This is bad for the RIAA, but good for file sharers. Yet another judge today disagreed with the RIAA’s assertion that making copyrighted works available — say, on a P2P network like BitTorrent — is not copyright infringement.
This marks the second time the law has sided against the RIAA on this exact same issue. The judgment basically says, “leaving something out for someone to steal does not make them an accessory to theft,” and we agree.
Will this stop the RIAA from continuing with its ridiculous lawsuits? No way. Other than counting all of its money that never goes to artists, it has nothing better to do.
Where there is crime, there is a victim, or so the adage goes, and in this case, you’re likely one of the victims yourself. Eddie Davidson was the spam king of Louisville until he was caught in 2007, and he was sentenced today to 21 months in a federal PMITA prison.
Davidson sent out millions of spams, from fake rolexes to junk stocks. He was convicted on tax charges and for falsifying header information in emails. Oh, and fined almost three-quarters of a million bucks.
If you own an smartphone manufactured by HTC running Windows Mobile, you’re about to receive a free software update. We don’t know when it’ll hit or what it will do, but it’ll do something.
HTC has been criticized by some for what they consider poor implementation of of graphics acceleration in certain handsets, saying that the devices are sluggish due to poor drivers for video. The update, that HTC today confirmed is coming, will likely fix this problem, though the maker offered no specifics.
There’s a class-action suit pending, though it’s unknown if it will ever go to court. While many are upset with HTC over its handling of video on its devices, many others have a “you get what you pay for” attitude, more or less echoing HTC’s line.
Did American companies violate U.S. law by selling hi-tech police equipment to the Chinese? The Old Gray Lady asks this today, examining a recent Chinese police equipment trade show held in Beijing where several American companies, including Motorola and DuPont, were notably present. (An old law going back to Tiananmen Square prevents American companies from selling police equipment to China.) On display: Kevlar bulletproof vests, advanced police radio systems, fancy protective boots and a device that “swiftly” copies the entire contents of a hard drive without leaving any trace of having done so. That one’s developed by Intelligent Computer Solutions, which is based in California.
This all comes just a few weeks after China’s crackdown on Tibet protesters, never mind the controversy surrounding the Olympic Torch relay.
Of course, all companies deny any wrongdoing, stressing that they haven’t broken any laws. Be that as it may, I wonder if it’s worth sullying a company’s image just to make a few dollars from the Chinese. Not trying to pull a Jack Cafferty or anything, but selling American-developed technology to be used by Chinese authorities, that doesn’t seem like it’d be too popular with Joe Sixpack.
I don’t know if this is more or less ridiculous than Marvel claiming sole ownership of “super hero.” At least they had a hand in, if not creating from scratch, at least popularizing the term. But Futuremark, while an established company in an area where pwnage is rampant, has neither pwned anybody (ever) or even been in a situation where pwning was an option.
And let’s be frank here: “pwn” isn’t even a damn word, it’s a popular misspelling of an overused scrap of trash talk, which will probably be obsolete soon as everyone moves to voice chat. Trying to make it a trademark is not only misugided, it’s pointless. Face it, Futuremark, it was a n00b move.
Law: pwnage (TM)? [Kotaku]
About a year ago, I learned that just because you don’t store copyrighted materials on your server, “facilitating the transfer or consumption” of said material is still a no-no.
I was considering building a sweet video player web app (using SopCast) that streamed the Sunday NFL games simultaneously next to each other in a clickable grid that would allow someone to watch all the games at once and then click on each one to maximize that game.
Alas, I never did anything with it because I found out that even though I wasn’t hosting the games, I would have been making it very easy for people to watch them without the express written consent of the National Football League.
Read More
The captains of the Pirate Bay BitTorrent site will be formally charged with conspiracy to break copyright law. Pirate Bay was raided in 2006, though it wasn’t long before the site was back on its feet.
Those being charged are maintaining that there’s no legal grounds for the charges against them and plan to fight the case in open court. Formal charges will be filed Thursday in Sweden.
If convicted, each charged Swede could face up to $10,000 in fines as well as up to 5 years in jail. Convictions likely wouldn’t shutter the BitTorrent site, though, which is good news for you other pirate-types out there.
