Most people wouldn't mind paying money for music...just not a lot for music thats "old" I commend apple for taking a step towards pleasing the customer...if only they lowered their price on some of the mid 90's music that I want I would be ITuning my ass off. But MPAA/RIAA...BOO!
remember, they're getting old and have to pay for their rising costs on medicine. Those millions probably sounded pleasing for something they'll never use.
I agree, bittorrent is far much better than the P2P's, but the MPAA is taking that out as I type this. It's pitiful that it even came to this...if the companies were smart, they could have been making millions off of this a long time ago..
The movie and record industry loves its CDs and DVDs. Now what is a CD or DVD? It is an easy to reproduce cheap form of media. The Corps that the RIAA represents wants to have a media that they can make doubles of cheaply, but only them, no one else. This is asking the impossible of course because if they can copy it easily than anyone can copy it easily. It would be like me making cars so cheap that I couldn't afford to put locks on the doors or ignition. Then I run to the cops everytime one of my cars get stolen. This is how the RIAA corps do buisness. They don't feel accountable for the simplisity of CDs/DVDs. They only know that it is illegal for anyone but them to make copies and they don't have to pay the cops anymore than the taxes that they have always been paying like everyone else. Yet they need all of our police forces time and our courts to protect their investments. Not the media they produce, our civil service suffers so they can save cash. Fine, you can sue a p2p. Now prove that it is the fault of the p2p and that this could not have been done on FTP with a FTP browser. Next, MGM should sue the internet for creating a medium that allows p2p. I don't see how TCP/IP is any less guilty than p2p. How long can we let the industries get away with this? Will the next media be even easier to copy? Could you just rub the 2 disks together to make copies and that would be illegal and the RIAA petitions the courts to put video cameras (at the peoples expense) to monitor every computer and user? Any encryption by a corporation is protect by our courts. If I start a company and encrypt my product by putting the first bit an the end then to correct every byte and I use that the courts and the police have to arrest people who brake my pathetic code. Simply putting the end bit back to the beginning and correcting the bytes would be a crime. I wouldn't have to pay the cop or the court or the prison they put you in. I get to keep all my money at the expense of the system.
Here they go Suing P2P programs... Great, next the movie industry will be suing companies that make VCRs because I can record a movie from showtime or ABC and watch it any time I want... and they Oh No, I can give that tape to a friend to watch it too.
I don't get one thing though, there is more porn on these P2P programs than anything else, if it kills buisness because people can just download it for free, why isn't the porn industry bankrupt.... oh yeah, I remember why, if you put out something good, people will buy it even if they can download it.
uhh, simmer down. How can you say they spent no time trying to make these discs? Sure the idea is cheap, but sony themselve spent millions of dollars on encryption and why do you think you need apps to rip some cds?
I didn't say they spent no time making CDs. Sony spent millions making 650mb CDs, and when they were made there was no encryption on Compact Disc. As for the Millions they spent on DSS encryption for DVDs, the code to decrypt it can be printed on the back of a T-shirt. The T-shirt company did get sued too, it did brake a law in the DCMA. Freedom of speech? As a company I would not pay millions for an encryption that will be broken in a week and then whine and complain, not to the company that made this crap encryption, but to the peoples civil service system. All money to uphold the DCMA should be paid by the RIAA & MPAA. I am sorry if I get simmered up because I see corporations making profits on the back of our police force and court system and styfling our technological advancements to protect their intrests.
Maybe if albums were priced fairly in the first place, people would have no qualms with buying them.
But instead, when we are liberated by p2p netowrks, the industry acts like the victim.
When artists start getting equal or majority of the money spent on albums, I'll start buying them.
In the meantime, I'll stick to downloading songs and supporting the artists by buying their merch. (They get more money from merch than cd sales anyways)
Never has the Supreme Court done so much in so little time to crush developing technology. Instead of trying to understand the way the world and the technophiles of this country operate, the supreme court goes out of its way to help the RIAA/MPAA crush the cutting edge of technology, blunting it so that the old ways can be dominate for a few decades more. I guess it's gonna take another country's technology center to outshine the US AGAIN (Japan in the electronics industry) to get the US to finally tell the RIAA/MPAA to shut its hole.
no matter how secure the media is it still has to go from the player down a cable to a TV. (or a set of speakers in the case of music) There is no way of telling whether it is a TV/speakers on the other end or a computer recording it. The decryption is done for you.
