|
Napster Shares Their Defense With the RIAA
The long awaited first round of the Napster Inc. -vs- RIAA legal battle was started today. In opening statements, the Napster defense has said that downloading copyrighted songs is legal and protected by the law.
Napsters legal triage cited a federal case in which a decision was made that noncommercial copying of music is protected by law. They went so far as to say that the law is even extended to making songs available on Napster, for thousands of people to download, and because of this Napster is not doing anything wrong and therefore not liable.
The more intriguing aspect of the Napster defense that David Boies, the lawyer that successfully defeated Microsoft in the antitrust battle of the century, has set forth is one that may prove to be the most harsh against the record labels. Citing internal industry documents the Napster legal team plans to show that the labels have abused their market power to block alternative methods of music distribution, and along with an obscure antitrust law, says that the labels have lost their power to enforce their copyrights.
"If you use a copyright to achieve an anti-competitive purpose, you lose the rights to them," Boies said.
This obscure law that Boies plans to use against the labels has been dubbed "copyright misuse," which states that copyright holders can lose the power to enforce their copyrights if they've used them to achieve an anti-competetive purpose. In this case, Napster plans to argue that the recording industry has acted in an anti-competetive manner by not allowing alternative distribution methods to be opened up.
The legal discovery process also turned up internal record company documents that, according to Boies, shows the RIAA is "misusing copyrights for anti-competitive purposes." That undermines their right to sue Napster on copyright grounds.
Napster and the RIAA will be back in court on July 26, in which the judge will decide whether or not to grant the preliminary injunction that the RIAA requested. Napster's legal defense has asked for the date to be pushed back so that the court can take a detailed look at the issues and evidence prior to making a decision.
Thanks to -X- for portions of this article.
User Comments
(These do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of this site)
|
spyed
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 6:57 PM
brilliant. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 7:04 PM
I used to not have faith that Napster has what it takes to win this battle but now that Boies is onboard, and this preview of their defense has been shown, I have faith now. I surely hope Napster wins as it will mean more than just the ability to share files on Napster.
--[ jark ]-- |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 7:45 PM
Along with Jark, I was affraid that the "old" napster argument wouldn't hold up. I now think that this one could though. I mean, it sounds good, i just wonder if it will sell to a judge!
Later
Adam |
|
kurt_nimmo
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 8:14 PM
Even if the judge rules against them, there will be a lot of incriminating stuff released to the public after Boies presents his case.
He's absolutely correct - the industry has rigged the game and holds a monopoly that must be addressed as an anti-trust issue. |
|
pressf8
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 9:37 PM
I think this defense SOUNDS really good--but the courts don't necessarily have a history of agreeing with what I see as making sense :) Their defense has gotten pretty weird--they seem to have abandoned the ISP defense (which I thought was a pretty good one) and have gone with one that I certainly never would have come up with... I really hope it works out for them though!
Brian
http://www.screwmetallica.org
|
|
kurt_nimmo
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 9:42 PM
For those of you who want the skinny, as presented by Napster, read this PDF:
http://dl.napster.com/opposition.pdf
|
|
nontoxic
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 9:47 PM
It deffinately looks like Napster is going to stand a much better chance against the RIAA than MP3.com did. This could get interesting. |
|
kurt_nimmo
|
Date: July 3, 2000 @ 10:28 PM
Who is this person screaming in the previous post? Jeez, my ears hurt.
I guess, in a democratic forum, you have to put up with shameless spamming...
Anyway, the Napster defense hit the nail right on the head: the real reason for the industry's frontal assault is twofold - ironclad control of distribution and denying entry to unsigned artists.
See page 25 of the aforementioned PDF. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 12:37 AM
Jark i think that above flooder needs to be banned dont you? i hope napster sticks it to the RIAA why should they be a monoply is right! |
|
jark
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 2:30 AM
Why do assholes have to interrupt perfectly decent conversation? Consider yourself banned!
--[ jark ]-- |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 2:42 AM
good, you removed the llama spam post |
|
spyed
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 8:04 AM
I can't wait till threading works =)
It's going to 0wn.... |
|
thesporq
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 8:14 AM
Unfortunately, it seems that the only battle that Napster will win is in the court of public opinion. If Napster's lawyers can make the RIAA say something either embarassing, incriminating, or just plain stupid, then they will have won. Napster has to see themselves as a martyr, to keep the door open, even with a dead body. They may have to lose this battle, to avoid losing the war. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 9:50 AM
Hey it sounds good to me but will it sell to a judge...
