In the spirit of this thread:
Lets say I have a friend who has many, many illegally obtained albums, hundreds even. Do you think at any point he could be held accountable for his actions, or is the government only looking for the people who are helping to distribute stolen music?
Do I know you?..
But seriously i think this falls under the category of technically illegal but not enforced.
I’d think the government would be more concerned about the tons of child porn on p2p networks than mp3s.
But we all know Metallica are the true victims,poor little Lars.
One other thing, it occurs to me that most mp3 downloader have uploaded a great deal as well. Is it possible the government could prosecute large downloaders on the grounds of distribution under the auspices of DMCA, the patriot act, or both? Should my friend seek to change his evil ways? Do inflated record prices justify breaking the law?
Two ways he could get into deep trouble that do not directly involve the government:
If he downloads from work, or stores or copies them onto a corporate-owned PC, he could discover that some companies take a very hard line against this, and be fired. And in this economy, that means he could end selling pencils to finance further illegal downloads.
If he downloads from school, or stores or copies them onto school-owned PCs, he could face school disciplinary action. And could, possibly, be expelled. And then he’d have to get a job as a Wal-Mart greeter, and during break times he would have to go back to the electronics section, and download from there. Then Wal-Mart would find this out, and fire him. And once he has a Wal-Mart firing on his record, he may as well wear a big “Osama Rules!” t-shirt when he goes on interviews. He then will have to sell his body for the pleasure of rich men, and will end up being addicted to Percocet, tatooed with the word “Man Bitch” on his genitals, and finally contract neural syphyllis. After wandering the rails as a singing hobo for a few years, he will die alone and forgotten, tended only by the nurses of St. Agnes Sanctuary for the Criminally Insane. His last words will be “Lars! You were right! Truly you are the King of Kings!”.
So you see, he really ought not to.
First, you friend can’t go to jail in any case. Copyright infringement is a civil offense, not a criminal one. He can only be fined.
Second, the government isn’t going to do anything. Again, copyright is a civil offense, not a criminal one. It’s up to the copyright holder to take action. They can, however, ask the authorities to seize your computer as evidence.
So the question is whether the copyright holder wants to go after you for the violation. Could you afford the lawyer fees to defend youself?
Copyright is protected by both civil and criminal law. Here’s a list of Federal criminal statutes regarding copyrights, along with some examples of cases:
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/iplaws.htm
To violate the Federal criminal copyright law, you have to be a “large scale” violator of copyright. However, that’s defined as distributing more than $1000 of retail value of copyrighted material. That’s (say) 100 albums worth. If you stay logged into a file-sharing program all the time and you have your files shared, it’s very easy to serve a couple hundred albums over the span of a couple of weeks.
So if your friend is constantly logged into a file-sharing program and has his files shared it’s theoretically possible he could go to jail. However, in practice the Feds aren’t going to go after him: they’re going to go after bigger fish like the software piracy ring described in one of the cases. No one’s going to arrest you for speeding five miles over limit if there’s some guy screaming past you at 100 miles an hour.
Is your pal collecting movies as well? Even if he isn’t, he probably wants to know about a little company called BayTSP. That company is working closely with federal authorities to enforce the DMCA, and if they are to be believed, they know everything, everything, about what we’ve been up to when it comes to peer-to-peer file sharing. Among the notable things mentioned in that article:
and
Remember, you can worry about Big Brother all you want, but it’s the little brothers and sisters who always rat you out.
I agree for the time being, but the labels are starting to get more involved in this, especially now that they have their own legal fee-based file-sharing programs in place. In my opinion, it’s only a matter of time before they start going after individual users since there’s no longer a central administrative network that can be shut down a la Napster.
–Cliffy
Not to scare you, but have you read this? Synopsis: guy in Pittsburgh (who may be oblivious to the entire ordeal) could be in serious trouble for P2P file-sharing.
Basically, we could see cease-and-desist letters sent to the violator’s home becoming fairly common.
A good thing to remember is that the RIAA is always going to go after the biggest offenders in the biggest “network” of file-sharers. For example, they went after Napster first, now it’s shut down. Then they went after Audiogalaxy. Now they’re onto Kazaa and Morpheus. It wouldn’t surprise me if they went after IRC and people with their own ftp sites eventually. They’re pissed, and they’re ready to fight for what they believe in–and unfortunately, the law is on their side. Not much you can do about it.
As always, The onion puts things in perspective.
http://www.theonion.com/onion3836/riaa_sues_radio_stations.html
Actually I live in Chicago and while it is rare it isn’t unheard of for the police to go undercover and arrest people selling or buying promotional or homemade CDs from Used CD stores.
I have seen it.