Comments on: BPI can sue AllofMP3.com http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9245 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9245/comment-page-1#comment-58590 Reader's Write Tue, 04 Jul 2006 22:39:24 +0000 #comment-58590 "The Big Four Organized Music cartel's BPI (British Phonographic Industry) enforcement unit can try to sue Russia's AllofMP3.com, says a report." Actually anyone can try to sue in any country. All you need is the money to hire a lawyer and then find the lawyer to file the lawsuit. So, what allegedlty the repoert says is just plain common sense that did not need repeating. Must be that the report is plain RIAA propaganda. “The Big Four Organized Music cartel’s BPI (British Phonographic Industry) enforcement unit can try to sue Russia’s AllofMP3.com, says a report.”

Actually anyone can try to sue in any country. All you need is the money to hire a lawyer and then find the lawyer to file the lawsuit. So, what allegedlty the repoert says is just plain common sense that did not need repeating. Must be that the report is plain RIAA propaganda.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9245/comment-page-1#comment-58109 Reader's Write Tue, 04 Jul 2006 10:40:44 +0000 #comment-58109 and I have argued this elsewhere with the Kazaa decision in Australia, that under UK patent precedent (and therefore other common law countries such as Australia), infringement occurs where the ?song? is heard, and under our (both countries) copyright legislation, it does not matter if the 'authoriser' is in another country.... so if Kazaa is forced to filter, and the BPI succeed in suing AllofMp3.... From what I understand of it, instantly sites like LimeWire, Morpheus etc etc could be forced to filter by the laws of other countries, despite the fact that the US Supreme Court has held that secondary copyright liability does not contemplate that a product could be redesigned.... so you see the way the law is evolving (read: revolting :-]), suddenly an internet service that has any potential to result in copyright infringement can be stopped by a foreign nation.... BIG PROBLEM - otherwise known as the death of innovation. It is fundamental that AllofMp3 not be held liable in the UK - the boundaries of international law are being blurred by the minute. and I have argued this elsewhere with the Kazaa decision in Australia, that under UK patent precedent (and therefore other common law countries such as Australia), infringement occurs where the ?song? is heard, and under our (both countries) copyright legislation, it does not matter if the ‘authoriser’ is in another country…. so if Kazaa is forced to filter, and the BPI succeed in suing AllofMp3…. From what I understand of it, instantly sites like LimeWire, Morpheus etc etc could be forced to filter by the laws of other countries, despite the fact that the US Supreme Court has held that secondary copyright liability does not contemplate that a product could be redesigned…. so you see the way the law is evolving (read: revolting :-]), suddenly an internet service that has any potential to result in copyright infringement can be stopped by a foreign nation…. BIG PROBLEM – otherwise known as the death of innovation. It is fundamental that AllofMp3 not be held liable in the UK – the boundaries of international law are being blurred by the minute.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9245/comment-page-1#comment-57733 Reader's Write Tue, 04 Jul 2006 00:41:06 +0000 #comment-57733 First the best comment I've seen about this. When I'm in the office it's perfectly good business to shop around internationally to find the lowest cost supplier. But when I'm at home it's illegal to do exactly the same thing as a customer. But secondly, what the hell is going on here? This amounts to national censorship of a site that a particular national lobbying organisation doesn't like the look of. Is this just as bad as the Chinese Firewall? Or am I over stating the case here? Shouldn't the free speech, first amendment people be all over this one? But then what's actually happened is that a UK court has given approval for the BPI to go ahead and start a court case. And you can just imagine the sniggering behind closed doors as the lawyers rub their hands with glee. "You want to do what? Well if you're quite sure we can certainly help you; for a fee. Of course we can win, although it may take some time" said the lawyers to Jarndyce and Jarndyce. First the best comment I’ve seen about this. When I’m in the office it’s perfectly good business to shop around internationally to find the lowest cost supplier. But when I’m at home it’s illegal to do exactly the same thing as a customer.

But secondly, what the hell is going on here? This amounts to national censorship of a site that a particular national lobbying organisation doesn’t like the look of. Is this just as bad as the Chinese Firewall? Or am I over stating the case here? Shouldn’t the free speech, first amendment people be all over this one?

But then what’s actually happened is that a UK court has given approval for the BPI to go ahead and start a court case. And you can just imagine the sniggering behind closed doors as the lawyers rub their hands with glee. “You want to do what? Well if you’re quite sure we can certainly help you; for a fee. Of course we can win, although it may take some time” said the lawyers to Jarndyce and Jarndyce.

]]>