> RIAA Continues to Sue File-Traders
> The RIAA today announced a new round of copyright infringement
> lawsuits against 745 individuals accused of illegal P2P file-trading,
> including computer network users at 17 colleges.
>
> “Theft is theft and should be treated as such,” said RIAA Pres.
> CARY SHERMAN. “When college students illegally download, they not only
> put themselves at risk for lawsuits but also put the next generation of
> music at risk as well. Our ability to invest in new bands and new
music is
> seriously threatened by online theft.”

The quote by Cary Sherman is interesting to me, as he (and others)
call file sharing "theft". Interesting, because this is an
adaptation/co-option/corruption of common law theft, which
is defined as "depriving the rightful owner of his property".
No such deprivation occurs with software/intellectual property,
which can be reproduced at-will.

Unless the property is the profit from rental, which is not what
they usually are talking about. It's the digital bits, that's the
property, that's the theft.

But if you listen to them, the RIAA and their lawyers,
this is inconsistant! They try to have it both ways.
If their property is the bits, then when I purchase
a CD or DVD, I buy the bits, right? I'm the new owner,
they're mine to do with as I see fit, including
file sharing, etc.

The legal basis of IP law is very tenuous indeed.
The recording industry is in fact inventing a new
branch of law in an attempt to hang on to the
power they've had over consumers and artists for
years.

The model they're using is more like a rental
agreement. When you purchase CD or DVD, you
don't actually own the bits. You are just
purchasing a license for certain use. But
if the bits are placed on the internet by
an anonymous untraceable source, then there no
actionable offense against anyone who grabs
the bits, since there was no contract with
them, only the original (anonymous) purchaser /
uploader.

The scary thing is that to get around this
legal inconsistancy (which the RIAA lawyers
are well aware of) they are beginning to
pressure computer manufactures to include
special hardware and software to handle
"rights management", which could make it
impossible in the future to anonymously
post the bits. Scary, not so much for the
file-sharing issue, but because the free
flow of any/all information on the internet
will be severely restricted, which does
not serve the public interest.

But IP law has never been about serving
the larger public interest, just to server
a handful of already wealthy corporations
and fat cats...


--
Bill Huston
607-724-1755
bhuston@...