p2pnet - rss feed: EMI tries to nail MP3Tunes
p2pnet news | P2P:- The record labels, “love to sue” Michael Robertson, founder of MP3.com —- sold to Vivendi in 2001 for $372 million —- who, “now incubates a number of Web startups,” says TechCrunch, going on:
“One of them is MP3Tunes, which is billed as a music storage locker. But the record labels still don’t like it.
“EMI is suing MP3Tunes for copyright infringement and demanded that the service turn over the more than 100 million music files stored in all 125,000 MP3Tunes accounts.”
A New York turned EMI’s demands down.
The argument, says the story, is, “even if there is no sharing between lockers, users are transferring music to MP3Tunes, which is the same as distributing the music”.
Is this in any way akin to Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s discredited ‘Making Available‘ effort?
“Connecticut district judge Janet Bond Arterton has thrown out the RIAA’s infamous ‘making available’ claim which comprises the bottom line for all the Big 4 P2P file sharing cases,” p2pnet posted in February, going on, ‘Prove it!’ - she says in effect.
Under the claim, the RIAA tries to assert merely having a shared files folder that can be accessed is copyright infringement, a specious argument already explicitly dismissed by judge Marilyn Hall Patel in her Napster decision.
Here what Robertson has to say on his blog >>>
In court EMI v MP3tunes, EMI demanded that MP3tunes provide copies of the more than 100 million songs in their subscribers’ personal music Lockers. MP3tunes offers a free and paid service for people to store their music files digitally so customer or music fans can both keep them backed-up and listen to them anywhere through a Net radio, like those from Logitech, Reciva or Terratec, or from any Net connected device, such as a Wii or PC. The newest feature allows subscribers to automatically sync their music files to a device of their choosing so all their music is where they want it to be, without the hassles of running software and plugging devices in via USB cables. All access to a music Locker requires a unique username and password, and there is absolutely no sharing between Lockers.
MP3tunes strongly objected to EMI’s request, because it was both an invasion of user’s personal storage, and because it would create a huge technical and financial burden, with more than 300 terabytes of files in personal Lockers.
Files are not MP3tunes’ possessions any more than the contents of a safety deposit box are owned by the bank that houses them. The storage provided by MP3tunes is the user’s own space. A Locker is empty when someone opens an account and that customer decides what files are placed into their Locker. All files are stored at the request of the user. People who choose to utilize remote storage should be guaranteed the same level of privacy they have for the files stored on their local hard disk.
No corporation should have the right to demand the content of tens of thousands of personal accounts be turned over to them. There’s no reason to suggest that the users are doing anything but listening to their own music collections in a modern manner. There are millions of Gmail accounts that have MP3 files stored in them - same with Yahoo, AOL and Microsoft’s email and hosting services. If EMI can gain unfettered access to wantonly look through personal accounts on MP3tunes those services will be next.
EMI is trying to eliminate online storage and take people back to a prehistoric time before Internet services existed. I’m not sure the Judge saw this as a privacy issue, but he got it right when he rejected EMI’s demands to turn over personal files for thousands of unsuspecting people. It is an early, but very important, ruling in our battle with EMI. This fight will likely prove to be a long one, because some record labels would rather spend millions in attorney fees trying to outlaw all new technologies, like online storage and web hosting, rather than figure out how to use them to grow their business. At stake is personal ownership and privacy in the digital era - both issues worth fighting for.
Stay tuned.
TechCrunch - EMI Suffers A Setback In Case Against MP3Tunes, March 29, 2008
Making Available - Judge nails RIAA ‘making available’ claim, February 25, 2008
blog - Court Ruling Denies EMI Access to Millions of Personal MP3 Files, March 26, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
April 1st, 2008 at 2:15 pm
FTFA “…users are transferring music to MP3Tunes, which is the same as distributing the music”.
I farted the melody to “Cry Me A River” at the food court in the mall. Is that the same as “distributing the music” too?
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:07 am
Huh?
“A New York turned EMI’s demands down.”
Not sure, but I guess from the context that there is missing “judge” between “York” and “turned”, isn’t it?
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:41 am
What..the..fudge?
Is EMI totally deaf, blind and with an industrial case of technophobia?
If there was any risk of copyright violation it’s certainly no more risky than the ‘leaps of faith’ that other industries take every day.
“because some record labels would rather spend millions in attorney fees trying to outlaw all new technologies” - this quote truly boggles the mind. I’d love to sit down with an executive, and before sticking a pen where the sun don’t shine, put this question to them and try not to laugh…