The future of P2P and the internet

[Xzyx987X]

Well for those of you who didn't already know the RIAA has been going around sueing everyone they can find who is sharing mp3's on p2p networks. Lately though, things are starting to get dirty. The RIAA has recently been trying to asociate p2p progs with porn (albeit their is a connection, but there's also a connection with porn and pretty much every other part of the internet...) and offering not to sue people if they delete their songs (although they openly admit the artists and publishers can still sue.) But this brings up an interesting point; right now nothing the RIAA is currently doing to catch people is leagally wrong, but what will happen when file sharing evolves to the extent the law is no longer on their side? A good example of this would be earth station 5. It can transfer files via proxy servers to protect users identities, and it is based outside the US so the goverment can't shut it down. It can't even be blocked since the servers adresses can always be changed, and it uses random ports for transfering. And although I don't think es5 actually implements this, if the data being sent was encrypted properly it couldn't even be intercepted by the ISPs (if the goverment forced them to moniter users that is.) So the question is, what are the US goverment, RIAA, MPAA, or anyone else who has intelectual property they care about, when they are forced to admit intelectual property can no longer be protected without going against the constitution? (i.e. installing monitering software on every computer.) Any thoughts?

[GundamGuy]

They will amend the Constution... or just install montering programs even if its illegal.. its not like the goverment is not doing it now any way...

[Fury]

I got a question. How is what the RIAA is doing legal. They are finding out whats on peoples computers. I find something wrong there. The girl in newyork is countersuing. I dont think what they are doing is gonna fly.

[Xzyx987X]

Actually, they are currently pushing the government to allow the methods they are using as we speak and as far as I know the government is pretty much convinced.

[Joker]

Well if am not mastaken isen't finfing out what on summon's computer HACKING (ILLEGAL)? I do think that there going behind lines which they said. Since they shoulden't be hacking(illegal) if they are violating people pravicy. Who noes why there using it or if there using it. Unless they hack or monitor the transmissions but even at that they would enter the servers point of loggin in. Which would violate terms of privicy which each person in the US have. By your constutation if am not mistaken?

The results do not justify the mean's? To but it simple that my opinion on this topic.

[Xzyx987X]

True, that would be illeagle, but it's not what they're doing. All they are doing is conducting searches on kazaa to determine who has what and downloading it to prove that it's not just a missnamed file. Since by using the program you are agreeing to leave yourself open to anyone dowloading from you it means nothing they're doing is wrong. There maybe a bit of room for debate on that issue, but I think in the end the courts will decide in favor of the music industry.

[WANG]

The RIAA will give up long before it tracks down and takes legal action against the three million some KaZaA users that partake in sharing copyrighted songs.

[Shindou Hikaru]

The thing is that no matter what they do,P2P networks will advance and evolve.Even if they ban it illegal,sharing program creators will probly find a way to create sth legal,but with the same result.Theoretically,Kazaa isn't illegal.It's just a medium program that makes an impersonal connection between computers,so as to share files,possible.It's not based on any network.If they shut down Kazaa,they would have to shut down e-mail file transfer,as well.The same goes for many other P2P programs.I just brought Kazaa as an example.That's my opinion.

[Solitude]

i think people who download mp3 are as much at fault as the people hosting them.but p2p is too big an idea to be stopped by mere legal jargon about its various application.and about mp3s one can argue the same way one does about emulation:it's all about backup or playing on a more capable system or just trying it out.i know very few people actually sincere about that kind of stuff(one of them happens to be me-not with mp3s though)

[EmuFreak]

