Analysing Copyright Law according to IAAL

Site Announcements
Locked
Toast

Analysing Copyright Law according to IAAL

Post by Toast » 25 Jul 2010, 17:14

Hey Peeps i wanted to show off

Copyright Law and the tripwires behind the mechanism for the full paper visit:
https://www.eff.org/wp/iaal-what-peer-p ... yright-law

So do i need to care about US Copyright law ?

That is a relative question we seen that the US is pretty aggressive when it comes to applying their laws in other countries instead of letting that specific country deal with their own mess since almost every European Country has an antip2p agency.

If we look at the Wikipedia Article on US Copyright Law it says:
  • United States copyright law governs the legally enforceable rights of creative and artistic works under the laws of the United States.
Each government governs over their own laws although we seen breeches of this (piratebay). There are some International Copyright Laws

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... yright_Act

This piece is meant as a general explanation of the U.S. copyright law principles most relevant to P2P file-sharing technologies. It is aimed primarily at:

Now this article will focus on development and the laws applying to the developer how does everything apply to the developer.
  • Developers of core P2P file-sharing technology, such as the underlying protocols, platform tools, and specific client implementations
  • Developers of ancillary services that depend upon or add value to P2P file-sharing networks, such as providers of search, security, metadata aggregation, and other services.
So any part of Development is covered by these laws (this is really messed up ill explain later on)

This section caught my eye same as before about it being US Law:
  • What this is not: The following discussion focuses only on U.S. copyright law, and does not address any issues that may arise under non-U.S. law. While non-copyright principles may also be mentioned, this discussion does not attempt to examine other legal principles that might apply to P2P file-sharing, including patent, trademark, trade secret, or unfair competition. Nothing contained herein constitutes legal advice-please discuss your individual situation with your own attorney.
But as i said before US Copyright Law has a funny way of showing up at your doorstep even if your not apart of the US..

Now defining what a p2p app is is really hard since basically what is a p2p app
  • 1. send files
    2. receive files
These are the 2 fundamental features of a p2p app now how many apps can do this ?

Well there are far too many apps here to list em all but lets take some of the and discuss it

First off if we wanna blacklist like the French government did with the banning of all p2p apps why not go ahead and just shutdown Internet instead cause MSN Messager any web-server with a php upload script or FTP access can easily be made into a receive and send platform so doing that is basically idiotic and i think most French people agree with me.

Now take Englands Digital Economy Act thats basically an embarrassment cause the government is bullying the users there are better ways to make piracy lessen cause it will never go away but it can lessen if the file sharers are given reasonable options instead of downloading it on the Internet.

Now for Trance fanatics like me we got wonderful services for our artists like Beatport, Junodownload etc that lets the Artists earn the cash instead of some greedy fuckhead of a director that makes sales much better and more available for the common users.

(sry went back to the user side again but i thought its still relevant back to the article).

Now lets analyse the part in the paper of IAAL
VI. Lessons and guidelines for P2P developers.

1. Do not make or store copies.

This one is pretty basic nothing much to discuss about the first point

2. Do not promote, encourage, or foster infringing uses.

Ahh now we are getting somewhere do not promote or foster infringing user so we cant make stuff scene specific even if we wanted too.

Here is another part of the paper:
  • Marketing and promotional materials (including websites, advertisements, press releases, newsletters, or links to third party reviews or testimonials)
  • Any instructions aimed at users (including screenshots, FAQs, and customer support communications, whether in email, chat, or bulletin board postings).
this is what refereed to as an affirmative act so our FAQs etc could be considered promoting infringement but for that to actually stick we could argue that providing help files with MSN Messager is the same bullshit

3. Your two options: total control or no control.

Here is a part that i think its most fucked up one of em all autoupdate features like apex etc if apex was under US law it would break copyright law since it has an autoupdate function so again back to the issue of vulnerability vs security as a certified administrator this makes really no sense to me that our app cant have an autoupdate function cause US Law prevents it but at the same time US Law states that botnets etc are highly illegal aswell so we cant secure out users from becoming involuntary zombies if they go on a rouge hub that is used for CTM DDos and that hasn't got some critical updates like reconnect rates and important dns blockers along with REF

But its ok aslong as you dont have a p2p brand on your app to do an autoupdate feature so back again to initial complaint about what constitutes an p2p app.

I myself see DC++ as a chat app basicly like IRC not as a file-sharing app that allows me to get new stuff fast and easy (seems like a paradox). But for me its a communication platform with the availability to share files kinda like MSN Messager or other similar programs.

4. Better to sell stand-alone software products than on-going services.

found a funny note here on the paper on this point:
  • Copyright owners will argue that having the power to terminate or block users from accessing the network is enough "control" to justify imposing vicarious liability.
Now hubsoft has these functions and all the faglink clients from the ruski developers has this function so their high risk software in this case then.

another note is this:
  • Add "financial benefit" in the form of a business model that depends on a large user base, and you're well on your way to being held vicariously liable. This is true even if you are completely unaware of what your users are up to-the pairing of "control" and "financial benefit" can be enough.
Ive seen over the years of hubs begging their users from cash via paypal for users for hosting service etc this is probably one of the issues that that part is referring to since the hub itself is a high risk target.

5. What are your substantial noninfringing uses?

This is what i was talking about before that i dont see the app as a copyright violating machine that eats away at Hollywood, its a communication platform that connects people and lets em discuss and interact.

For me ADC, DC++, ADCH++ is the stuff that keeps me coming back since it provides an outlet for imagination combined to possibilities vs reality how much can we cram and hookup :)

6. Disaggregate functions.

Skipping this point it was boring (although copyright law is pretty boring unless its a huge fuckup like point 3)

7. Don't make your money from the infringing activities of your users.

Not going to happen in our case

8. Give up the EULA.

Wonder if MS is gonna give up the EULA for MSN Messager :P

9. Beware direct customer support.

This is mostly to our users don't ask how or why u cant download a new movies cause we don't wanna answer that.

10. Be open source.

of course what else is there :P

Hope this clears some stuff up and to Pret yeah sentence fragment my ass :P

Pietry
Senior Member
Posts: 328
Joined: 04 Dec 2007, 07:25
Location: Bucharest
Contact:

Re: Analysing Copyright Law according to IAAL

Post by Pietry » 27 Jul 2010, 07:42

In a recent study, BitTorrent seem to be the most wanted file sharing system, and piracy seem to be flourishing with this kind of file sharing. However, attention seem to be distracted from DC, as less and less users join this system. The bright side is that DC is more obscure as not mentioned as important so file sharing can grow here, but less advertisement for this networking system.
Just someone

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests