http://p2pnet.net/story/11138
the beginning: http://p2pnet.net/story/10880

So apparently this hearing has happened or is still in session.
The outcome will surely be interesting, but probably not issued today.
Either way, the lady's statement doesn't really do anything to help her. She just questions people for making computer and p2p progs, which has the same answer to the quesion, "Why climb Mt. Everest?"
Answer: "Because we can."
She never said she didn't share things, but she never said she did. It looks like this will depend on the fact of sharing or simply offering files. It was unclear, in the articles, if she did actually share files with people or if she only had a folder for such an act.

[ reply ]

Actually her response is that by making it "accessable" does not mean the same as copyright infringement. Basically if this were true, then libraries would be in violation of copyright in fringement, as well as the RIAA themselves because they too make music accessable via radio... basically she has to win this case or the RIAA is going to do a great deal of sueing.

But still theres the matter of "and ip address is not a person."

__________________
Audi Videos | MySpace Layouts | About Me | Kid Sniffles

[ reply ]

Yah I get what her argument is. She just never says anything straightforward. Apparently she never actually shared anything, but that is not clear in the words from her statement or the article.
I like the "an ip address is not a person," idea, but the argument there lies in the fact that people with guns get convicted of murder.

[ reply ]

Not exactly...

The idea behind the IP thing is thats most ISP's issue dynamic IP addresses, meaning they are leased over a period of time and expire. Therefore one ip != a customer.

I'm also certain if you had a wireless router you could say the same thing, saying it wasn't you but someone was using your connection. Since the RIAA has no real proof of this other then the face that the ip assigned by the ISP is attached to the billing account and was used in p2p file sharing, they usually drop the case. There just isn't enough hard evidence.

I think the other argument here is that digital copies of things does not infringe on copyright laws... at least thats what the EEF is saying i believe.

__________________
Audi Videos | MySpace Layouts | About Me | Kid Sniffles

[ reply ]

How would kids in college get caught? I've heard of at least one who was caught and simply got an email to the effect of "cease and desist", from the university (here at UGA). A friend of mine simply has a limit of uploading 650mb a day (at Virginia tech). Maybe the same rule applies here at UGA.
So if I'm on the wireless in the student center, is there any liability?

[ reply ]