CNet, P2P and the First Amendment

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 3, 2004, 5:41 pm

Anybody else on CNet's mailing list? Every now and then something worth reading actually pops out. Got this one today, and found it interesting:

nduced to break the law
A bill currently before the U.S. Senate may make it illegal for me to tell you about software that can make copies of copyrighted files. Though it's aimed at file-sharing networks, Senator Hatch's Induce Act would make anyone who induces another person to commit copyright infringement liable for the same penalties.

If I were to recommend a really good CD ripper, such as, say, CDex or iTunes, any record company could say I induced people to make illegal copies of copyrighted material, and get the law on me. Remember--this isn't a civil matter, it's criminal, possibly involving jail time. The real problem is that inducement, as mentioned in the bill, could cover a broad range of activities, such as writing and talking. Looks like a conflict with the First Amendment to me.

The act tries to define "intentionally induces," but it comes off as vague, which means all sorts of people could get hauled before the courts by the FBI at the behest of corporations. I'm pretty disappointed one of my representatives, Senator Barbara Boxer, signed on to introduce the Induce Act. I hope you all get a chance to tell your representatives to defeat this poorly written bill.

Wayne Cunningham
Senior Editor, CNET Download.com

The link to the article about it is here: http://news.com.com/Senator+wants+to+ba ... 80384.html

Small quote from it:

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said he intended to move ahead with the highly controversial Induce Act despite objections from dozens of Internet providers and Silicon Valley manufacturers. The Induce Act says "whoever intentionally induces any violation" of copyright law would be legally liable for those violations.

Now it is fairly obvious that I am not a Republican, and imho this is just a continuation of the infringement of the first amendment. Can't even talk about it? And not to mention that at least in Norway and other European countries we can make LEGAL copies for our own personal use.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » August 3, 2004, 6:23 pm

i think it would be difficult to convince a court that "i intentionally induced" somebody to violate a copyright.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » August 3, 2004, 6:34 pm

Someone set us up the bomb!

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » August 3, 2004, 6:56 pm

The first rule about Bit Torrent is that you don't talk about Bit Torrent.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » August 3, 2004, 7:04 pm

If it passes, it will got shot down so quickly after it is enforced, IF it passes.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 3, 2004, 7:06 pm

this is a clear violation of my right to steal other people's itellectual property.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » August 3, 2004, 7:07 pm

This act would be like putting someone in jail for shooting someone, when all they did was buy a gun.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 3, 2004, 7:26 pm

kyoukan wrote:this is a clear violation of my right to steal other people's itellectual property.

Yeah because obviously I can't be allowed to rip my own CDs to play on my MP3 player! Ohnoz!

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 3, 2004, 8:14 pm

This is fairly old news and I fully expect it to pass. Is it constituional? Nope, will it eventually be gotten rid of? Yep, Will innocents be harmed by dumb laws first, Yep.

Will voting Dem help this? Nope, Will voting Republican help this? Nope

Vote Libertarian!!!! http://www.lp.org

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » August 3, 2004, 9:51 pm

How exactly will voting libertarian help anything? I'm sure it's a good platform, but unless there's a huge change in the electorial system, a vote for the libertarian candidate is a waste.

edit: no reason for me to be rude, I just hate seeing people waste their votes when there's a mad hatter in the oval office to get rid of.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 3, 2004, 11:11 pm

Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:How exactly will voting libertarian help anything? I'm sure it's a good platform, but unless there's a huge change in the electorial system, a vote for the libertarian candidate is a waste.

edit: no reason for me to be rude, I just hate seeing people waste their votes when there's a mad hatter in the oval office to get rid of.

You are right in one way and wrong in another Drolgin. For starters, there will not be a libertarian president in 2004, I fully realize this. However parties get matching funds and chances to be on ballots based on past election performances, not to mention the 2 major parties tend to pick up the banner of any third party that shows success, so it may cause them to alter a stance to be more centrist, or realistic. Then add in the fact that their are Congressional elections, State Governors, State Representatives, etc to vote for, and each one elected strengthens the only party that places individual rights and liberties to the forefront.