Sweden to charge Pirate Bay in copyright case [Reuters]
In the last three weeks, I’ve been to seven airports. CES, Macworld, and other travels have sent me all over the place. One thing I always check out when I run across them are airport Palm stores. See, I’m a Palm believer. They started the handheld and smartphone revolutions, we owe them a lot. And I think they have a few bright products on the horizon. I don’t stop by the stores for the hardware, I stop by to see people getting interested in smartphones.
But this little travel tradition of mine might soon come to an end, as word is Palm will be shuttering 26 of its airport stores as it prepares to pay out quite a bit of money to Treo 600 and 650 owners as part of a class-action suit it settled not long ago. The final hearing is set for May 2. Many of these handsets had manufacturing problems, and those that required more than one repair are eligible for a rebate or credit. If things go as anticipated, registered owners of Treo 600s will receive $75, whle 650 owners will receive a $50 credit towards the purchase of any new Treo smartphone.
Class action settlement has Palm pulling plugs [BGR]
Police in New Carrollton, Maryland are among the first in the state to use the magic of modern technology to issue tickets to motorists. Information about the driver in question is pulled from the Maryland motor vehicle database and then printed out in the squad car. Sounds very simple, no?
Before this system, "officers would write out 5 copies of each citation by hand" and about 10-15 percent of tickets (nationwide) have to be thrown out because of legibility issues. One of the officers says that the time it takes him to write a ticket is about three minutes, down from over ten minutes.
Police Use High-Tech Ticket Technology [WJLA]
Shame on you, Staples and HP! Lull us into a false sense of security with your hilarious Easy Button and not hilarious celebrities’-hands-doing-stuff commercials while you pull the wool over our eyes with your printer ink price-fixing. I feel violated, although that might have nothing to do with this HP/Staples stuff.
These are all allegations at this point, so let’s not get too bent out of shape but a man in California is suing HP and Staples for breaking antitrust law, claiming that HP offered Staples "at least $100 million worth of ‘market development funds’ and incentives, in exchange for an agreement to stop selling third-party HP-compatible ink cartridges. According to the lawsuit, Staples then used HP’s exclusivity to raise prices on the HP cartridges it offered."
Read More
I guess it’s kind of a normal thing right now for tech companies in the far east to sue each other regularly over technicalities in order to get a leg up competition-wise. So, feeling the fever, Sharp decided to get in on the frenzy and throw down against LCD TV rival Samsung. The suits concern “brightness, response speeds and viewing angles of LCD panels,” apparently, which doesn’t say much, but I’m sure it will all come to light in five years or so when this is all wrapped up and we’ve moved on to holograms.
Sharp files LCD patent suit against Samsung Elec [Reuters]
Ever send an e-mail on your corporate account that you regret sending? Ever think that deleting it from your local folder or from the server will save you from Legal’s wrath?
Don’t.
Apparently the Feds have software that can detect several layers of deletion, which is worse than you might think. Let’s say I send an e-mail to Peter saying “You’re dumb and no one likes you.” Then I write another e-mail saying “You smell funny,” but don’t actually send it; it just stays on my computer in the draft folder. Then I delete it. Well, Johnny Law will see that I wrote it, then deleted it. They’ll see my thought process, then throw my in prison for harassing Peter.
The moral is, if you’re going to harass your co-workers, do it in person or over the phone. It’s a little harder to trace that way.
GCs to Employees: Think Before You Send [Law.com via Slashdot]
A teen being investigated in connection with a murder secretly used the MP3 player in his pocket to record an interrogation that the detective working the case swore under oath never took place.
I’ve always wondered whether or not detectives searched suspects before locking themselves in an interrogation room. You’d think they’d at least check for weapons but who knows, maybe finding an MP3 player wouldn’t arouse any suspicion.
Whatever the case, this kid not only got himself a free pass on the freedom train but also ended up getting the detective in question charged with 12 counts of first-degree perjury.
Gotcha! Teen’s MP3 Catches Cop in a Lie [ABC News]
Two bills passed in the House yesterday concerning ISPs’ responsibilities for reporting child pornography. The first bill dictates that "ISPs would have to inform the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children of the Internet identity and geographic location of suspected sex offenders and the time child pornography was downloaded."
Read More
Gentle readers, congratulate us. We, as bloggers, are now legally protected as “journalists”. Or at least we’re getting there. Take that, legitimate press.
