RIAA turns on Grokster users

07-23-02

RIAA turns on Grokster users

The RIAA have turned on Grokster file-sharing users directly. Users found to have shared files the RIAA believe to have copyright on, are now contacted by Grokster with a warning to stop trading these files, on the off-chance of being removed from the network completely. This is how it works. The RIAA notifies Grokster that a certain user has traded files that infringe the copyrights of their artists and according to Grokster's terms of use, continued violations of such rights will result in termination of their username registration..

 

And this:

Could Hollywood hack your PC?


By Declan McCullagh
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
July 23, 2002, 4:45 PM PT


WASHINGTON--Congress is about to consider an entertainment industry proposal that would authorize copyright holders to disable PCs used for illicit file trading.
A draft bill seen by CNET News.com marks the boldest political effort to date by record labels and movie studios to disrupt peer-to-peer networks that they view as an increasingly dire threat to their bottom line.

Sponsored by Reps. Howard Berman, D-Calif., and Howard Coble, R-N.C., the measure would permit copyright holders to perform nearly unchecked electronic hacking if they have a "reasonable basis" to believe that piracy is taking place. Berman and Coble plan to introduce the 10-page bill this week.

The legislation would immunize groups such as the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America from all state and federal laws if they disable, block or otherwise impair a "publicly accessible peer-to-peer network."

Anyone whose computer was damaged in the process must receive the permission of the U.S. attorney general before filing a lawsuit, and a suit could be filed only if the actual monetary loss was more than $250.

According to the draft, the attorney general must be given complete details about the "specific technologies the copyright holder intends to use to impair" the normal operation of the peer-to-peer network. Those details would remain secret and would not be divulged to the public.

The draft bill doesn't specify what techniques, such as viruses, worms, denial-of-service attacks, or domain name hijacking, would be permissible. It does say that a copyright-hacker should not delete files, but it limits the right of anyone subject to an intrusion to sue if files are accidentally erased.

Because Congress only has about five work weeks left before it is scheduled to adjourn for the year, the outlook for the draft bill is uncertain.

But because its sponsors include top Republican and Democratic committee chairmen, it could receive a warm welcome in the House of Representatives at a hearing tentatively scheduled for this fall. Coble is the chairman of the House subcommittee on intellectual property, and Berman is the top Democrat on the panel.

Berman wrote in an opinion article this month that "currently, copyright owners are unable to use some useful technological tools to deal with P2P piracy because they face potential, if unintended, liability under a variety of state and federal laws."

"It's a good bill," Gene Smith, a spokeswoman for Berman, said on Monday. "It's always hard to defend theft and piracy--this bill just puts into the hands of the copyright owners technologies that are already being used by the pirates."

Smith said the purpose of the draft bill was to "fight fire with fire, fight technology with technology."

Jessica Litman, a professor at Wayne State University who specializes in copyright law, said the draft bill improperly encourages "vigilante justice."

"I think it's wildly overreaching," Litman said. "Copyright owners are in essence asking Congress to say that peer-to-peer file trading is such a scorch, is so bad, that stopping it is more important than enforcing any other laws that federal or state governments may have passed on computer security, privacy, fraud and so forth."

Litman said that even if a copyright holder accidentally deleted a home video titled "Snow White," the owner of that PC could be out of luck. "Unless I can show economic harm, I can't even be compensated," Litman said. "Even if I want to be compensated, I have to jump through procedural hoops."

The film and music industries already are developing tools to use against rogue file swapping, though they've remained mum on the details. The RIAA says its members have the right to use any "lawful and appropriate self-help measure."

Fritz Attaway, the MPAA's senior vice president for government relations, endorsed Berman's approach on Monday, stressing that law-abiding Internet users should not be concerned.

"No one in the motion picture industry has any interest in invading your computer or doing anything malicious with your files," Attaway said. "The idea is to make unauthorized file sharing sufficiently inconvenient or at least unsuccessful."

The MPAA and RIAA did not respond to requests for comment on Tuesday.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation condemned the draft bill as a sop to Hollywood and the recording industry.

Digital lockdown?
"This is part of a greater strategy that's being implemented by the entertainment industry to lock up and control digital information in general," said Robin Gross, an EFF staff attorney. "The rights that we've enjoyed in the analog space are now being taken away from us because we're entering a digital realm"

Gross said she was concerned by the broad grant of immunity to copyright holders who become computer intruders. "When they screw up, they don't want you to be able to get some sort of retribution from them," she said.

Other sponsors listed on the draft bill include key legislators such as Reps. John Conyers of Michigan, the top Democrat on the full Judiciary committee, Lamar Smith, R-Texas, the chairman of a crime subcommittee, and Robert Wexler, D-Fla. Currently there is no companion legislation in the Senate.

The next step for the draft bill is the House Judiciary subcommittee on intellectual property. A representative for Coble said earlier this month to expect a hearing starting in September, when Congress returns from its August recess.

Berman announced plans for the legislation during a speech to a Washington trade association last month. He represents California's San Fernando Valley, adjacent to Los Angeles and Hollywood's cluster of entertainment companies.

Coble and Berman have jointly written a second draft bill that could sharply limit Americans' rights relating to copying music, taping TV shows, or transferring files through the Internet. But they have said they do not necessarily endorse the plan's details.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-945923.html?tag=fd_lede

 

Interesting:

Entertainment: Some music labels see perks in file sharing

Copyright © 2002
Tribune Media Services

By JON HEALEY, Los Angeles Times

(July 23, 2002 3:34 p.m. EDT) - Like millions of other music lovers, Martin Hall misses the pioneering service from Napster Inc. that let consumers download songs from one another's computers for free.

