[dvd-discuss] Re: [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V #234

["Rares Marian" <rmarian(at)linuxmail.org>]

Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2003 14:31:21 -0700
From: microlenz@earthlink.net
Subject: [dvd-discuss]Reasonable or is it a Good Faith Belief ala DMCA

This afternoon my dial in internet connection was getting whacked by some KAZAA 
user (64.83.13.124 mostly and his cronies there about). Presumably someone used 
my previous IP address for KAZAA activities. So what if the RIAA and MPAA 
suddenly discover that someone has been polling me using KAZAA and decides "if 
he's being asked for KAZAA info he must have some!" get Jack and the Internet 
Jackboots out there immediately. The facts are that I am not. My firewall has 
been rejecting the over 400 incoming packets. I got tired of the the whole 
thing and disconnected and reconnected. Now I only have had one Bozo's NETBIOS 
request. 

SO the question is what constitute or should a good faith belief under the 
DMCA. WE all know about DNS and all that and it's pretty obvious what's 
happened. SO it is unreasonable that given the KAZAA requests I have turned 
away that I am engaged in P2P but should ignorance by the RIAA and MPAA legal 
staff of technical matters constitute "good faith"?
--begin
What is this a police state? oh wait...
--begin

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 21:01:10 -0700
From: "juergen + barbara" <jmhoraze@compuserve.com>
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss]Reasonable or is it a Good Faith Belief ala DMCA

... and that's why RIAA is filing subpoenas;  each assigned dynamic IP is
associated and logged with username and date/time at the ISP servers.

Of course, the burden of proof lies then on you as the defendant.  And how
will you proof you are innocent?  They can haul in your PC with all the data
and start looking and fishing for evidence to make their case.  You can
claim the log file should show any activity you are accused of; but then
they will counter: what log file; and if the log does not show your file
sharing of copyrighted titles that would not proof you didn't do it!

(Quite similar to the "Patriotic Acts", come to think of it: guilty until
proven innocent; and then, again, you must be guilty somehow, otherwise you
wouldn't be accused by the industry or the administration in the first
place! Right?  Somehow a scenario it reminds me of the novel and movie
"Brazil" -- which was somehow inspired by the methods of the GeStaPo in the
Thrid Reich.)

Enjoy,
   jm.

--begin
Or any reich
--end

> away that I am engaged in P2P but should ignorance by the RIAA and MPAA legal
> staff of technical matters constitute "good faith"?


I feel that I have seen a gradual decrease in the value of the Internet, 
proportional to the number of security and "anti piracy" measures in place.
Kazaa is just one example of a technology that has been attacked vigorously
by the RIAA, to the detriment of the Internet as a whole, IMO.

Regards,

Glendon Gross

------------------------------
--begin
Sometimes I think the Net has imploded on itself already, and nobody will save China
and other nations from oppression anytime soon, so what's the Net for? Then I remember how
much I'd rather be at the Linux machine at home, rather than on this Windows machine. 
Putty and ssh_d makes it possible.
--end

Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 21:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marcia Wilbur <aicra@well.com>
Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss]Reasonable or is it a Good Faith Belief ala DMCA

On Sat, 5 Jul 2003, juergen + barbara wrote:

>
> .... and that's why RIAA is filing subpoenas;  each assigned dynamic IP is
> associated and logged with username and date/time at the ISP servers.
>
> Of course, the burden of proof lies then on you as the defendant.  And how
> will you proof you are innocent?  They can haul in your PC with all the data
> and start looking and fishing for evidence to make their case.  You can
> claim the log file should show any activity you are accused of; but then
> they will counter: what log file; and if the log does not show your file
> sharing of copyrighted titles that would not proof you didn't do it!

How will you prove you are innocent? You shouldn't need to unless you are
copying music for commerical purposes. The Audio Home Recording Act
makes users who copy music for non commerical purposes immune to lawsuits.
Regardless of the fact the RIAA has brought about lawsuits, the AHRA
protects you. So, you shouldn't have to prove you are innocent of a crime
... because there has been no commission.

Of course, the scenario would be different with MPAA...

- -marcia
--begin
Things might change if independent filmmakers would speak up about it.
But they must be brai^H^H^H^Hconverted first.
--end
------------------------------

End of [dvd-discuss digest 2003] V0 #234
****************************************


-- 
______________________________________________
http://www.linuxmail.org/
Now with e-mail forwarding for only US$5.95/yr

Powered by Outblaze