• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is it legal to do this?

B

BuckMaster

Diamond Member
I would like to start a FTP Server. I'm still in the middle of running/testing some FTP Server software. Is it ok for me to put MP3's on my FTP server for people to D/L? Kinda like what Napster does. I would think its legal as long as I have the Orignal CD? But of course its another thing if the other person is D/Ling it and he/she doesnt. I just want to cover my end. Its really not that big of a deal. Im just doing this to goof off with this FTP software and have something for friends to D/L at the same time.


Thanks..
 
Well no, not really, it's legal for you to have them as MP3, but not to allow other people to get them. That's what Napster's defense is, they aren't hosting the mp3's.
 
OT, but...

In most people's minds, no, this would be copyright infringment. There's a good chance that if you left it running long enough, you would get a cease-and-desist letter from the RIAA telling you to shut down the server or face legal consequences.

OTOH, part of Napsters arguement is that it's legal if you own the CD's, and make no commercial profit from the venture. This arguement seems a little iffy to me, but I'm not a lawyer/judge. The precedent (sp?) of the MP3.Com case certainly doesn't inspire confidence though.


 
I doubt it. It's not legal to distribute physical copies of a CD, why would it be legal to distribute electronic copies of the CD?

And distribution is likely how the authorties would see it.

With all the sh1t hitting the fan over MP3s lately, I wouldn't try it.
I have a few hundred MP3s. All of which I ripped/encoded myself for convience (play games while listening to CDs don't work, because CD and computer use the same speakers), I own all these CDs, I still wouldn't show off my MP3 collection.
 
Its illegal. You would be hosting them for other people to get for free, which is wrong. If you were like napster then you could argue that you are just the passthrough, but you are not. Its wrong dude.
 
The Napster defense is sound as long as you understand the technology. The problem is that lawyers -- even technology and copyright lawyers -- are clueless when it comes to understanding modern computer and Internet software. And judges are just old lawyers.

Holding Napster responsible for its users sharing files amongst themselves makes about as much sense as holding the telephone company responsible for organized criminals who use the telephone to conduct their operations. Come to think of it, we should sue the telephone companies for pirating music because 90% of the data ends up travelling through a phone line, and the phone companies know that full well.

I won't even get into the dirty politics and scheming monopolism behind anti-consumer entities such as the RIAA and MPAA, but the real reason they are going after Napster is that they cannot cost-effectively sue each and every one of the millions of people sharing digital music.

Modus
 
If you didn't advertise to anyone but your friends and this little FTP server was out there running with its own IP and no www.com name, then who's going to know about it and who would bring up the legal aspect?
 
Oh, and another overlooked part of the Napster defense, which should have won them the case outright, is that person to person duplication of copyrighted music has been legal since the early 1980's, in the form of audio cassetes and CD's, as long as no fee is charged. (That's why you're allowed to dub a CD onto a tape and give it to a friend.) The RIAA lost that legal battle and now they're seeing how much it cost them, as it enables millions of people to share files with millions of others, instantaneously.

Sorry, I kind of veered off topic. Yes, an FTP site hosting copyrighted files for public access is illegal.

Modus
 
??? As long as you don't grow too big its ok. Everyone here (am I wrong ?) have many illegal softwares. The reason nothing happens to you is that its no big deal. I mean, like if they are going to pursue everyone in the world !!! haha.. If you grow big though ... and make a company... then.. hehe.. you better get lisense for everything you have ! 🙂

So, as long as you stay small... its ok and you got no problem.

 
Napster don't have any of those MP3's on their server. You do. So I think it is illegal. Anyway, check with your ISP too. They might not let you run an FTP server. I now many @home ISP's are against FTP servers (like mine).

🙂
 
while were on(off) the topic of mp3s, Is it technically illegal to, say, download an MP3 from a site or from Napster, when you don't own that song on any CD?
 
No, it's not legal. Several college students have been busted for serving mp3's. But mostly that's because the college network admin's see that one person is using a ton of bandwidth, and then they report them. However these people are the ones with T1+ connections and usually upwards of 5,000 mp3's. If you only have a couple hundred and you're serving over a DSL connection...it's not necessarily legal, but the FBI won't waste their time hunting you down.
 
