p2pnet - rss feed: Linking is OK — Spanish court on P2P case
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Of major interest to anyone who’s following the ‘linking is illegal because it supposedly allows people to infringe on copyrights’ and/or ‘linking is the same as publishing’ cases in Canada and elsewhere, a Spanish court has ruled a site with links to P2P downloads is perfectly acceptable.
Sharemula.com, offering eDonkey links to movies, music, software and games, isn’t breaking the law, ruled the Madrid court in its final decision on a case brought by Spain’s Brigade of Technological Investigations, and which, “cannot be appealed,” says TorrentFreak.
“Following a Federación Antipiratería (Anti-piracy Federation) investigation in 2006, 15 people were arrested in Spain in connection with the operation of Sharemula.com, an eDonkey (eD2k) indexing site,” states the story, continuing:
“eD2k links are similar to URLs or .torrent files, in that they contain no copyright material themselves, but may point to such works.”
Just under a year ago, the court dismissed the case against Sharemula saying neither the site nor administrators, “had operated illegally by offering links to copyright works, since they had not done so for profit or commercial gain,” says TorrentFreak, adding:
“The hearing confirms the position of the defense that linking to P2P networks does not constitute a criminal offense,” wrote David Bravo, a lawyer in the case, noting, “Sharemula did not store any copyrighted material. The site simply links to files that are hosted elsewhere, on computers of P2P users.”
In Canada, isoHunt has gone from defense to attack in the online file-sharing case lodged by Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG’s CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association of America), and p2pnet is waiting for a court ruling in the case where Vancouver businessman Wayne Crookes claims merely linking to an allegedly defamatory article is the same as publishing it.
In Europe, the entertainment cartels are attacking search sites MiniNova and The Pirate Bay.
TorrentFreak - Linking to P2P Downloads Confirmed Legal in Spain, September 19, 2008
defense to attack - isoHUNT sues record labels’ CRIA, September 6, 2008
same as publishing it - Wayne Crookes v p2pnet: update, August 30, 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.
September 19th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
in other news
and oddly i have a letter in writing about how bell mistreated me.
Seems a PR campaign has started from Crull on down ( see dslreports.ca/teksavvy/ for details )
Seems that the “donate button to paypal” on my website has htem thinking im more serious about launching my own offensive about,
“misrepresentation” , which i will add is a suit one could move to become “Class action”.
With bells recent loses in court the neo cons ( conservatives slipping in the polls ) a new age may dawn in canada.
NEVER GIVE up. Don’t let the bastards win.
Vote swapping can really make the differance. I get the idea now that it could actually get the green party some actual seats as well as get liberals in where they might barely lose and even the ndp should support this as it might shore up places they were close in like oshawa where the truck plant is due to close.
Whne this decision comes it will signify how the justice system in canada will operate.
September 19th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
I predict lots of trackers will move to Spain.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Trackers and p2p don’t magically take anyone anywhere. Nor do they magically give you access by putting a link up. The user has to do something to get there. It is the users action that makes the connection. Don’t click you stay right where ever you are without any changes. It doesn’t of itself aid nor abet anyone without some sort of action on the part of the user.
I have never agreed with the change in daffination that having ads on a site constitutes a “for profit” motive. Nor have I ever agreed with the idea that the reading the daffination basically says that the profit motive comes from “lack of payment” to the copyright owners. If that were the case, when you picked up that item in the store you didn’t want, that too could be considered lack of payment when you put it back, deciding you didn’t really want it after all.
It’s a slimey sort of corporation that does these sort of tricks. One that I want nothing to do with as far as their products go. I don’t want their music, they can sit of the virtual shelf till the power dies for all I care. If you don’t fool with the product at all, your exposure to risk associated with them drops off a huge amount. It’s gotten that bad as far as having anything to do with their stuff. There are so many limitations to the use of the product that it no longer serves the use it was intended for.
If I can’t use a product in my lifestyle because of those limitations, I have no reason to have the product and no reason to spend money on it. The RIAA and MPAA have provided the best reasons not to buy their products at all. They are the best bad publicity the major labels could have ever schemed up and they have done their jobs in that aspect very well.
September 20th, 2008 at 6:50 am
why don’t take a copy of that verdict and send it to the judge dealing with the Whiny Cook case…
after all you were just also just linking to a site saying he was something close to what we’re flushing daily through the WC.
/emote WC flush