Visit www.truerealm.com for IRC and updates on New Programs like Windows ME |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 10:12 AM
I got goosbumps by reading this news post. I'm glad that there are brilliant people out there who can be paid lots of money to do cool shit for you like getting the RIAA off your back. That's awesome, man. America rocks. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 3:13 PM
Would be interesting, wouldn't it ? To see the record labels & their monopolistic powers to actually be the ones in the firing line & not Napster.
Ahh...sweet irony ! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 3:14 PM
Would be interesting, wouldn't it ? To see the record labels & their monopolistic powers to actually be the ones in the firing line & not Napster.
Ahh...sweet irony ! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 6:21 PM
They should also use the digital tape fiasco that the RIAA caused with digital tape back in the early/mid 80's. They wanted copyright chips on all the digital tape decks. The RIAA basically held up the introduction of new technology then because they were,"worried about copyright infringement". Burn in hell RIAA, you suck. (You too Lars.) |
|
BruxBox
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 8:49 PM
Fine strategy, the Antitrust laws.
Now, if RAM manufacturers pick up this strategy, they can use the Antitrust laws against Rambus. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 9:20 PM
This is great, just brilliant NAPSTER has a GREAT defense and if napster lose da case hell is going to be hot, and its going to break lose all over from every stand point. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 4, 2000 @ 10:47 PM
Seems Boies still has sleepless Anti-trust nightmares from the Microsoft case. I think they should have stuck to the "I am just a search engine type ware". Hey it worked for Lycos...Just a thought. |
|
jark
|
Date: July 5, 2000 @ 3:48 AM
Ever get the feeling that Boies had thought about that already? Besides that, what good is going in with only one angle? The idea is not to go in with only one avenue, but rather many so that if one gets shot down then there are backup routes to be taken. Boies obviously is not ignorant to this game as he did beat Microsoft and all their money. I think the tides are slowly going to turn in the favor of Napster, but only time will tell.
--[ jark ]-- |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 5, 2000 @ 11:44 PM
Let's not forget about "copycode". The *inaudible* notch that the RIAA wanted to put in every recording! You know the one..the one that when the National Bureau of Standards (now NIST) tested at Congress' request with 100 regular (non-audiophile) people, EVERY person could hear it EVERY time! See? the RIAA CARES about quality (NOT!).
I hope they get everything they deserve! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 26, 2000 @ 11:55 PM
Losing Napster would totally jsut plain out in everyway shape and form SUCK ... why cant these rich snobby old people just understand that the days of buying records are over. It's time we take a step towards the future where fans can be fans without emptying their pockets. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 27, 2000 @ 12:08 AM
I remeber about 7 months ago when I first got Napster .. everything was going just fine .. I was happy , they were happy .. then MTV had that freakin thing where they told everyone in the world about Napster and suddenly everyone signed up and now look what happened .. nobody seemed to mind when it first came out.. So I just wanna say that all the new Napster people suck and all the old Napster people kick ass .. Damn new peole ruined it for us... it just goes to show what you cant see cant hurt you
|
|
Anonymous
|
Date: July 27, 2000 @ 2:26 PM
hey!!!!! Its july 27th!!! how did court go??? |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: August 15, 2000 @ 2:53 PM
yeah i think metallica sucks and the recording industry of america sucks too. ive been a metallica fan for 15 years and i own everything i had on my computer from metallica via napster. i downloaded to my computer at work because it was easier than actually downloading the music from cd. so tell metallica they can go fuck themselves and i wouldnt purchase another piece of metallica merchandise if my life depended on it. oh by the way, the rest of my metallica belonging went straight into the trash with metallica themselves as far as im concerned. FUCK YOU METALLICA!!!!!!! |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: August 21, 2000 @ 7:10 AM
napster mass markets music and doesnt compensate the musician some of whom are poor.doesnt sound fair to me.public opinion is for napster people will always want to get something for free.that is why i use napster.i hope they will shut it down,but as long as everybody else is using it im gonna get mine to. |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: August 21, 2000 @ 7:16 AM
napster mass markets music and doesnt compensate the musician some of whom are poor.doesnt sound fair to me.public opinion is for napster because people will always want to get something for free.that is why i use napster.i hope they will shut it down,but as long as everybody else is using it im gonna get mine to |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: August 21, 2000 @ 7:20 AM
if you wish to contact me ,i am rhanedance on napster |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: October 27, 2000 @ 10:41 AM
quit crying |
|
Anonymous
|
Date: October 27, 2000 @ 10:59 AM
The RIAA states, "The home computer and/or a hard drive is not a digital music recording device, therefore Napster and users are liable for infrengement." If my hard drive is not a digital music recording device then I'm not recording digital music, therefore cannot be liable for infrengement. |
|
|
Navigation