The system is designed by the majority parties to supress any chance of a third party candidate, only people voting their conscious will change that. I seriously doubt that Kerry will be the next President and if he is that he will be better than Bush, so I am going to vote Libertarian and improve their numbers, if one Kerry backer agree and did the same in my state, that would result in a deserving party receiving 2 votes rather than it actually influencing th election.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 4, 2004, 9:42 am

Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:How exactly will voting libertarian help anything? I'm sure it's a good platform, but unless there's a huge change in the electorial system, a vote for the libertarian candidate is a waste.

edit: no reason for me to be rude, I just hate seeing people waste their votes when there's a mad hatter in the oval office to get rid of.

Im a libertarian myself, a vote libertarian is not a vote for this election, its a vote for the future, and for hope that one day we abandon the two party system. Obviously im supporting Kerry in this election being that I live in florida and i find it crutial for this countrys progress that we do everything possible to get rid of this administration. To be fair, a 3rd part could never flourish with the electoral college.
Honestly though we need some senate seats, maybe a govenor or some house seats before we have a chance of bringing in a president.
Honeslt i think the party is making a mistake, and instead of putting all there effort into the presidential election, they should work hard to put the word out in local, smaller elections in order to build up a reputation.

heh, kylere the libertarian party is anything but moderate...they are extremely liberal and extremely right-wing, but our countrys standards anyhow

Thess · Post by **Thess** » August 4, 2004, 11:36 am

What exactly is a right wing liberal?

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » August 4, 2004, 12:16 pm

Thess wrote:What exactly is a right wing liberal?

It somewhat depends on what definition of liberal you are using. Go back 50 years or so and the political definition of liberal was fairly close to the modern day libertarian. One that believes in the liberty of the individual. Over time, in the U.S. at least liberal came to be associated with a political position that while still supporting liberty on social issues, was decidedly less so on economic issues. Although even on the social issues the support for liberty in social issues at least among the democratic party was stronger in theory than in practice, much like the republicans are often not nearly as supportive of economic freedom as they claim they are.

Left/Right has always seemed to me like a pretty crude measure to look at political positions with. What exactly is being measured on the scale to determine if you are "right" or "left"? And what about positions like libertarianism which would place you to the left on some issues and to the right on others.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 4, 2004, 3:02 pm

Thess wrote:What exactly is a right wing liberal?

its a stupid online test, but the placement on this chart can show political standings on a slightly larger then one dementional scale

http://politicalcompass.org/

either way chmee gave a good explanation, even though i would consider myself to be fairly moderate on economic issues and not too much "right wing"

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 4, 2004, 6:48 pm

Kelshara wrote:Yeah because obviously I can't be allowed to rip my own CDs to play on my MP3 player! Ohnoz!

yes retard that is exactly what most people rip cd's and movies for.

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » August 4, 2004, 7:02 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Kelshara wrote:Yeah because obviously I can't be allowed to rip my own CDs to play on my MP3 player! Ohnoz!
yes retard that is exactly what most people rip cd's and movies for.

Some do, And should have the right to back up their music.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 4, 2004, 7:12 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Kelshara wrote:Yeah because obviously I can't be allowed to rip my own CDs to play on my MP3 player! Ohnoz!
yes retard that is exactly what most people rip cd's and movies for.

Umm Kyoukan, fuck off, you accuse everyone of crimes without trial.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 4, 2004, 7:17 pm

yes retard that is exactly what most people rip cd's and movies for.

Actually I do, and I have no plans of unpacking our gazillion CDs after moving since I got it all in MP3 form already. And considerng you're just trolling you truly come across as really sad. See also: You posting the bittorrent post in the Movies section.

