Here we'll explore the nexus of legal rulings, Capitol Hill
policy-making, technical standards development, and technological
innovation that creates -- and will recreate -- the networked world as we
know it. Among the topics we'll touch on: intellectual property
conflicts, technical architecture and innovation, the evolution of
copyright, private vs. public interests in Net policy-making, lobbying
and the law, and more.
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this weblog are those of the authors and not of their respective institutions.
Mahalo is a new "human-powered search engine," which means they hand-craft pages on popular search topics. Each page contains a mixture of tips, how-tos, and links. In a way it's kind of like wikihow on steroids, with less instructions, prettier graphics and often higher quality info and off-links.
They've just published their alpha version of the "How to Download Free Music" page. It features a prominent warning about copyrights and a link to the RIAA right at the top.
Much of the early page info focuses on MP3 Blogs, but if you scroll down there's detailed information on torrents, including how to install and configure clients, how to get around firewalls, and even warnings about honeypots and TorrentSpy. All in all one of the most extensive and best-written pages I've seen yet from Mahalo.
(Full disclosure: at least two of my friends work for Mahalo but I have no financial stake in the company and neither of them wrote this particular page.)
Any purportedly authoritative site that starts with "It is illegal to download copyrighted material without permission" is setting a poor standard.
It could instead say "In many jurisdictions it is perfectly legal to download unauthorised copies of published copyrighted material."
I don't actually know in which jurisdictions it is illegal. Japan perhaps?
Moreover, it would also be true to say "In many jurisdictions it has not yet been established whether 'making available' or 'advertising a willingness to manufacture copies' can be illegal." and also "In many jurisdictions, while many have been sued, no-one has yet been prosecuted for file-sharing, let alone downloading, on the grounds of copyright infringement".
The record labels are gleefully litigating, but in the US are doing everything possible to prevent any cases actually obtaining a judgement as to whether any copyright infringement has been committed by the downloading defendant.
1. Crosbie Fitch on August 2, 2007 10:40 AM writes...
Any purportedly authoritative site that starts with "It is illegal to download copyrighted material without permission" is setting a poor standard.
It could instead say "In many jurisdictions it is perfectly legal to download unauthorised copies of published copyrighted material."
I don't actually know in which jurisdictions it is illegal. Japan perhaps?
Moreover, it would also be true to say "In many jurisdictions it has not yet been established whether 'making available' or 'advertising a willingness to manufacture copies' can be illegal." and also "In many jurisdictions, while many have been sued, no-one has yet been prosecuted for file-sharing, let alone downloading, on the grounds of copyright infringement".
The record labels are gleefully litigating, but in the US are doing everything possible to prevent any cases actually obtaining a judgement as to whether any copyright infringement has been committed by the downloading defendant.
Permalink to Comment2. drwex on August 2, 2007 1:20 PM writes...
Hey, that's the fun of a public alpha - you can go and pester them to make changes.
Permalink to Comment