MIPI Raids Kazza - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

feelgood · 02-06-2004, 07:00 AM

Quote:

UPDATE:Music Industry Piracy Investigations this morning raided the offices of P2P companies Sharman Networks and Brilliant Digital Entertainment, along with the homes of key executives and several ISPs.

MIPI obtained an Anton Pilar order – which allows a copyright holder to enter a premises to search for and seize material that breaches copyright without alerting the target through court proceedings – yesterday from Justice Murray Wilcox, and began raiding premises in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria this morning searching for documents and electronic evidence to support its case against the peer-to-peer companies.

In addition to the offices of Sharman Networks and Brilliant Digital Entertainment (BDE), MIPI raided the residences of Sharman Networks’ CEO Nikki Hemming, Brilliant Digital Entertainment Chief Executive Officer and President Kevin Burmeister and Phil Morle, Director of Technology at Sharman Networks. Monash University, the University of Queensland and the University of New South Wales were also raided, as well as four ISPs including Telstra.

"Telstra lawyers are presently working with lawyers from the record labels in order to determine exactly what information is being sought under the terms of the order," Telstra spokesman Warwick Ponder told ZDNet Australia . "We have not been asked for and will not provide any BigPond subscriber information."

"Telstra has made it very clear for a long time now that it does not support copyright infringement or any other illegal activity," said Ponder. "At the same time Telstra clearly respects its obligation to protect customers information and privacy under the Telecommunication Act and Privacy Act under Federal law."

MIPI general manager Michael Speck told ZDNet Australia the order was specifically targeted at the operators of the Kazaa network. "This is not about individuals, this is about the big fish," said Speck. "This is a signal that Internet music piracy is finished in Australia." The ISPs and Universities were raided to gain evidence about the operators of the Kazaa network.

The investigation into the Kazaa network has been ongoing for six months, and was precipitated by a significant change in the physical and technical structure of Sharman Networks, according to Speck. "The Kazaa operation infringes copyright within the terms of the Australian Copyright Act," he said.

"This action appears to be an extraordinary waste of time, money and resources going over legal ground that has been well and truly covered in the US and Dutch Courts over the past 18 months," said Sharman Networks in a statement. "This is a knee-jerk reaction by the recording industry to discredit Sharman Networks and the Kazaa software, following a number of recent court decisions around the world that have ruled against the entertainment industry’s agenda to stamp out peer-to-peer technology."

Sharman Networks became a target for the music industry when it purchased the Kazaa peer-to-peer file-sharing technology from its Dutch creators Kazaa BV in 2002. It has had a long relationship with BDE, and in 2002 had to defend against a backlash when it was revealed spyware had been included with the Kazaa software. BDE subsidiary Altnet was later formed and offered to pay people for hosting content on the Kazaa network.

"Kazaa operators know the difference and make the decision as to whether they facilitate legitimate or illegitimate downloads," said Speck. "It's very clear they are facilitating and authorising global copyright infringement."

Sharman disagreed, claiming it bought the Kazaa software "with the express purpose of building it into a legitimate channel for the distribution of licensed, copyright protected content which in turn financially benefits artists".

"There is no doubt this is a cynical attempt by the industry to disrupt our business, regain lost momentum, and garner publicity," said Sharman. "The assertions by plaintiffs are hackneyed and worn out. It is a gross misrepresentation of Sharman’s business to suggest that the company in any way facilitates or encourages copyright infringement."

Monash University and the University of Queensland have challenged the order, and the arguments will be heard before Justice Wilcox at 3.30 pm today.

Sharman Networks, Australian subsidiary LEF Interactive and BDE will face the record company lawyers before Justice Wilcox on Tuesday.

According to MIPI, there are around three million users simultaneously online and connected to the Kazaa network at any one time sharing around 573 million files. Over 850,000 tracks are made available by over 2,500 Australian users. If each downloaded track was purchased for US$0.99 the total would be over US$2 billion per month globally.

Same old shit MIPI trying to do, what really caught my eye was the last paragraph. Goddamn 2 billions? Christ, a whole year worth of business like that would cover Canadain government budget for the year

yakimushi · 02-06-2004, 07:58 AM

This is just more of the RIAA type tactics designed to intimidate and misinform the public.

I just love thier attitude. "We make shitty music, without variety, and support our Clear Channel radio monopoly, then blame the consumer when they don't want to pay $18 for one song off a CD."

Its like they're saying, you aren't paying us as much as we want, so we're going to sue you.

numist · 02-06-2004, 08:09 AM

Thats globally, though, so split up 2 billion across the demographic users/country. Its a misleading number in that it doesnt represent Australia, but the whole world.

Im with yakimushi, although you cant discount older, decent music that youd still have to pay for in a record store. Its not all about new music, sure it sucks, but the company is losing money here. They are acting like a company, who can blame them? Its a new source of profit that could take their business to the next level, its just a shady practice.

numist · 02-06-2004, 08:18 AM

ooh, from here:

Quote:

Sharman disagreed, claiming it bought the Kazaa software "with the express purpose of building it into a legitimate channel for the distribution of licensed, copyright protected content which in turn financially benefits artists".

I find it how carefully Sharman chooses their words, its like a veiled mudslinging to counter the MIPI's efforts...

"We'd love to financially benefit artists....

but not you."

japhyryder · 02-06-2004, 08:59 AM

This action appears to be an extraordinary waste of time, money and resources going over legal ground that has been well and truly covered

Without change the music industry will kill themselves off

cycloptor · 02-06-2004, 09:34 AM

dun dunn dunununnnn....

losthellhound · 02-06-2004, 01:55 PM

What I find odd (and scary) is that the copyright holders according to this law, can walk in without a warrent.. No legal precendings at all..