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » August 4, 2004, 8:22 pm

Xzion wrote:
Thess wrote:What exactly is a right wing liberal?
its a stupid online test, but the placement on this chart can show political standings on a slightly larger then one dementional scale

http://politicalcompass.org/

either way chmee gave a good explanation, even though i would consider myself to be fairly moderate on economic issues and not too much "right wing"

Hmmm, interesting...

My score was:

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.90

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » August 4, 2004, 8:48 pm

mine was just about where I thought it was
Economic Left/Right: -1.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.97

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » August 4, 2004, 8:51 pm

I got to this question:

The growing fusion between information and entertainment is a worrying contribution to the public's shrinking attention span.

but couldn't focus and gave up.

Just kidding!

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -5.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.23

I'm pretty happy with that estimation. I'm like frickin' Ghandi, dudes!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 4, 2004, 9:30 pm

Kelshara wrote:Actually I do, and I have no plans of unpacking our gazillion CDs after moving since I got it all in MP3 form already. And considerng you're just trolling you truly come across as really sad. See also: You posting the bittorrent post in the Movies section.

I never said I don't steal music or movies. I am just one of the few that will own up to it in a discussion about peoples "rights" to copy and redistribute other people's digital IP.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 4, 2004, 10:44 pm

Let's see I have bought Pink Floyd's The Wall

Tiwce on LP
Three times on Cassettes
4 on CD
2 VHS
and 2 different DVD versions

Guess what Kyoukan, I do not consider any format I transfer the media to now to be piracy. I OWN that SOB.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » August 4, 2004, 10:47 pm

Im very, very, very, VERY unsure that its on beta!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 5, 2004, 1:35 am

Kylere wrote:Let's see I have bought Pink Floyd's The Wall

Tiwce on LP
Three times on Cassettes
4 on CD
2 VHS
and 2 different DVD versions

well that was a little stupid of you now wasn't it?

Post by **Sylvus** » August 5, 2004, 1:45 am

I seriously hope that you had a wicked acid habit and kept eating the media or something...

Pink Floyd is the most overrated band of all time!

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 5, 2004, 9:00 am

kyoukan wrote:
Kylere wrote:Let's see I have bought Pink Floyd's The Wall

Tiwce on LP
Three times on Cassettes
4 on CD
2 VHS
and 2 different DVD versions
well that was a little stupid of you now wasn't it?

Media wears out

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » August 5, 2004, 9:41 am

Sylvus wrote:I seriously hope that you had a wicked acid habit and kept eating the media or something...

Pink Floyd is the most overrated band of all time!

There a LITTLE overrrated, but there still an amazing band. I guess when it comes to PF's scycadelic(hell no i cant spell that)-like style, its something only some people are able to get into

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 5, 2004, 3:55 pm

Kylere wrote:Media wears out

so do cars. do you steal a new one when your old one breaks down?

Kargyle · Post by **Kargyle** » August 5, 2004, 4:19 pm

Sylvus wrote:I seriously hope that you had a wicked acid habit and kept eating the media or something...

Pink Floyd is the most overrated band of all time!

Not to thread jack, but you're on crack. The crown for most overrated band easily belongs to Nirvana. Pink Floyd is easily one of the greatest bands ever.

On the subject at hand, the law is stupid. I'm adamantly against digital theft and copy right infringement, but people have a legitimate right to rip media that they have legally purchased.

I agree with Kyoukan on her disdain for the self richeous fuck sticks who think they have some magical right to steal simply because they aren't actually stealing a physical object, or because they don't like the business practices of the record labels, or whatever other lame excuse they use to self rationalize their theivery.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 5, 2004, 7:25 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Kylere wrote:Media wears out
so do cars. do you steal a new one when your old one breaks down?

This is an analogy that does not hold water, and if you thought instead of talked you would have realized that yourself.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 5, 2004, 10:41 pm

why does it not hold water? you see here on earth, you have to actually explain your argument.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 5, 2004, 11:29 pm

It doesn't hold water because it makes zero sense, you buy an album for the music not for the material of the album. That has never been under debate, the law allows for personal backup copies.