Run your opperation from a server in the middle of Russia and no one can touch you 😀 😀 😀

But it is illegal under US law I beleive
 
There were like a zillion ftp mp3 sites before Napster. Running one, especially one without web listings, for a few buddies is no problem. The only problem you might have is if your ISP doesnt like you uploading/hosting.
 
Hahahahahaha
"Run your opperation from a server in the middle of Russia and no one can touch you "

LOL !!!!! 🙂 😉
hehehehe

 
Hahahahahaha
"Run your opperation from a server in the middle of Russia and no one can touch you "
soooooo true !!!
LOL !!!!! 🙂 😉
hehehehe

 
To answer your question,

Hosting a FTP server full of MP3s is very likely illegal, unless you get a hotshot lawyer who can prove otherwise.

Is it ethical. I think not, assuming the people who are downloading the music don't own the CDs.

Will you get caught. 99% chance that you won't.

Its your decision to make.
 
Well I didnt really think this would fly. 🙂 But just wanted to ask anyways. It will be a small FTP site for friends/family. I was just thinking of something they would like to D/L and everyone likes music 😀

Cya...
 


<< ...person to person duplication of copyrighted music has been legal since the early 1980's, in the form of audio cassetes and CD's, as long as no fee is charged >>


I think that is correct.
I belive it was 1983, US Supreme Court.
Can someone with Lexus-Nexus look this up?
 
if it's friends and family only, put a password on it and then only them and hackers will get to it. If it's close friends that law should cover you.
<< ...person to person duplication of copyrighted music has been legal since the early 1980's, in the form of audio cassetes and CD's, as long as no fee is charged >>
 


<< while were on(off) the topic of mp3s, Is it technically illegal to, say, download an MP3 from a site or from Napster, when you don't own that song on any CD? >>


No........this is when it is illegal. If you own the CD you can make yourself backup copies and copies on different media, as long as you actually own it in some format.
If you have no access to any legally purchased copy of the music (purchased by yourself or a close friend/family member) and you have an MP3 of it, that's illegal.




<< Everyone here (am I wrong ?) have many illegal softwares. >>


Perhaps most, but not everyone. I have nothing illegal, everything from Windows 98SE, MSWorks Suite to Games down to my copy of AudioGrabber and WinRAR (like WinZip, but does more types of archives) is licensed to me.
The only software on my computer I haven't paid for is Apollo (MP3 player) and EditPad (notepad on steroids) becuase they are both freeware.
 


<< I think that is correct.
I belive it was 1983, US Supreme Court.
Can someone with Lexus-Nexus look this up? >>



I was wrong. It was 1984, not 1983.
&quot;In the 1984 decision in Sony v. Universal Studios, where the entertainment industry had tried to stamp out VCRs, the Supreme Court said that even though VCRs were predominantly used to copy copyrighted materials, because there were substantial uses that did not infringe copyrights - either because the material was not copyrighted or the copyright owner did not object - you could not find that Sony was guilty of contributory or vicarious infringement.

Now, the recording industry sometimes seems to argue that what matters is which use of the technology predominates. That has never been the law, and, indeed, in the Sony case, it was absolutely clear that more than 80 percent of the use was copyright infringement. So the issue is not, Which is the predominant use, but rather, Is there any substantial noninfringing use? And in fact, in Sony, the Supreme Court did not say there had to be any actual substantial noninfringing uses - it said that the technology merely had to be capable of substantial noninfringing uses.&quot;

This has a great explaination of judicial precident regarding these issues in the US.
linkified!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
&quot;Holding Napster responsible for its users sharing files amongst themselves makes about as much sense as holding the telephone company responsible for organized criminals who use the telephone to conduct their operations. Come to think of it, we should sue the telephone companies for pirating music because 90% of the data ends up travelling through a phone line, and the phone companies know that full well.&quot;

heh, great argument there..

I wonder what the Canadian rules and regulations say on this topic.. it would certainly be interesting to see if we were allowed to!
 
What does any of this matter? With peer2peer networking File-Sharing communities already a reality, and I assume most AnandTechers have the resources to be a part of it, why should we care about Napster?

I have tons of illegal MP3s. I also buy, on average, about 3 CDs per month. Before Napster\Gnutella I would buy maybe 1 cd per month.

I'd like to see the day where everyone has wised up to Gnutella, and the corporate suits will have to find better things to do with their time (Like make quality products instead of crap) because they won't have anyone 2 sue. hmmm...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top