Originally posted by Xzyx987X
Well for those of you who didn't already know the RIAA has been going around sueing everyone they can find who is sharing mp3's on p2p networks. Lately though, things are starting to get dirty. The RIAA has recently been trying to asociate p2p progs with porn (albeit their is a connection, but there's also a connection with porn and pretty much every other part of the internet...) and offering not to sue people if they delete their songs (although they openly admit the artists and publishers can still sue.) But this brings up an interesting point; right now nothing the RIAA is currently doing to catch people is leagally wrong, but what will happen when file sharing evolves to the extent the law is no longer on their side? A good example of this would be earth station 5. It can transfer files via proxy servers to protect users identities, and it is based outside the US so the goverment can't shut it down. It can't even be blocked since the servers adresses can always be changed, and it uses random ports for transfering. And although I don't think es5 actually implements this, if the data being sent was encrypted properly it couldn't even be intercepted by the ISPs (if the goverment forced them to moniter users that is.) So the question is, what are the US goverment, RIAA, MPAA, or anyone else who has intelectual property they care about, when they are forced to admit intelectual property can no longer be protected without going against the constitution? (i.e. installing monitering software on every computer.) Any thoughts?

You make some rather valild points, and yes I do think sooner or later the p2p community will end up out smarting the RIAA till they think something else up. Right now I am really hopeing earth station 5 is the real thing because that is my p2p of choice right now.

[EGGO]

i think people who download mp3 are as much at fault as the people hosting them.

I don't know if you mean all MP3s, but you should also note that there are independant artists out there who hold no copyright, or who don't care.

if it weren't for file sharing I, as a die-hard fan of the music industry, would not even own half of the CDs that I do today.

I've have purchased CDs as a DIRECT RESULT of having downloaded an artist's work through a P2P file sharing network, and that's just the tip of the iceburg.

They can go ahead and prosecute me for having downloaded songs, but for each song they say is illegally downloaded, a CD in my possession will come up holding that song.

[chronos]

Even if they force that on people, they cannot sue everyone. There are millions of people out there, even teachers so they won't sue everyone. The only people who they will sue is the peole that created p2p. ex. napster

[EmuFreak]

Originally posted by chronos
Even if they force that on people, they cannot sue everyone. There are millions of people out there, even teachers so they won't sue everyone. The only people who they will sue is the peole that created p2p. ex. napster

Actually after killing off napster they tried to do so with kazza, and winmx but they had legal loop holes they could not get around so that is why they are starting to go after the users.

[neogeomad]

The RIAA bringing down p2p???? Hahahaha. Strong encryption will see an end to that EVEN if they do manage to somehow to track the gazillions of bytes running through the internet every SECOND.

And it's innocence until proven guilty. Consequence: they're gonna have to sue ever single one of the p2p users. The best they can hope for is so sue a few and make an example out of them. Sorry, but sueing a girl and making her apologize isn't gonna endear you to anyone soon.

They could change the law...but the civil rights activists are gonna go beserk before that happens.

Suppose then they get some sort of pre - emptive datatap law where they can go into someone's computer over the internet. Let's just stay with this for a minute even though it's kinda impossible for this to happen unless OS makers agree to leave in trapdoors...opps that's right forgot about Linux....

Anyways, what's to stop me taking copies of saved game files, concating them together and renaming them to "illegal1.mp3", "illegal2.mp3".

Have fun looking for that needle guys...

As for me personally, go ahead and sue me. I'm gonna take EGGO's idea to the extreme. wait until my day in court when I'm questioned as a defendant. The lawyer will accuse me of pirating songs and I'll dump my ENTIRE LEGIT. CD COLLECTION in front of the RIAA's GODDAMN FACE.

Then we'll see who's gonna be doing the suing. Did anyone say invasion of privacy and malicious prosecution? EAT THAT LOSERS.

[Hipoccolos]

One thing that's bugging me here is.... how the hell can they prove I have ANY pirated songs? I could easily delete every single one of them, or back them up on a CD-R and give them to a 3rd party without them ever knowing. Do they get some sort of track record that shows what you were downloading or some shit like that?


EDIT: Oh yeah by the way.... I find it really PATHETIC, LOW, and IMMATURE that they sued a 12 year old girl for downloading MP3's.