The law does not allow you to use another car, because you are buying the car, not an entitlement to transportation.

Stop smoking pot, get a job, and learn something other than the world views you are being fed by Michael Moore.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 5, 2004, 11:33 pm

when you buy an album you are not purchasing indivual rights to the IP contained on that album. when you buy an album you are purchasing just that: an album.

get a job? I would bet my next month's income that I made more money than you last year than you'll make in the next five.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 5, 2004, 11:44 pm

Maybe in Canada Kyoukan, but in the US when you buy an album you are buying the music, not the media.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 6, 2004, 1:40 am

show me one fucking single piece of legislation in the US that says that and I will make xouqua ban my IP. if you can't then just admit you are full of shit.. AGAIN.. and stop yapping like a small dog.

Kguku · Post by **Kguku** » August 6, 2004, 3:49 am

I don't know about the US, but if you lend me your CD's for a while, kyou, I can legally copy them for myself here in Canada! Hooray for CD levies.

However be aware you cannot copy it for me!

http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml#copy_for_friends

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 6, 2004, 10:52 am

Don't know about the US but I know in several European countries you can legally make copies for yourself and close personal contacts (close family and friends). So the whole situation is a pretty good mess.

Kargyle · Post by **Kargyle** » August 6, 2004, 11:42 am

You can in the US. Making persoanl copies and copies for friends and family falls under fair usage. Napster tried to use the fair usage as its defense against the RIAA, but the court decide (rightfully in my opinion) that fair usage does not include the mass distrubution to strangers.

Thess · Post by **Thess** » August 6, 2004, 12:35 pm

Economic Left/Right: -5.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.13

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 6, 2004, 6:43 pm

http://www.eff.org/cafe/gross1.html also http://fairuse.stanford.edu/

Do I have the right to make a copy of my CD for my own personal use?
Yes. The fair use doctrine allows an individual to make a copy of their lawfully obtained copyrighted work for their own personal use. Allowing people to make a copy of copyrighted music for their personal use provides for enhanced consumer convenience through legitimate and lawful copying. It can also enlarge the exploitable market for the rights holders. The fair use privilege's personal use right is what allows an individual to make a backup copy of their computer software as an essential defense against future media failure.

Personal use also permits music fans to make "mix tapes" or compilations of their favorite songs from their own personal music collection or the radio for their own personal enjoyment in a more convenient format, or "format shifting." Another example of acceptable personal use copying of a copyrighted work is "time-shifting," or the recording of a copyrighted program to enjoy at a later and more convenient time.

As new media present new ways for people to enjoy music, the public's fair use rights accompany them into the electronic frontier. Now, music fans have the right and ability to copy their own music collection onto their own computer storage device and create customized play lists for their own personal use and enjoyment of their music.

It is important to note that while consumers have the right to listen to their own music collection for their own personal use, they do not have the right, however, to make their music collections available to others by uploading them onto the Internet for public downloading.

Okay Kyoukan, get the fuck off of VV

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » August 6, 2004, 7:46 pm

oh you must have missed where I said legislation and not gay quasi-pirate website that gives you an unsubstantiated overview of your "rights"

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 6, 2004, 8:09 pm

Stanford.edu gay quasi-pirate website? Wow, you got smacked down hard this time. Just admit it.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 6, 2004, 8:13 pm

Kylere wrote:http://www.eff.org/cafe/gross1.html also http://fairuse.stanford.edu/

Do I have the right to make a copy of my CD for my own personal use?
Yes. The fair use doctrine allows an individual to make a copy of their lawfully obtained copyrighted work for their own personal use. Allowing people to make a copy of copyrighted music for their personal use provides for enhanced consumer convenience through legitimate and lawful copying. It can also enlarge the exploitable market for the rights holders. The fair use privilege's personal use right is what allows an individual to make a backup copy of their computer software as an essential defense against future media failure.

