Can RIAA Lawsuits be Blocked by Routers? 97
Chris Frank asks: "With the RIAA stepping up its pressure on internet sharers, what is the legal status of people behind apartment routers? With no logging of who is moving what who can the RIAA prosecute when it tracks a shared file back to that specific shared internet account? I would imagine that many Slashdot readers are behind routers that hold all of their internal IPs private to the outside world. Is the bill payer responsible for all of the users of that router? How can a person be held accountable for the actions of others, especially when there is no proof of who did what?"
Short answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Their new tactic (Score:3, Funny)
Everytime you download an MP3 the RIAA kills a kitten.
Re:Their new tactic (Score:3, Informative)
The original quote: Every time you masturbate, God kills a kitten. Please think of the kittens
Re:Their new tactic (Score:2, Informative)
Please get off the Internet.
Re:Their new tactic (Score:1)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.oralse.cx/contrib/domokunkitty.jpg [oralse.cx]
Re:Their new tactic (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:1)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:2)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:2)
ObFamilyGuy (Score:3, Funny)
Peter: Why did all the dinosaurs die?
Museum Guide: Because you touch yourself at night.
Re:Their new tactic (Score:2)
Re:Their new tactic (Score:2)
felis-domesticus, sounds almost like the name of a roman emperor or something.
ToS (Score:5, Informative)
Re:ToS (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ToS (Score:2)
Isn't this so? IANAL.
Re:ToS (Score:2)
Re:ToS (Score:1)
I think for the RIAA case, it would depend on how extreme the behavior was. If the user (not the owner) of the connection was serving 15GB of MP3s, and collecting 50+ per day, the likelihood of the owner not knowing - assuming they are present - is small.
You may not go after the owner of the line for the actual act, but if you show that the owner reasonably knew the crime was happening, they may be charged with being an accomplice, or perhaps aiding & abetting.
Now, for the ran
Re:ToS (Score:2)
Moderate as "Rational" (Score:1)
Don't you think that 'rational' should be a mod comment?
Re:ToS (Score:1)
Re:ToS (Score:2)
Re:ToS (Score:1)
Re:ToS (Score:2)
Re:ISP's (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:ISP's (Score:3, Insightful)
Likewise, when someone decides to spam over your open wireless network, Speakeasy will quite likely cancel your service for allowing it to happen, whether you personally were the one spamming or not.
Most of the people.... (Score:2)
If I were running a neighborhood wireless LAN, I would make sure that everyone knew the risks of file sharing. Then again, it would be much easier to just make one of your neighbors sign up for the service and pay them IN CASH.
Re:Most of the people.... (Score:3, Insightful)
If my ISP lets me have open Wifi, so I do.
Re:Most of the people.... (Score:2)
heh (Score:2, Funny)
Answer (Score:4, Insightful)
How can a person be held accountable for the actions of others, especially when there is no proof of who did what?
I'm not sure. Perhaps you should ask the people that crafted the RAVE Act. [drugpolicy.org]
Re:Answer (Score:1)
If they are able to make university students pay tens of thousands of dollars [slashdot.org] in fines they must have some power
meshach
Re:Answer (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So hayrides are now illegal? (Score:2)
Ahhh...but all people on X are toddlers (or turn into toddlers). Quite logically this means that all toddlers are on X.
Wheeeeeee!
Re:Answer (Score:3, Informative)
What would probably happen... (Score:2)
Sorry, this won't work. The best way I can think of right now to twhart the RIAA is to force people to upload if they're downloading. That way, the RIAA has to provide its own content in order to find ppl doing it.
Well that's not the greatest way ever, but it would be damned amusing.
Re:What would probably happen... (Score:1)
Re:What would probably happen... (Score:2)
Re:What would probably happen... (Score:2)
If you have to ask . . . (Score:2)
Apartment Building ISPs (Score:1, Insightful)
The most obvious result... (Score:2, Insightful)
ISP May Drop You, But... (Score:3, Funny)
In fact, it is possible that everyone behind the router could be file-sharing. As long as the cloud of doubt remains, though (and the router logs remain non-existant), the router owner shouldn't be on the hook for anything beyond violating the terms of service with their provider.
Of course, IANAL, so ignore all of that and buy all of your music for full price at Best Buy. Rat out your friends. Run Win XP. Choose a starter home. Choose leisurewear and matching luggage...
Sure... and use DMCA against RIAA (Score:4, Interesting)
DMCA Section 202.512.(a) [loc.gov]
Re:Sure... and use DMCA against RIAA (Score:1)
Re:Sure... and use DMCA against RIAA (Score:4, Informative)
The original link I wanted to show: Full text of DMCA legislation [loc.gov]
I also found this: DMCA Summary (i.e. written in plain English) [loc.gov] Look at page 8. Specifically, Title II Section 512. There are provisions there for ISPs. This section was added so that ISPs should not be held liable to what their users are doing. You are required, once you receive a subpoena, to reveal the identity of the person in question. However, this can be impossible if you run a wireless AP and don't log MACs or you can even claim that the person was using a fake MAC. In any case, you have a lot of leeway.
Anyone hit by the RIAA extortion lawsuit should claim ISP rights!
Re:Sure... and use DMCA against RIAA (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually... (Score:4, Interesting)
A - B - C - D
Assume that you are host B, and you VPN to host C, who happens to be in France (with you in the Canada). Host D also VPNs to the guy in france, but he never tells you who that guy is (he is careful to not even give any hints of that).
