Petteri Pyyny
5 Oct 2000 11:49
Now when Napster is a hot topic, once again, it's maybe a time to remind you guys about the very basic question behind this case and p2p technology overall.
Napster's legal case is not about proving that sharing copyrighted MP3s is legal. Not at all. You and me, the guys who actually use Napster and similiar services and allow people to download copyrighted music from our harddrives -- we definately violate copyright laws. No question about it -- letting people to download something from you that doesn't belogn to you, is illegal. End of period.
It's exactle the same thing when you set up your own home page and put some Metallica tracks available on your site. That's illegal and eventually you get into trouble.
But this case is not about that -- it's about determining the liability of the service which allows people to share music. The question is the same in case where you make the homepage and put those MP3s there -- is your ISP responsible for those tracks as well?
And that, my friends, that is the question what they're trying to find out in court. Because suing each and every person who distributes illegal music through Internet is impossible task -- record companies want to share users' responsibility with the service providers. And that is what this Napster's case is all about.