Personal use also permits music fans to make "mix tapes" or compilations of their favorite songs from their own personal music collection or the radio for their own personal enjoyment in a more convenient format, or "format shifting." Another example of acceptable personal use copying of a copyrighted work is "time-shifting," or the recording of a copyrighted program to enjoy at a later and more convenient time.

As new media present new ways for people to enjoy music, the public's fair use rights accompany them into the electronic frontier. Now, music fans have the right and ability to copy their own music collection onto their own computer storage device and create customized play lists for their own personal use and enjoyment of their music.

It is important to note that while consumers have the right to listen to their own music collection for their own personal use, they do not have the right, however, to make their music collections available to others by uploading them onto the Internet for public downloading.

Okay Kyoukan, get the fuck off of VV

None of that indicates that you have any legal rights whatsoever to the actual content- those rights are still reserved to the copyright holders. That's why you'll find "All Rights Reserved" on most CD's and/or CD cases. They are specifically telling you that they are NOT transferring any of those ownership rights to you. Buying a CD does not make you an owner of the music, just that particular copy of it.

Not even Lars Ulrich gives a shit if you copy a CD onto cassette so you can listen to it on your old Walkman, but that's not really what all the hubbub is all about, is it?

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » August 6, 2004, 8:15 pm

Actually it is. I have the right to rip my own CDs to MP3s. They are trying to block the right to even talk about CD rippers.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 6, 2004, 8:21 pm

You're right, it's the original topic. Sorry for not being clearer.

I was referring to-

Kylere wrote:Maybe in Canada Kyoukan, but in the US when you buy an album you are buying the music, not the media.

and the general P2P debate.

Fuck the ripper ban, that's bullshit.

Kylere · Post by **Kylere** » August 7, 2004, 12:46 am

It doesn't matter what the facts of the world are, Kyoukan picks and chooses her reality.

Legislation is what causes Fair Use, and the reason you can make backup copies is that you are buying the music not the media, if you were buying the media until it wore out, backups would be illegal. I am not going to search through US Code to prove a proven.

To be even more specific you are buying the right to listen to the music, and if I buy that right multiple times, or even once, then by US law I can listen to it in whatever format I desire as it stands right now. However there are companies trying change that right now.

Mak · Post by **Mak** » August 7, 2004, 1:02 am

Kylere wrote:To be even more specific you are buying the right to listen to the music, and if I buy that right multiple times, or even once, then by US law I can listen to it in whatever format I desire as it stands right now.

Are you sure that's a correct interpretation of Fair Use? Does buying an album on cassette entitle you to download a more digitally perfect copy later? While that case could be made, I don't think I ultimately agree in your right to do that. If you were to apply that same logic a little differently, you argue could that because you bought a ticket to see a movie in a theater, you have a right to a free DVD of it later, and I'd say that's very incorrect.

Keep in mind that I'm not disagreeing with your position that you can make a back-up copy of music you already own. I do disagree with your position- at least as I understand it to be- that that gives you some sort of rights to that same piece of music in different types of media later.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » August 7, 2004, 9:20 am

Mak wrote:
Kylere wrote:To be even more specific you are buying the right to listen to the music, and if I buy that right multiple times, or even once, then by US law I can listen to it in whatever format I desire as it stands right now.
Are you sure that's a correct interpretation of Fair Use? Does buying an album on cassette entitle you to download a more digitally perfect copy later? While that case could be made, I don't think I ultimately agree in your right to do that. If you were to apply that same logic a little differently, you argue could that because you bought a ticket to see a movie in a theater, you have a right to a free DVD of it later, and I'd say that's very incorrect.

Keep in mind that I'm not disagreeing with your position that you can make a back-up copy of music you already own. I do disagree with your position- at least as I understand it to be- that that gives you some sort of rights to that same piece of music in different types of media later.

You are correct. You are allowed to make copies of YOUR copy. You cannot have a record in the attic, and legally download an MP3 of that album. You also can only back it up for your own purposes. You cannot distribute, or use for exhibition in any way.