PDA

View Full Version : US Supreme Court



Todd Fields
2005-03-03, 16:13
--- Aaron Zinck <azinck3 (AT) ufl (DOT) edu> wrote:


> I find this interesting, and while I'm not sure where I stand
> with respect
> to this case (I don't know enough about it) I don't understand
> what
> financial/business interest Slim Devices has in this case.
> I'm no lawyer
> and may be a bit dense about these types of things, but it
> seems as though
> the case is about peer-to-peer file sharing--not DRM (which I

I'm no lawyer either or that familiar with the case but I would
imagine that if the Betamax ruling were overturned then it would
not only affect how you can use P2P software but how you use all
sorts of tecnology such as CD burners. It's the Betamax case
that protects your rights to rip or copy your own music.

I'm certainly no angel when it comes to P2P and would be lying
if I said I didn't ever download stuff. But it cracks me up
that these companies' even try to pretend that they created
their software for anything other than illegal file sharing (be
it music or other). Sure there are legal uses for P2P and I
would hate to see a ruling against them, but if someone were to
try and sell me on the pretense that they were motivated by
anything other than the sight of the 50,000,000 users and
potential customers they saw orphaned by Napster I would be
insulted. Of course, I realize they are trying to win a case so
they will base their case on merits by which they can win.

Ben Klaas
2005-03-03, 16:55
> But it cracks me up
> that these companies' even try to pretend that they created
> their software for anything other than illegal file sharing (be
> it music or other).

I get new Linux distros from BitTorrent when they come out. Everything
from the Mozilla foundation has a bittorrent link. So, there are
definitely non-pirate applications that P2P is good for...

I don't disagree that the lion's share of internet traffic on P2P is for
"non-legal" use (whatever that means these days), but to say that the
software is created for the sole purpose of illegal file sharing is
incorrect.

the wired interview with the bittorrent creator is a fascinating
read...I'm pretty sure I would be sick of this guy within 10 minutes of
meeting him, but he's clearly driven by things other than illegal file
sharing...
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/bittorrent.html

this thread may seem like it's going a bit off-topic to some, but it
really isn't. These questions are huge to enthusiasts like those on this
list. It matters to slimdevices, and hopefully it should matter to you.

#!/ben

Michael Peters
2005-03-03, 19:35
On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:55:09 -0600, Ben Klaas <bklaas (AT) occamnetworks (DOT) com> wrote:
> > But it cracks me up
> > that these companies' even try to pretend that they created
> > their software for anything other than illegal file sharing (be
> > it music or other).
>
> I get new Linux distros from BitTorrent when they come out. Everything
> from the Mozilla foundation has a bittorrent link. So, there are
> definitely non-pirate applications that P2P is good for...

I have seen P2P used by university students who want to colaborate
with each other on a project and either don't have the technical know
how to set up a ftp/webdav/etc server, or don't want to go through the
paperwork to have university computer services do it for them.

They could colaborate by sharing files over aim or something - but
with P2P they just have to leave the computers on.

Personally I think a better solution is webDAV or ftp etc. but those
are more difficult to set up than a P2P app for the average person.

P2P has its place - I don't think it should be used to violate
copyright law, but it does have its legitimate uses.

--
http://mpeters.us/