Phillip Smith has just won an important case that sets a precedent that we’re going to use at some point. He’s a blogger. He was an angry blogger due to some bad experiences working with an eBay listing company. The blog posts got him in trouble legally, but he claimed journalistic protection.
After a protracted case, the judge agreed with him, stating that use of corporate logos are OK in blogs, just as they’re protected in newspapers. Likewise, opinion and linking are tolerated.
This is good news for us. Regular readers will know that we’re always in trouble, hopefully this new status as “journalists” will get us out of trouble earlier. And into the Playboy mansion easier.
Can bloggers be journalists? Federal court says yes [Ars]
We don’t normally discuss class action lawsuits here on the Gear, mostly because we’re not fond of fostering the idea that lawyers can do good. In this case, however, you’re very possibly due for a bate for 5% from Seagate, if you’ve purchased one of its harddrives in the last six years. That’s enough money to get you most of the way to the Transformers DVD. Read More
I’m always scared of lawyers. We live in litigious times, and lawyers are the “new priesthood, baby!” They’re involved in everything. When I got my first “cease and desist” from Apple, we had a party. I’m not sure what that says about me or Apple, but it makes a point: when threatened, we rattle our sabers in the form of calling our lawyers.
What’s really frightening, however, is when crackpots bring suits that bear fruits. Take, for example, the case of Baily v. Lewis Farm, wherein a dude buys a truck on Criagslist, the truck causes an accident, and everyone who ever previously owned the truck is sued and might be liable for damages. And you just wanted to unload a finicky iPod, didn’t you?
Read More
This is the kind of story I don’t like to write, but sometimes you have to do things like this. It’s my sad duty to inform you that our birdy in Duluth just msged me to say that the verdict is in on the RIAA vs. Jammie Thomas trial. Regular readers note that we’ve been following this trial, as it’s the first suit by the RIAA to make it to the trial phase. The judge has ruled in favor of the RIAA, and ruled that Thomas must $222,000 to the evil empire. This is horrible news.
We’ve been pulling for Thomas for taking a stand against the RIAA. We think its strong-arm, bullying tactics are downright heinous. In addition, we think they’re so wrong-thinking that any court would be crazy to side with them. We were wrong.
The real bad news is that now that the RIAA has one victory under its belt, it’s likely to look for new blood. Look for an avalanche of suits to be announced in the near future. With luck, someone in a more humanistic jurisdiction will also fight, and if that person wins, then it could reverse Thomas’s trial, as we’re hoping.
In the meantime, keep an eye on your shared folder. And your mailbox.
The big record labels are getting brazen. Really brazen. Today marks the opening of the first trial between the RIAA and a person it says illegally downloaded music. The problem for the RIAA is this person, and by person I mean damned hero, has decided to fight back. The RIAA has acted like a bully in most cases it’s pursued so far, so it’s great to see someone taking a stand.
But what’s coming out of the trial is more important than the trial itself. In testimony before the court, Jennifer Pariser, the top litigator for the Sony-BMG Music Group, was asked if she thought the act of copying a song off a CD a consumer owns should be allowed, which is how most of us get our music onto our Zunes or iPods. Her answer is nothing short of astounding. She state, under oath, that “when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song.”
There you go, sportsfans, you’re now all dirty little thieves. Every single one of you. So are your friends, colleagues, lovers, and probably your parents as well. At least according to Sony-BMG.
Sony BMG’s chief anti-piracy lawyer: “Copying” music you own is “stealing” [Ars]
We know you hate the RIAA. Everyone hates the RIAA (except, of course, for the RIAA). Somehow, it’s about the only thing I can think of less popular than the Prez that still gets to continue to function.
The RIAA is like a pack of untrained dogs: It sees someone it can clobber, then it does just that. It tackles and rips apart and gnaws and revels in the chaos and destruction it’s caused in the name of being “right.” Helpless old ladies and children have been dragged through pointless court cases, mostly to be made an example of to others. The unfortunate few who have faced the judge are meant to be a warning to the rest of us: Don’t share music.
The problem the RIAA faces now is that the basic concept that it sues for — making songs available on P2P networks violates their (or artists) copyrights — is being put through the crucible. Read More
This is bad for the RIAA, but good for file sharers. Yet another judge today disagreed with the RIAA’s assertion that making copyrighted works available — say, on a P2P network like BitTorrent — is not copyright infringement.
