Kazaa Source Scandals

[THE ENFORCER]

My lawyer could take that case.... he got ME outa jail.

for doing what?

[Vitron]

No the guy driving the car is in trouble, but buying a car isnt illegal here! But robbing a bank is illegal!

The guy sharing illegal files is in trouble, but making or owning peer to peer software isn't illegal! But sharing illegal file is illegal!

[THE ENFORCER]

The guy sharing illegal files is in trouble, but making or owning peer to peer software isn't illegal! But sharing illegal file is illegal!

Read post 16 (maybe im not making it clearer heres further input), the program developers are providing the means, therefore in my analogy kazaa developers are the drivers of the getaway car even though they arent robbing the bank (downloading the illegal songs) they are helping the robbers (you and me) steal money (the illegal songs) as they provide the getaway (the peer to peer software).

[GoldenPlums]

You may have a point if the only use for kazaa was for illegal file-sharing. But as it has perfectly legitimate uses too so there's not much of a case against the software programmers just because people are misusing their software. Eg. there's no case against Ford if they happen to have made the getaway car.

[Pearl Jam]

i have a good lawyer friend that says the chances of winning a lawsuit against a peer-to-peer software designer are up there with the chances of, and I quote "surviving a shark attack while wearing a meat-suit"

[Troll King]

Read post 16 (maybe im not making it clearer heres further input), the program developers are providing the means, therefore in my analogy kazaa developers are the drivers of the getaway car even though they arent robbing the bank (downloading the illegal songs) they are helping the robbers (you and me) steal money (the illegal songs) as they provide the getaway (the peer to peer software).

That bank analogy is flawed. The bank doesn't want people to come in and take their money. With P2P, the people you're downloading the songs from are active participants that do want the music to be shared. In other words, there is no "theft" involved in the actual downloading, as the person you're downloading the music from is the one who's legally liable for making the music available for free downloading. It's like he's the one that steals the money and then starts throwing the cash off a high building and letting anyone who wants some get it.

As for the getaway car, you're a little too selective with that metaphor. Firstly, the driver of that getaway car is also an active part of the plan to rob the bank. The key to your phrasing is "provide the getaway". In a sense, they did provide the getaway by making the software available. But instead of being the driver of the car, they are more like the car dealership that provides cars for anyone to get and use for how they choose to use it. Sure, you might use the car as a getaway vehicle in a robbery, but you can also use it to take your kids to the zoo. With Kazaa, you might use it to download music, but you might also use it to let people hear music that you yourself created.

[Sarien]

"surviving a shark attack while wearing a meat-suit"

That's frickin' hilarious. Made me actually laugh out loud.

[Kim]

I read Tk's post and it actually makes sense! Props!

[Richard Creager]

Priitk = kazaa!
Don't tell me it isn't true?!

DUH?

[Troll King]

I read Tk's post and it actually makes sense! Props!

You sound surprised. Were you expecting otherwise?

[THE ENFORCER]

You may have a point if the only use for kazaa was for illegal file-sharing. But as it has perfectly legitimate uses too so there's not much of a case against the software programmers just because people are misusing their software. Eg. there's no case against Ford if they happen to have made the getaway car.

I TOLD YOU about that ford car, buying cars arent illegal! I pertain to the fact that kazaa's main use is sharing illegal songs, programs.

[THE ENFORCER]

That bank analogy is flawed. The bank doesn't want people to come in and take their money. With P2P, the people you're downloading the songs from are active participants that do want the music to be shared. In other words, there is no "theft" involved in the actual downloading, as the person you're downloading the music from is the one who's legally liable for making the music available for free downloading. It's like he's the one that steals the money and then starts throwing the cash off a high building and letting anyone who wants some get it.

If you know that you are obtaining the song illegally then it doesnt matter. In your example if you run away with the money from the thief knowing that it was stolen from the bank then you are also partially liable and the bank will have every right to get their money back from you its called from the "tort of conversion".

As for the getaway car, you're a little too selective with that metaphor. Firstly, the driver of that getaway car is also an active part of the plan to rob the bank. The key to your phrasing is "provide the getaway". In a sense, they did provide the getaway by making the software available. But instead of being the driver of the car, they are more like the car dealership that provides cars for anyone to get and use for how they choose to use it.

That can be true unless you can argue that Kazza's main use is to illegal share songs and although hard to prove between you and me come on?

...

[Troll King]

Neither of those points changes the fact that your analogy was flawed..

For the first point: yes, you could trace the money (whether it be because they were marked, sequentially numbered, etc...), then yes, the bank could try to get them back. But that just further proves my point: You're looking at the liability of the people who receive the money, or the downloaders, as well as the robbers, or the file sharers. Unfortuately, we are not looking at the role of the downloader or the role of the file sharer. We're looking at the role of the actual program, Kazaa. To continue the metaphor, Kazaa would have to be the high building from which the robbers threw the money. Would you then hold the building's owners liable for that?

As for the second point, the makers of the program have no control over what the main use of Kazaa is. If you want another analogy, look at TW. TW was designed as a basing zone. Look at an average pub and you'll see that most people are not basing. That came about as a natural evolution of how the zone's settings are used.

Oh, and ending an argument with "come on?" doesn't make it any stronger, no matter how fervent the emphasis.

[THE ENFORCER]

What are you going on about the building????????
I dont think you understand my logic.....
Note: the building did not help the robbers steal the money! the only two people involved are the robber(you and me) and the driver (kazaa) no-one else! Who the fuck represents the building?

The makers of the program do you have control of what its use is, thats what program developers do, people tell program developers i want this program to do this thing and they design a program to do the activity. It is obvious that kazaa developers wanted to develope a program to share songs everyone agrees with that its only the legality that is in question...

Kazaa developers create a program for people to share illegal music the only way they get a way with it is through the loophole of peer to peer sharing.
If you want to be fooled into thinking that they had an ulterior motive than you think that.

[Amok]

I dont think you understand my logic.....

THAT'S BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT LOGICAL!