Comments on: Big Music Kazaa blunder

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 21:08:53 +0000

“Pardon this stupid question, but words to be used as a filter chosen by the cartels doesn’t add up to a workable filter. If they want to filter say, Stairway out of the title Stairway To Heaven; how long will it take the members to figure out S*T*A*I*R*W*A*Y or just move the letters one space in the alphabet higher as an unwritten understanding?”

It may not really matter what filter is adopted due to several reasons.

1. Any filter that prevents the uploading or downloading of public domain files or files where the copyright holder licenses the songs thru Creative Commons or otherwise authorizes duplication is illegal. The vast majority of works (musical/literary/etc) are in the described category.

2. As this post suggests, no filtering based on filename will work. Too easy to defeat.

3. If a filter were to work or be a nuisance, music fans will simply copy songs from other sources (radio, CDs, etc).

4. The giving or trading of DVDs with thousands mp3 files between friends as already common. I have not heard of a case where the mere possession of a gift is illegal. Certainly the receiver does not have an obligation to verify each of the thousands of songs to verify that the copying was legal any more than a receiver of ONE Cartier purse has to verify that the purse was actually made under license from Cartier.

The record companies, the music publishers, the movie industry , the Copyright Office, and the Copyright legislators and the Copyright judges still have not yet realized what hit them. They are still in sleep mode.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

Rafael Venegas

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 16:11:20 +0000

Very good point that. I can see scenarios where Sharman Networks could eventually sue the ARIA because of this.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 15:14:51 +0000

block .avi files or try to block “*.mp3″

It would be illegal to prevent the sharinig or copying of ALL mp3 or avi files, since any of these files could be in the public domain, licensed under Creative Commons or otherwise authorized by the copyright holder or the copyright status/holders are unknown.

Anyway, a filename based filter would only be an utter failure, as filenames will simply be changed before uploading and then again after downloading or playback programs can be made to recognize and playback real mp3 files regardless of the extension name.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 10:08:23 +0000

block .avi files

or try to block “*.mp3″

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 06:36:29 +0000

I wouldn’t know, i only use open source software/protocols.

Protocol: Gnutella
Client: Frostwire

Protocol: Bittorrent
Client: Azureus

Protocol: Direct Connect
Client: Dc-Qt

Protocol EDK2000/KAD
Client: AMule

Did i miss anything?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:33:20 +0000

“a gathering designed to apply a filtering solution”

I doubt very much that a filtering solution will be found by programmers unless all digital files have a required integrated ID and copyright status data (which they don’t have at present). Then if the integrated data is modified to fool the filter, the filter will be fooled. No wonder the lawyer did not show up to a “filtering solution” conference.

The music industry is in a bind. Any attempts to stop all file sharing would be illegal because many works are in the public domain or the owner allows sharing and copying… and no filtering system will work if the files do not have the required ID and copyright status data.

There is no way out other than a radical change in the way music is licensed and authors are paid for their work when files are shared on the Internet or copied at home.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

“The judge absolutely blasted the record company’s lawyer for walking out of an expert’s conclave which was intended to be to the problem of infringement.”

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 05:00:01 +0000

Pardon this stupid question, but words to be used as a filter chosen by the cartels doesn’t add up to a workable filter. If they want to filter say, Stairway out of the title Stairway To Heaven; how long will it take the members to figure out S*T*A*I*R*W*A*Y or just move the letters one space in the alphabet higher as an unwritten understanding?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 03:24:05 +0000

true, if they don’t stay in Australia wouldn’t all these court decisions be pointless?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Nov 2005 03:10:25 +0000

A spokesperson for Sharman said the action of the record companies in refusing to attend the second court-ordered meeting revealed that their true intention was not to foster agreement about an acceptable filtering technology, but to shut down Kazaa and rid themselves improperly of a competitor.

I have a feeling this is the cover sharman needed to sell kazaa to another company in country company i would not be surprised if it heads back yo netherlands