Forum: The Classroom
Topic: does the closing of napster = more mp3 downloads?
started by: jrh1406
Posted by jrh1406 on Jul. 31 2000,06:38
Ok, I had an epiphany alittle bit ago, with the passing of napster (even with the temporary shutdown of napster), everyone and their brother is coming out of the woodwork with their second favorite way of getting mp3s. Now i don't know if i've just been out of the loop for a while (wouldn't be the first time) but i've just been using napster and recently gnutella, now i know of atleast 5 other ways to get mp3s, there are links here, at slashdot, and even on collegeclub.com. Now that more people know about these different resources i've got the feeling that trying to shut down napster was an even bigger mistake than i had figured.
Posted by Sithiee on Jul. 31 2000,13:32
i dont think you realize the point behind shutting down napster. they all realize this isnt going to stop mp3 trading, that much is obvious. what it does set though is a legal precedent, which means anyone caught doing it can get in trouble, and they can use the case's outcome to back up what theyre doing.
Posted by PersonGuy on Jul. 31 2000,16:20
...a precident witch was ALREADY set by a magnivox case (see the other Napster thread for details)...------------------
<P:\>erson\Guy.exe -PersonGuy *pERSONgUY.cfg
< http://www.go.to/personguy >
Posted by jrh1406 on Aug. 01 2000,10:42
Except that they can only go after a couple of the mp3 sources i've run across, some of the others, they can't touch, legal precident or not.
Posted by Rol3x on Aug. 01 2000,19:18
quote:
Originally posted by jrh1406:
Except that they can only go after a couple of the mp3 sources i've run across, some of the others, they can't touch, legal precident or not.
what? why couldnt they 'touch' them? shit im hearing that if napster loses the case that it will effect EVERYONE who has anything related to file (specificly but not limited to MP3's) sharing. Ive read that if the shit for napster goes downhill that even rotten fudge-packing companies like AOL will have to make some changes in order to not have the same problems that napster is currently facing.
Posted by Sithiee on Aug. 02 2000,04:14
look, theres about 3 kinds of mp3 trading. download and upload from a server, i.e. using a search engine to find web pages, and then download from the server. then theres peer to peer through a server, like napster. and then theres plain peer to peer, like gnutella. plain peer to peer is very hard to stop. you have to do lots of protocol checking shit at the isp level. besides, gnutella and such cant even be sued, theres no real company, more like a program floatin around on the net
Posted by jrh1406 on Aug. 05 2000,07:13
Yeah, so unless they plan on sueing everyone they suspect of downloading gnutella, they can't touch it, unless they make gnutella ilegal to use. But then it's open source so with a few changes, it's now a new legal program.
Posted by Sithiee on Aug. 05 2000,15:20
they can make mp3 sharing itself illegal. just like shooting someone with a gun is illegal, not shooting people with certain model guns. but thats not even the point, the point is its just nearly impossible to stop the downloading of mp3s themselves.
Posted by jrh1406 on Aug. 06 2000,03:56
They can make mp3 transfering illegal, but i can always zip it, or rar it or arj it and then it's not an mp3 transfer, the only way to really stop it is to make file transfer itself ilegal and i don't see that happening
Posted by Sithiee on Aug. 06 2000,21:02
they can make mp3s themselves illegal (its what i mean, i guss you didnt catch it) they can say having mp3s on your comp is illegal. i dont think it will come to that, but they can do it, the same way having pot is illegal. trust me, they can make it illegal in some way shape or form for you to obtain mp3s.
Posted by jrh1406 on Aug. 07 2000,00:21
Well they can make owning mp3s a federal offense but unless they have just cause to think i've been doing something illegal then they can't touch me. They need a warrent to come in and search my computer for mp3s, just like they would for pot, or anything else that is illegal.And besides it already is illegal to have mp3s of music you don't already own on your computer and i don't see them cracking down on too many people
Posted by nobody on Aug. 07 2000,16:33
quote:
Originally posted by Sithiee:
they can make mp3s themselves illegal (its what i mean, i guss you didnt catch it) they can say having mp3s on your comp is illegal.
They cannot make all mp3s illegal, because mp3s can be used for lawful purposes. The constitution guarantees the freedom of speech and of the press. The government certainly doesn't have the right to make it illegal for a musician to record a tape or CD of their own music, so why could it be made illegal for a musician to make an mp3 of their own music? And even if they did ban use of mp3s, someone could create a new technology to record audio, and unless the gov't banned all transmission of audio signals over the internet (which would be unconstitutional, not to mention impossible to enforce), the laws would be futile.