Yoink yoink yoink..

all your computers are belong to the music industry (well at least they could make up lost revenue selling them on E-Bay)

nanofever · 02-06-2004, 02:12 PM

My response on things like this will always be something akin to "suck it copyright holder xyz and learn how to profit from the new medium.

arch13 · 02-06-2004, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nanofever
My response on things like this will always be something akin to "suck it copyright holder xyz and learn how to profit from the new medium.

It's an industry that's having a hard time accepting change. the whole nature of buisness has changed but they're stilll despretly holding on to an old business model. A telling sign is that the owner of the rolling stones catalouge has refused to liscense it to Itunes because the Itunes liscense agreement requires a 33% spilt between the three parties (apple, the liscense holder, the artist/artists estate). Curently, liscense holder collect 40-70% depending on the value of the catalouge. As the liscense holder, the companies have taken the stance similar to the NRA, "you'll take it from my cold dead hand".
The end will come, but much like the auto makers in detroit (similar issues dealing with change), they will fight to the last.
When the world changes, it inevetable that some companies go under as ways of doing business chnages. however, much as the example of the change of this country from manufacturing to white collar work, there are those that feel bitter and resentfull of the change.

Mister B · 02-06-2004, 04:14 PM

Free music just means musicians won't be making millions, only hundreds of thousands of dollars.

What will those poor souls do?

Less money will bring out more innovative music if you ask me, instead of all the copycats who try to cash in with other peoples style.

sandeep · 02-06-2004, 06:21 PM

That stat about the potential 2 billion USD at the end there is a bit misleading.

Its unrealistic to say that those 2 500 australian people would buy the same 850,000 tracks if they cost a US buck, that they did when they were free.

Its a hell of a stat, as biased as it is though. Unfortunately, I think that's the kind of numbers people look at when thinking of the new "buy digital music" movement. Very incorrect, but very believeable I suppose.

BoCo · 02-06-2004, 07:17 PM

Fuck 'em. I'm gonna download something just to spite them...

02-06-2004, 08:59 AM	#5 (permalink)
japhyryder no one special Location: Charlotte, NC	This action appears to be an extraordinary waste of time, money and resources going over legal ground that has been well and truly covered Without change the music industry will kill themselves off __________________ It's only entertainment, someone's sick idea of a joke.

02-06-2004, 01:55 PM	#7 (permalink)
losthellhound Thats MR. Muffin Face now Location: Everywhere work sends me	What I find odd (and scary) is that the copyright holders according to this law, can walk in without a warrent.. No legal precendings at all.. Yoink yoink yoink.. all your computers are belong to the music industry (well at least they could make up lost revenue selling them on E-Bay) __________________ "Life is possible only with illusions. And so, the question for the science of mental health must become an absolutely new and revolutionary one, yet one that reflects the essence of the human condition: On what level of illusion does one live?" -- Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death

02-06-2004, 02:12 PM	#8 (permalink)
nanofever Huzzah for Welcome Week, Much beer shall I imbibe. Location: UCSB	My response on things like this will always be something akin to "suck it copyright holder xyz and learn how to profit from the new medium. __________________ I'm leaving for the University of California: Santa Barbara in 5 hours, give me your best college advice - things I need, good ideas, bad ideas, nooky, ect. Originally Posted by Norseman on another forum: "Yeah, the problem with the world is the stupid people are all cocksure of themselves and the intellectuals are full of doubt."

02-06-2004, 04:14 PM	#10 (permalink)
Mister B Insane Location: Burbs of St.Lou	Free music just means musicians won't be making millions, only hundreds of thousands of dollars. What will those poor souls do? Less money will bring out more innovative music if you ask me, instead of all the copycats who try to cash in with other peoples style. __________________ "Little racoons and old possums 'n' stuff all live up in here. They've got to have a little place to sit." Bob Ross.

02-06-2004, 07:17 PM	#12 (permalink)
BoCo Fear the bunny Location: Hanging off the tip of the Right Wing	Fuck 'em. I'm gonna download something just to spite them... __________________ Activism is a way for useless people to feel important.

02-06-2004, 07:58 AM	#2 (permalink)
yakimushi Addict	This is just more of the RIAA type tactics designed to intimidate and misinform the public. I just love thier attitude. "We make shitty music, without variety, and support our Clear Channel radio monopoly, then blame the consumer when they don't want to pay $18 for one song off a CD." Its like they're saying, you aren't paying us as much as we want, so we're going to sue you.

02-06-2004, 08:09 AM	#3 (permalink)
numist Banned Location: UCSD, 510.49 miles from my love	Thats globally, though, so split up 2 billion across the demographic users/country. Its a misleading number in that it doesnt represent Australia, but the whole world. Im with yakimushi, although you cant discount older, decent music that youd still have to pay for in a record store. Its not all about new music, sure it sucks, but the company is losing money here. They are acting like a company, who can blame them? Its a new source of profit that could take their business to the next level, its just a shady practice.

02-06-2004, 09:34 AM	#6 (permalink)
cycloptor Tilted	dun dunn dunununnnn....

02-06-2004, 06:21 PM	#11 (permalink)
sandeep Insane	That stat about the potential 2 billion USD at the end there is a bit misleading. Its unrealistic to say that those 2 500 australian people would buy the same 850,000 tracks if they cost a US buck, that they did when they were free. Its a hell of a stat, as biased as it is though. Unfortunately, I think that's the kind of numbers people look at when thinking of the new "buy digital music" movement. Very incorrect, but very believeable I suppose.