Google removes Kazaa Lite results from search

that's just crap. However kazaa lites official website still comes up when you search for it.

 

That will just make a search engine developed in China or some other country that doesn't recognize copyrights the winner.

The RIAA can not win.

DD

 

An occasional battle, yes. But the war, no way.

I've cut down on the downloading but not because of any ruling. I'm just picky. I was looking for an obscure song over the weekend just for kicks and had no trouble finding multiple files. If someone is at home right now, just open up Kazaa and see how many people are sharing how many files at this very moment.

The RIAA can not win.

 

agreed. i've had no problems finding anything on Kazza Lite.

the morons over at the RIAA are fighting a lost cause. good for them.

 

The labels will just blame the costs of fighting piracy as a defense as to why they charge $18.99 for crappy music

 

If you read the disclamer it says that Kazaa itself invoked the DMCA against Kazaa lite because of copyright infringement.

Funny that this has nothing to do with the RIAA at all.

 

I hate the RIAA (whether or not they have to do with this) and I dislike Kazaa for all that spyware crap.

Here you go:

http://search.lycos.com/default.asp?lpv=1&loc=searchhp&tab=web&query=kazaa+lite

 

Excellent point.

 

What is your opinion on this matter, Jeff?

 

On this? Kazaa has a right to do whatever they like including protect their trademarks.

On the issue of downloading, I've posted a LOT on the issue so I won't bother to go into it again.

 

I know Mrs. JB said she buys music online, so I would venture to guess that Jeff's opinion is in line with hers.

...or at least if he knows what's good for him it better be

 

Yes, she does BUY music online through Apple's Music Store. I do as well and have since the day it was launched.

Being a long-time musician, my opinion on downloading is pretty damn complex and, admittedly, has changed over time.

 

I would assume you are anti-Kazaa.

 

bnb -- the houston chronicle doesn't have to print the big news stories of the day...they're a private entity.

in the same way, google doesn't have to do anything it doesn't want to do...it's privately owned.

 

I have kind of a unique view of this. As someone with clients whose web sites depend on traffic generated by Google, I can understand your issue. In fact, Google is under heavy scrutiny right now from search engine placement specialist who have suggested Google practices retaliation against certain sites it doesn't like by de-listing them.

In fact, there have been reports of employees of Google having angry exchanges with webmasters and de-listing them from the engine just to spite them.

On the other hand, Google also has to protect itself from outside lawsuits and, in this instance, I'm sure that is exactly what they are doing.

Not necessarily. I find Kazaa, Napster and others to be really innovative uses of technology. I also think the RIAA was absolutely moronic not to embrace that technology. And, frankly, having seen the absolutely corrupt nature of the music industry from the inside, I have no love lost for the RIAA or its cronies.

On the other hand, I know songwriters and others who represent a sizable chunk of the music business and who suffer as a direct result of downloading. These are people not making millions but rather making a normal wage ($30K - $100K per year) as a songwriter. So, I sympathize with their plight and see the big picture that this isn't just about Metallica losing a few thousand bucks out of their millions.

I also do not recognize the concept that music should be free. It's a tremendous amount of work and we live in a free country so artists should be allowed to profit by the sweat of their labor.

As I said, it is a complex issue for me. I can see it from both sides. I don't blame the downloaders or even the people who facilitate them. I'm not a fan of the RIAA and its tactics but I understand why they are doing what they are doing.

I don't have any answers.

 

I recognize your points Max. And I'm not really sure of my position on this. At first whim I tend to agree with you.

On one level, if people dislike google's distortions they are free to use another search engine. Let the markets prevail, etc.

The issue I was raising, though --(and it wasn't an original thought, by the way -- twigged it from an editorial of some sort -- source long forgotten), was that at what point is there a 'public good element' here? There are (IMO woefully inadequate) concentration of ownership standards for media because of the influence the media does have. Some have argued that google may have even more influence (because of its absolute dominance) and questioned whether this is a good thing.

I know y'all hate regulation and I have no idea what the solution may be, but the civil libertarian in me gets a wee bit concerned when a 'private company' which is charged with disseminating information may manipulating things.

Would you feel differently if the Googlites decided to only report results supporting one side of any of the other arguments bandied about in this forum?

 

Ok.. I just read the story, and I gotta say...freaking hilarious.

http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5070227.html

Here's the jist...

Kazaa lite is a 'hacked version' of Kazaa, I didn't know this. Seems Kazaa's mad about COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT and has hired lawyers to protect ITS REVENUES....because people are using the spy free software.

So...

A company, who's very existence is based on copyright infringement is threatening lawsuits when someone copies their stuff...I hope Kazaa gets sued to kingdom come and back. Bunch of hypocrites. It's ok to "share" other peoples work, but not ok to mess with their stuff.