said by »news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10129640-93.html :

Judge Davis threw out the verdict in the case because he argued that "actual" distribution of copyrighted music must be proven for the law to be violated. Therefore, the RIAA had to prove that users downloaded the music that Thomas was making available through the peer-to-peer service. Simply making the content available is not a violation of copyright, under this reasoning.

But the RIAA has said that proving that songs have been downloaded from services like Kazaa is nearly impossible. As a result, the RIAA has long argued that making digital music available for others to download illegally is an infringement on copyright.

Over the years, judges have disagreed on this reasoning, and as a result, they have written different opinions on this issue. As a result, it's very likely that the legal issue of what constitutes copyright infringement will eventually be decided by the Supreme Court.

said by AnonMoose1 :

Who are those people in the photo?

said by cybercrimes :

The report does note that Verizon, who has traditionally shied away from playing Internet babysitter, so far has no plans to play along. Some of you might recall that Verizon has battled the RIAA previously over being forced to play content police

im happy im with verizon

said by RadioDoc :

You may have inadvertently tripped over a major distinction here with "but it's not like free FM-radio play really hurt concert and merchandising sales". Revenues from concert tickets and merchandising sales rarely go to the record label...they are a primary revenue source for most bands though.

said by funchords :

Jim Croce doesn't need another dollar for Bad Bad Leroy Brown.

said by funchords :

Jim Croce doesn't need another dollar for Bad Bad Leroy Brown.

said by EasyDoesIt :

Unfortunately Jim Croce died in an accident in 1973.

said by Doctor Four :

It should read "RIAA's Legal Assault On P2P Still Failing". Failing to stop "piracy", that is.

said by Mr Matt :



On the other hand the shakedown methodology being used by the RIAA has been in place for years. The RIAA has always used calculated extortion to shake down those businesses targeted for such transgressions as playing copyrighted music without paying a fee to the RIAA. In such a case RIAA Lawyers would figure out how much it would cost the defendant to pay an attorney to defend the business against a frivolous RIAA Lawsuit. The dollar amount demanded would be less than it would cost for the business to defend itself against the lawsuit. In most cases, business management would roll over and write a check to avoid wasting time and money to defend the business against the lawsuit. Since the defendant was a business, management could pay and simply write off the cost as a business expense. On the other hand if the business management took a strong position on the matter and threatened to strongly defend themselves, the RIAA lawyers would simply go away. Individuals do not have the luxury of writing off such a settlement as a business expense. The RIAA is not a government agency and should be sanctioned for impersonating a government agency.

said by FDM80 :

I think the reason verizon isn't playing along is that they know that if they do, they will end up footing the bill for being the police.