You allow host A to VPN to you, and A is someone you thought you could trust, in the USA. But he is only an RIAA narc. He connects to your network, and discovers that host D runs a large mp3 ftp server. But the narc on host A only knows your own public IP (which might as well be your identity, it will lead to it easily enough). You however, are outside of the jurisdiction of the USA. The RIAA won't be able to sic criminal prosecution on you, and even if they tried, you have a good chance of beating extradition "Your Honor, I only participate in an experimental hobbyist network". Besides which, they don't want you, but rather your computer or ISP's logs. The RIAA is big enough to try to prosecute this in civil court... but how can they force you to reveal the identity of host D, when you don't know it yourself?
And, the network could be made even larger, so that they might have to hop from host to host, forcing the revelation of the next hop's identity. How much would that cost them, and could host D vanish before they got close? Imagine not a chain of hosts, but a square mesh. Now, instead of just the 2 routes, you have 4 or 6... they can't even tell which of your routes is C, which is G or Z. So, at that point, even your ISP's logs aren't enough, they have to confiscate your computer.
I think the scheme is rather strong, but I'd happily take suggestions. Anyone(not in the USA) want to help me build it?
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
nullsoft doesn't approve it's distribution officially anymore(i guess something to do with the owners, never
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
You think I'm talking IRC and p2p, the other reply thinks I'm talking p2p alone.
And none of the implementations you mention even do international links, except through random chance. I'm starting to believe that everyone that reads slashdot suffers from a lack of imagination....
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
Re:Actually... (Score:2)
Duh.
And IP-over-freenet is the most absurd thing I've ever heard of. My scheme gives you secure/anonymous IP, without the overhead of freenet. You build applicatio
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
Freenet MIGHT only use links within a country - or it won't. It doesn't matter - you still have plausable deniability since you don't know what's passing through, links are saturated, stored content is encrypted etc.
There's
who's watching? (Score:1)
The problem comes when these files are made available to people outside the intranet... w
Who's really commiting the infringement? (Score:2)
If I had all my (legit) music files on an SMB share and somebody left the port on the firewall open so that SMB was enabled, have I committed a copyright infringement?
Re:Who's really commiting the infringement? (Score:2)
So, YES, you are liable -- you made the music available. You CAN'T make music files available on an SMB share (since you are copying, or facilitating).
Ratboy.
Re:Who's really commiting the infringement? (Score:2)
I copy my material to my own physical disk array. I can do that. Apparently though, if I then open CIFS or NFS access to that disk array, I've infringed on the copyright. It seems strange and counterintuitive that copying files from my media to my other media is allowed, and giving access to my media is allowed, but putting the two together isn't. I don't think the courts are going to see this as cut and dried in either direction.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Who's really commiting the infringement? (Score:1)
This seems all the more true as long as people are being prosecuted for "hacking" offenses that reall
Wireless Routers (Score:2)
Why Should You Not Be Held Accountable? (Score:2)
Wrong question. The courts would ask:
"Why should a person not be held responsible for knowingly operating a facility by which he knowingly allowed users to engage in illegal acts?"
If you had reason to believe your users were illegal copying files, and you took no action to stop them, then you, it seems to me, can be held accountable.
Re:Why Should You Not Be Held Accountable? (Score:2)
If I was a school administrator, I'd consider making use of the school's netowrk contingent on the student's specific written acceptance of legal and financial responsibility for any harm attributable to that use.
Common Carrier (Score:1)
IANAL however so I may be way off base here.
tax (Score:2)
I Didn't Do It (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, many home computers on the Internet have a single account and are shared by multiple people. Say three people all use the same PC and when sued, all three say they didn't know about the problem. What then?
Re:I Didn't Do It (Score:1)
Sounds like SPEWS (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, collateral damage is acceptable and good?
If I leave a network that I am responsible for open for content sharing, but don't actually share anything personally, why should I be held responsible? I didn't share anything, why are you suing me?
Oh, collateral damage is acceptable and good?
Damn, some people want it both ways. Seems to me, if you back SPEWS you should back the RIAA in this case. Conversely, if you don't believe in this kind of accountability, you shouldn't be backing SPEWS. Same damn thing, except the RIAA might actually let you negotiate.
Re:Sounds like SPEWS (Score:2)
The difference is night and day. There are basically no parallels.
When the RIAA takes collective action, it is using the legal system and coercive power of the the state. Furthermore, it is reaching beyond its own organizational boundaries to exert force on other parties.
When I block SMTP connections based on a blacklist, I am doing so
Re:Sounds like SPEWS (Score:1)
It is using the civil legal system alone. This is not reaching beyond its boundaries #2. Everyday you wake up you are both subject to, and protected by this, assuming you live in the US of course. That is also a personal choice, living in the US that is, just like being on the
Re:Sounds like SPEWS (Score:1)
I accidentally leech on someone's accidental WiFi (Score:2, Insightful)
Thus frequently when I turn on my powerbook's airport, my notebook automatically connects to this mysterious neighborhood WiFi. I have to look and make a few extra mouse clicks if I want to reconnect to my own network, (which is NOT also called "default.") This accidental neighborhood WiFi is not always active, so I don't always remember to check for an accidental co
IANAL, but.... (Score:2)