P2P Dealt a blow

[KernelPanic]

...by the US Government.

A landmark ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to put a financial pinch on file-swapping companies, but a number of them may escape the grim reaper, say financial experts and attorneys.

That assessment came quickly Monday after the Supreme Court handed a major victory to record labels and movie studios, which had filed lawsuits against peer-to-peer file-swapping companies such as Grokster for allegedly allowing copyright infringements to occur on their networks.

http://news.com.com/Court+ruling+could+squeeze+P2P+pennies/2100-1030_3-5764949.html?part=rss&tag=5764949&subj=news

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4627679.stm


Now is it me, or are the Western governments becoming more and more brazen in their public displays of affection to corporations?

How and why should a technology creator be held accountable for the actions of it's users?
God damn, Corporations and 'the State' are realising that the Internet is running further from their reach than they would like and they are desperately trying to legislate it back. Just like the 2257  :mad:


PS. The reason I have placed it here is because these pieces of software are in the main the antithesis of DRM and it's ilk.

Discuss.

[MrX]

great, because I live in Canada and we're not as much as a corporate machine as the USA is.

[Orethrius]

I wonder if the Bay has received any new cease and desist orders to flame over this.

[toadlife]

This isn't a blow to p2p at all. It's a blow to the scum sucking companies who market spyware laced p2p apps.

[KernelPanic]

This isn't a blow to p2p at all. It's a blow to the scum sucking companies who market spyware laced p2p apps.

Not really, the wording is far too vague to say that.

[xyle_one]

How is it bad? Companies make software with the sole intention to use it for illegal purposes, and you get mad when legislation is passed to stop it? If anything, this will be enough to get file sharing out of the public eye so that it will be something worthwhile again. No more kazaa-esque networks of kiddies sharing complete crap.

[KernelPanic]

How is it bad? Companies make software with the sole intention to use it for illegal purposes, and you get mad when legislation is passed to stop it? If anything, this will be enough to get file sharing out of the public eye so that it will be something worthwhile again. No more kazaa-esque networks of kiddies sharing complete crap.

The point is, Ford do not get sued when someone runs a small child down.

British American Tobacco are not held accountable when a smoker dies of lung  cancer.
H&K are not held accountable when a crazed gunman kills your Grandmother.

But when it comes to technology all rationality seems to go out of the window. Why?

[xyle_one]

p2p software such as morpheus are created with the sole intention of sharing copyrighted material. That is software to facilitate illegal activity.

Smoking, i can agree with. However, there have been numerous lawsuits where the prosecution successfully won against the tobacco industry. Tobacco is also not marketed as something with the intent to kill you, even if they do, in fact, kill you. p2p apps are marketed as tools to download files illegally. Cars are not sold as tools of murder either. Guns are sold as tools of protection.

I think it really comes down to how they presented themselves. They fucked up, and now we all suffer. Like I said though, if anything this will "hopefully" take file sharing off the radar for a while, and those that aren't idiots about it can get back to really moving the technology forward.

[KernelPanic]

I think it really comes down to how they presented themselves. They fucked up, and now we all suffer. Like I said though, if anything this will "hopefully" take file sharing off the radar for a while, and those that aren't idiots about it can get back to really moving the technology forward.

Perhaps so, the creator of Freenet and the head of the British Phonographic Industry said as much in a BBC Newsnight interview.

I'm actually no great proponent of copyright infringment but I do oppose governmental acts like this against free enterprise. The problem is, some of these P2P applications are used mostly for legal activities whilst others are not but they are all placed under the same legal jeopardy and very few of them market themselves as a tool for subverting the law.

[Kintaro]

Funny you mention Tobacco. Someone in australia sucsesfully sued and won for getting lung cancer! Hell I might do that when I get lung cancer!

[Aloone_Jonez]

I can't see this tobacco companies being sued anymore as in the UK all packets of cirgarettes have to display health warnings in capital letters like this for example:
SMOKING KILLS

SMOKING DAMAGES YOUR UNBORN BABY

SMOKING CAUSES IMPOTANCE

Now I can't help but laugh when I see people opening a packet of cigarettes

[Refalm]

SMOKING DAMAGES YOUR UNBORN BABY

So that's why people smoke after they had sex

[Kintaro]

I always get the SMOKING CAN HARM YOUR BABY WHEN PREGNANT packs down here in australia, I think I will live a long time because I can't get a baby, and also that baby is not me.

One day I am going to start a Tobbaco company that uses gentically engineered tobacco to have a rich blend of vitamins and healthy stuff, along with some chemical that implants stem-cells in the lungs so they grow healtier, and make the government pass a law so the packs read SMOKING IS FUCKING AWESOME MAN.

[Refalm]

This is how it looks like here:



"SMOKERS DIE YOUNGER"

[MrX]

in Canada our smoking packs have to have 50% covered with a text and a picture warning.
read this annoying government site
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/tobacco/youth/index.html

hey, as long as I don't smoke before I am 19, I have a 15% chance of becoming a smoker!