The strangest news I've read in quite some time... I bet you didn't see this one coming. [img]graemlins/laugh2.gif[/img]

<h3>Kazaa Sues Movie, Recording Industries</h3>
LOS ANGELES - The owners of the Kazaa file-sharing network are suing the movie and recording industries, claiming that they don't understand the digital age and are monopolizing entertainment.
Sharman Networks Ltd. filed its counterclaim Monday in response to a copyright-infringement lawsuit brought by several recording labels and movie studios. That lawsuit accuses Sharman of providing free access to copyright music and films to millions of Internet users in the United States.
The latest filing came two weeks after U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson dismissed Sharman's claim that it could not be sued in the United States because it is based in Australia and incorporated in the South Pacific nation of Vanuatu.
Wilson had found Sharman subject to U.S. copyright laws because it has substantial usage by Californians and its actions are alleged to contribute to commercial piracy within the United States.
Sharman's counterclaim alleges copyright misuse, monopolization, and deceptive acts and practices.
"In seeking to simultaneously stop illegal copying and to maintain their dominant position in the distribution of musical and movie content, the industry plaintiffs have obscenely overreached," Sharman said.
It seeks a jury trial, damages, attorney fees and a permanent injunction against the entertainment industry so that it can't "enforce any of their United States copyrights against any person or entity."
Sharman said the entertainment companies are behind the times and don't realize that consumers need not buy CDs, DVDs or videotapes to enjoy music or films.
Sharman also claimed that movie studios "dominate and, when they act in concert, have monopoly power" for the aftermarket distribution of first-run major motion pictures. Likewise, the company said, recording labels "when they act in concert, have monopoly power in the distribution of recorded music." Movie studios involved in the lawsuit include Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., Columbia Pictures Industries Inc., Disney Enterprises Inc., Paramount Pictures Corp. The recording labels are BMG, EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner.
In a statement, the Recording Industry Association of America (news - web sites) called Sharman's arguments "laughable."
"Sharman's claims are akin to the thief who plunders Fort Knox and then claims she's not responsible because Fort Knox declined to buy her second-rate security system," the RIAA said.
The case is one of the largest in the recent online copyright wars testing the international reach of U.S. courts.

Source: Yahoo! News

[ 01-30-2003, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

About time...

I heard that we are here in Sweden checking up the idea that Denmark have that it is illegal to make digital copies of any copywrighted material, even for your own personal use, and even if it is for backup purpose.

Sure that will certainly make the illegal copies vanish. Now the big question is.. has the pricews dropped drasticly?

And on another note, now there is a big sale obn CD´s to a lower price... Will be interesting to see if RIA´s claim that the price has mnothing to do with the sale is true... Somehow I get a feeling that sell will increase.. maybe only slightly.. ;)

BAH!

Well, if you can't beat 'em... :(

Both sides should be ashamed of themselves now.

How dose he expect said companies to make their money?

Too true Leonis!

My question is how can the U.S. subject citizens in another country to our laws? The judge said that since people in Califoria use Kazza that the makers of Kazza can be sued in the U.S. Does this also mean that if someone is killed by a gun that was made in the U.S. that a U.S. gun maker can be sued from another countrie?? The same can be said for cars,medicines,airlines and just about anything else the U.S. exports. I think that the judge might be opening a Pandoras box with this case.

I also want to know the Austrailian government has to say about it? How can they allow one of their citizens to be subjected to a forighn law on his home soil? Sounds kind of fishy to me.

Thanks, overlooked that bit. Edited it in now. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 01-30-2003, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

Yes. Kind of like a thief getting injured while burglaring someone's house, then sueing the owners... If the RIAA remembers some of these types of cases, they may not see the suit as quite so laughable.

The same way they alwasy do, by gougeing the public. The RIAA makes such a huge deal out of file shareing , but the ignorantly believe 2 things:
#1 that everyone has a computer.

#2 that everyone who has a computer downloads music and movies with it.

I dont know about anyone else, but have you tried to download ANYTHING with a dial-up connection? My windows update used to take over an hour on dial-up. With DSL it only takes 10 minuets. Not everyone has DSL or cable. In my group of off line friends there are 2 of us with high speed connections,the other 7 have dial up or no computer at all. If we are any kind of indication of the "Common man" then there realy isnt all that much file shareing going on.