But Hall isn't your typical music fan. He works for a record label, Merge Records, whose songs were being copied without a dime in compensation.

Merge is among a group of independent labels and artists that view "peer-to-peer" networks as an effective tool for boosting CD sales. The major record companies and many well-known artists, on the other hand, are fighting on multiple fronts to drive consumers away from those systems.

Whereas Merge and others have used peer-to-peer systems to promote little-known artists and new releases, the major labels have sued Napster, Audiogalaxy, Kazaa and three other file-sharing networks, alleging copyright infringement on a grand scale. They also are injecting bogus files onto the most popular networks to stop users from downloading new songs, and they are contemplating lawsuits against consumers who offer huge collections of songs to copy.

The divergent views about file sharing reflect the wide gap in sales and resources between the five major record companies and the many small independents, which say they can't spend the sums needed to get their songs played on commercial radio stations or their music videos aired on cable. That's why it's tough for the music industry to present a unified front - not just on file sharing but also on such technology-driven issues as Internet radio royalties, digital music formats and copy-protected CDs.

The split could pose a problem for the major record companies in their legal battles against the leading peer-to-peer networks. In particular, the efforts by the independents could undermine the major labels' argument that these networks have no significant legitimate use.

"Because we're shut out of (the major labels') distribution system, we have to get our records out, we have to get our records heard, whatever way we can," said Hall, director of publicity and promotions for Durham, N.C.-based Merge. "If it means giving it to Napster, so be it. ... We have to find some way to let people know that the record is here."

Said Cary Sherman, president of the Recording Industry Assn. of America, the industry's largest trade group: "It's up to the artists or label to choose whether to use peer-to-peer service for these purposes. It shouldn't be up to the peer-to-peer service to decide that they're going to take your material and make it available whether you like it or not."

The RIAA has nothing against peer-to-peer technology, Sherman said, as long as copyright holders' rights are respected. That's the approach taken by CenterSpan Corp., whose technology limits file sharing to files the copyright holders have approved for copying.

There's a third approach emerging too: companies that distribute authorized promotional material to users of Kazaa and other hotbeds of piracy. Two examples are Altnet Inc. and FileFreedom, which enable labels and artists to offer samples of their works, identify and expand their followings and even sell downloadable music files.

Altnet, which is co-owned by the original developers of the Kazaa software, tries to direct Kazaa users to copy-protected versions of the songs they are seeking. FileFreedom monitors what its users download from any Internet source, offering information about the artist and, in some cases, promotional material paid for by similar acts.

MaddWest, a hip-hop duo from Indiana that has moved to Los Angeles, is using just about every available peer-to-peer tool to promote its new release. The self-titled CD came out July 2 on 2KSounds Corp. of Woodland Hills, California, an independent label distributed by EMI, one of the five major record companies.

Will people still buy the CD if they can get it for free?

"To think that people who (download) have no sort of ethics, I think that's a little bit of a jump," said AceHa, half of MaddWest. "I think that people have some loyalty," he said, adding that e-mails from fans show that they are, in fact, shelling out cash for the CD.

On the whole, though, CD shipments fell 10 percent in the U.S. last year, when Napster's popularity peaked and a new generation of file-sharing services emerged to supplant it. And sales so far this year are down even further, Sherman of the RIAA said, particularly in countries with widespread high-speed Internet access.

Those figures have convinced many top labels and artists that the file-sharing sites are teaching consumers to switch from buying music to stealing it. But other labels disagree, saying their fans will pay for music they think is good.

Merge promoted its releases on Napster, which shut its service in response to a court order, and Audiogalaxy, which dropped file sharing after the major labels filed suit.

"It's a gamble," Hall said. "Yeah, some people are probably going to burn this (music onto a CD) and never buy it. But hopefully, more people are going to hear it than would hear it otherwise, and then they might buy it."

Even major-label artists can get a promotional push through peer-to-peer networks, said entertainment lawyer Ronda Dixon, whose clients include pop-reggae artist Shaggy.

Dixon said one key to the success of Shaggy's last CD, "Hotshot," was the breakout song "It Wasn't Me." Shaggy's label, Vivendi Universal subsidiary MCA International, had released a different song as a single, but a disc jockey in Hawaii downloaded "It Wasn't Me" from Napster and turned it into a local hit, Dixon said. The record company saw the response and released "It Wasn't Me" to stations across the country, pushing "Hotshot" to the top of the Billboard charts.

MCA representatives declined to comment, but Dixon advocates further discussion of the possibilities.

"We sold 12 million units," Dixon said, "despite (downloading on) numerous peer-to-peer networks. ... I think (labels and artists) need to explore it better rather than dismissing it out of hand."

http://www.nandotimes.com/entertainment/story/475490p-3800512c.html

 

Cancelled ones are cleared. The ones that don't finish will try to connect and finish downloading everytime you re-connect to the network.

 

Well said mrpaige. There is no proof that filesharing is the reason for less CD sales. Instead of the RIAA working on how to offer the consumer a convenient and affordable way to download their favorite songs, they are turning their backs to consumer needs and wants.

Music has entered the digital age. It's time for the music industry to come out of the stone age.