Begins targeting those who it accuses of being "facilitators" of copyright infringement, meaning we can expect a fresh new wave of lawsuits from its latest and greatest legal strategy.It seems that newsgroup users will be the next target of the RIAA's wrath with a new lawsuit filed on behalf major record labels against Usenet.com. It's always been hoped that Usenet would stay under the radar while the RIAA, MPAA, and others focused on the more mainstream P2P services like Napster, Aimster, Grokster, and KaZaA, but it seems as though the party may be nearing an end. Filed on October 12th, the suit claims that the Fargo, North Dakota-based Usenet.com service "...sells access to a body of content from a global network of computers" that "...contains...millions of copyrighted sound recordings" and "...touts its service as a haven for those seeking pirated content." The complaint even cites Usenet's own "about" section with the following: Today’s hottest way of sharing MP3 files over the Internet is Usenet; forget about all the peer-to-peer software applications, which quickly become outdated. Usenet allows everyone around the world to share their files on a worldwide network of peer servers and make them available to any member of this worldwide network.A usenet is comprised of a large number of servers that communicate with each other. An individual user reads and posts messages to a company's local computer server. Messages are stored on that server and then exchanged with other servers. Usenet.com loads online bulletin boards(newsgroups) obtained from the usenet network onto its server and then sells access to the newsgroups that it has chosen to host on its usenet.com service. The suit claims that many of the newsgroups that usenet.com chooses to offer "are explicitly dedicated to copyright infringement." The complaint continues: Users of Defendant's service post copyrighted sound recordings to these newsgroups on Defendant's services; the works are identified by artist and title so that users can easily find any sound recordings they might want to copy. Those copyrighted works are then propagated worldwide, allowing millions of users of the Usenet network, including Defendant's own subscribers, to copy copyrighted sound recordings with ease and anonymity - and without authorization.It sums up its lawsuit with the claim that Usenet.com "provides essentially the same functionality that P2P services such as Napster, Aimster, Grokster, and and did," and that it even goes further than them by customizing "...its services to make it as convenient and seamless as possible for subscribers to distribute and obtain copyrighted music without authorization and without paying for music." It's too early to tell how things will paly out, but one thing's for sure - the RIAA is leaving no stoned unturned in its scorched earth legal strategy. [via WIRED] ***UPDATE: P2P Blog has an interesting observation to point out in that the RIAA actually cites an article on Slyck.com in its argument about newsgroups being actively touted as a superior source of infringing material."Newsgroups are widely touted - in numerous publications, Internet postings, and other media - as a great source of infringing material, one that is superior to P2P services. See, e.g., Thomas Mennecke, "Bittorrent vs. Usenet", Jan. 9, 2007, available at http://www.slyck.com/story1376.html (comparing Usenet favorably to Bittorrent as a piracy tool)"Looking for more stuff to watch or download?
|
 
|
members that voted for this story
|
no, no. i jest, but i know a couple of you have a way too high-and-mighty attitude that rubs me wrong sometimes; kinda like the Canadians.
Its strange how the community digs a hole for itself by being elite asshats. Oh, did I say that??? Sorry asshats!
It is also stupid and shortsighted to assume things you know nothing about.
WHERE exactly did I say that ONE source was better in my post? Is it best for ME ...YES! And your ignorance is showing on newsgroups, because YOU PAY FOR ACCESS TO THEIR SERVERS nothing more....as far as I know that is not a crime.
And as far as paying goes, some idiots pay for seed boxes on bit torrent too! Or didn't you know that?
NOW who is really paying for files? The guy that pays to connect to a server or someone who pays for a seedbox to seed torrents?
And most are illgeal torrents at that!
WHO said it was "invincible"? Most have said that it IS MUCH HARDER to take down than kazaa....and it will be!
Maybe you need to face the truth on that one.
The phone company's not responsible for obscene phone calls, is it? Why should UseNet be responsible for what their users do? They're only providing the service, which is perfectly legal. How the service is used is up to the users. The RIAA is going to have to come up with a way to identify the users like they did with file-sharing networks.
They'll find a way, but by then music will be free any way, as band by band gets out of their contracts and starts their own websites.
The end is near, RIAA. Technology is gonna get'cha!
Guess WHAT..... those services were NOT protected by the DMCA either! So what is your point?
I use all of them too dumb FUCK. Are you saying I cannot respond to your post? +1 for being an idiot.