The website p2pnet.net is being sued for libel by a company called Sharman Networks for an article which contains quotes from this AP article and also some comments by an anonymous user of the site. The suit charges that by 'publishing' these comments p2pnet.net is defaming the characters of Sharman Networks and their CEO. The anonymous posters are also named as John and Jane Does in the suit.
The way the comment(s) were 'published' was that it was clearly stated they were anonymous posts to p2pnet.net, as reading the google cache will clearly show.
[update: google cache now gone, but yahoo cache still intact for now.]
The comments in question appear to be an insider releasing some tasty tidbits on CEO Nikki Hemming, claiming that she is a 'dupe' merely in place to distract attention or something like that(not the kind of thing someone would take seriously if it were false, so......?). I'm tempted to post the entire thing in question here, but I won't have to decide on that until the yahoo cache goes down.
The reason it is essential that this lawsuit fails is that if a precedent is set that internet sites are responsible for anonymous postings they 'publish' the entire online world is in trouble. For a few more details on what lawsuits of this type are generally intended to accomplish, check out this article.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Why real music fans fileshare
I just thought I'd post something here briefly on something many of you have heard me discuss in person. Many of those who question my position on filesharing have asked me how artists are supposed to get paid if we don't pay per copy of their song we obtain. My answer is this:
If we were genuinely concerned about musicians and their support, real fans would download the album and send the $20 directly to the artist. If anyone anywhere has a response to that (other than that they actually don't care about the artist, they're more worried about supporting the labels that own them), I would like to hear it.
If we were genuinely concerned about musicians and their support, real fans would download the album and send the $20 directly to the artist. If anyone anywhere has a response to that (other than that they actually don't care about the artist, they're more worried about supporting the labels that own them), I would like to hear it.
One step at a time...
Old news, I know, but I just can't believe that with all the research I've done on the topic I've never found these guys before: Among all the other great things at this site dedicated to destroying outdated views on intellectual property is this list of all the "nobody's"(a reference to my little debate with Jack Marshall over peer-to-peer ethics) who hold similar views to my own on the economic incentive program we misleadingly call intellectual 'property.'
As more and more people examine this issue critically, movements like this are certain to grow. Even if the only purpose they serve is to nudge people into doing their homework on the topic, that service is incredibly valued. On that note, take a look at this article (via p2punite.org) on the HD video format. Anyone considering making this 'upgrade' needs to look long and hard at what it actually encompasses and decide if they really 'need' a device in their home that is at the beck and call of our major corporations.
As more and more people examine this issue critically, movements like this are certain to grow. Even if the only purpose they serve is to nudge people into doing their homework on the topic, that service is incredibly valued. On that note, take a look at this article (via p2punite.org) on the HD video format. Anyone considering making this 'upgrade' needs to look long and hard at what it actually encompasses and decide if they really 'need' a device in their home that is at the beck and call of our major corporations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)