Posted by PersonGuy on Aug. 08 2000,01:09
WHERE...
WHERE!!!
WHERE they have jurisdiction... not here...------------------
<P:\>erson\Guy.exe -PersonGuy *pERSONgUY.cfg
< http://www.go.to/personguy >
Posted by Sithiee on Aug. 08 2000,05:13
first off, there are better forms already available (mp4 is much more compact than mp3). second freedom of speech has limits, although not many people realize it, but you are guaranteed freedom of speech as long as it does not put anyone directly in danger. i.e. you cant yell "Fire" in a crowded theatre. it would be consitutional, the fcc is allowed to prevent any transmissions they please (where they have jurisdiction) if they have a good reason. they could stop it if they wanted. this is all theoretical. im saying theoretically, they could completely outlaw mp3, and you wouldnt be able to do shit about it. but even if they do, it would be hard to enforce, and probably wouldnt be enforced. the same way you can be arrested for turning into the farthest lane in your car. you can be arrested for it, and there wouldnt be shit you could do about it. but the chances of a cop actually caring about it are so unlikely that everyone does it anyway.
Posted by nobody on Aug. 08 2000,18:45
Can you provide any example of how posessing an mp3 file creates a "clear and present danger?" Sorry, but I'm not seeing any parallel between recording an mp3 file and yelling "Fire" in a crowded theatre.Secondly, the FCC example you gave doesn't apply because the FCC only deals with signals broadcast across the airwaves. If you wish to look it up, there are some supreme court cases from (I think) the 1950s, one was ABC v. CBS and another was US v. Pacifica (again, not 100\% sure) that explicitly ruled that there is a difference between broadcasts over the airwaves and other froms of speech. The basis on which the court upheld the constitutionality of the FCC was that there could only be a limited amount of transmissions on the air, otherwise radio and network TV would become unusable because of too much crosstalk and interference between different transmitters. The court also allowed the ban on offensive language and content on network TV and radio because it would be too easy for people trying to get the news or something to accidentally tune in to things they find offensive. Once again, these standards ONLY apply to the rather unique situation presented by radio and broadcast TV. And neither of them has much to do with mp3 audio over the internet. Finally, a blanket ban on mp3 files would NOT pass a constitutional test because it is not the "least restrictive means" for achieving the goal of stopping piracy and infringes too much on the rights of independent artists to distribute their music. They can outlaw piracy (they already have), but they cannot ban tools that have any "commercially significant" purpose other use in than illegal activity. *Disclaimer: IANAL
Posted by PersonGuy on Aug. 08 2000,22:52
nobody is cool... nobody is a genious... nobody is smarter than me... nobody has made several good points in the forums... I like nobody...Seriously though, even if you WERE against Napster, I'd respect you execelent reasoning skills! NOBODY ROCKS! ------------------
<P:\>erson\Guy.exe -PersonGuy *pERSONgUY.cfg
< http://www.go.to/personguy >
Posted by Bozeman on Aug. 09 2000,10:27
Make MP3's illegal? That's like saying C++ is illegal, or spanish is illegal, or PRINT is illegal! MP3's are another medium, like paper, (although digital) and are also a unique format, like a jpeg. (but for sound, I was just using jpeg as an example of a unique format) Making MP3's illegal would, in my opinion, be as atrocious as Hitler burning the books in Nazi Germany. People wouldn't stand for it. Sure most wouldn't care, those who don't own a comp or use MP3's won't be affected. Who WOULD cause an uproar would be the ACLU, and pretty much everyone who uses MP3's. I would certainly be pissed off, banning MP3's is one step toward tanks in the streets, and swastika banners. (albeit a very small step, any step is one step too far!) Besides, without a legal way to check PC's, they would still be out there, because they can be recreated, saved to disk, ripped, or hidden inside the computer. With so many ways around the system, they would have to make illegal searches to find MP3's. Hmmm, more nazism...
Posted by nobody on Aug. 09 2000,14:52
Why thank you, PersonGuy! Nice to know that my rants are appreciated 
Posted by Sithiee on Aug. 09 2000,18:20
i dont know that the aclu would be all that quick to do something, considering there are many groups whos civil rights of being able to control their music's distribution are being completely trampled.
|