This is ridiculous, we are the victims now of an industry THAT DOES NOT COMPETE. Ever wondered why the price of new cds/dvds is pretty much the same for EVERY COMPANY? In a changing market they have not adapted or reviewed their pricing structure at all. This is price fixing by decree of the supreme court.
Interestingly enough, its the News that has given rise to the increase usage of p2p. I remember CNN Headline News first announcing Napster was being sued, then detailed what Napster was and their website. Needless to say, I was downloading music that day.
Nevertheless, the RIAA cannot win. Lets face it, who decides who has a job next week in the business world. Sure, its normally your boss, but in the real world, you piss off your customers, they go deal with someone else and you lose out and fail as a company. Except the RIAA is a dictatorship, and they started to sue. I like these sypathy commercials they have in the movie theatres and I sit there wondering how much they get paid to say that, and if they actually mean it, and how much they're going to pull in anyways.
But what I loved the most is how they call it "intellectual property". If 50 Cents lyrics is intellectual, then we have a nation of geniuses! I also love the creativeness of movies recently. Its always remakes and sequals. My god...I'd like to thank all and declare all artists who do their own work as creative geniuses, because I'm tired of sitting through sequals and remakes. To quote SpaceBalls, "Don't worry, we'll all see each other in SpaceBalls II: The Quest for More Money".
My point exactly? Quit having 50 Cent or some rich actor/singer tell us its bad to steal, I'd rather see a crying CEO because he's getting screwed by the people, despite the fact he's screwing the artist, "intellectual" property isnt selling. Boo hoo. I'd be willing to pay $10 if I knew who was getting the money. Course, then again maybe that explains why potentially great bands never get anywhere. With the money they receive, it aint worth producing anything good except a good song now and then.
Seems funny these are the same companies selling the burners and the blank disk. Just seems like they are after free money and creating the problem themselvs just to have a way to get free money from hardworking people.
Hmmm With this ruling gun companies better watch out. After all if the Software maker is liable for misuse of it's software.. Then Gun companies are liable for all not hunting (animals)related shootings and deaths.. After all according to what I've read it this.. It's the software companies fault they were used wrong.. so by logic.. it must be teh gun companies fault it was used wrong.. Same would apply to auto manufacturing, Knife manufacturing, etc..etc..etc.. What they have basically done is opened a can of Whoop-A** in closed room with no but themselves to use it on.
had actualy bothered to do any research, you would see that this clearly isnt the case. Grokster has been found guilty because it "encouraged" the use of programs to swap music and such. Wether or not this opens computer sellers up for lynching is debatable, quiter a few off those advertise you can burn music and films, which may now be illegal. However, the SC, although they agreed grokster was guilty, no one agreed why.
Nothing major will happen without a new law, and a new law is a while away. The dems get fubnding from movie and music company's, but get votes from the kids who steal music and movies. the reps are generaly in favour of big business and copyrights, but arent going to jump to help people who fund the democrats.
If the movie industry moved its funding to the republicans, or the republicans changed their posistion, we'd have a settlement, I dont see that happening.
Michael Moore funding Bush, or Bush saying, hey kids, be like me, steal things.
"Grokster has been found guilty because it "encouraged" the use of programs to swap music and such."
What the hell is wrong with that? RE-READ it. Now consider if the music is simply my music I recorded on my computer, converted to MP3 and share! They said "Music"
NOT COPYRIGHTED MUSIC, per say! Music! The broad scope.
Like if it were to say, be Pictures for a moment and I "encouraged" the sharing of pictures. The companies that make Comic Books and Posters could come after Me?!?! People could share COPYRIGHTED pictures!
Ticks me off its always assumed that any music off the internet is CRIMINAL! To Assume makes an ASS of U and ME. ASS-U-ME.
