File Sharing Deemed Legal In Spain...

  dogbreath1 16:10 05 Nov 2006

click here

And an interesting observation about the potential weakness of RIAA cases...especially as regards the potency of evidence and anomalies associated with open wireless networks...

  dogbreath1 16:20 05 Nov 2006

click here

The following quote has been extracted from the above...

"Brace yourselves, this is where it really starts to get freaky. In her countersuit, Anderson claims that the Settlement Support Center acknowledged the probability of her innocence, but informed her that should she refuse to settle, the RIAA would proceed with a suit in order to discourage others from attempting to defend themselves against unwarranted litigation."

Customer relations, eh??!!

  Forum Editor 16:25 05 Nov 2006

Steady on. I know you like to find things which look as if they support your personal opinions, but one swallow doesn't make a summer, or in this case one judge doesn't make a law.

Spain already has a law making file-sharing for copyright material illegal, and in June of this year - only a few short months ago the Spanish congress passed legislation preventing ISPs from 'facilitating' file sharing. There's more - the Spanish Justice Minister Juan Fernando Lopéz Aguilar has announced that Spain is drafting a new law to abolish the existing right to private copies of material.

If you think that a single decision by a judge in court amounts to a change in the Spanish law you have a great deal to learn about the way legislation works. This decision will be appealed, and in the long term I'll be astonished if the Spanish law is changed.

  Forum Editor 16:32 05 Nov 2006

your second post - which is about an american woman who is suing the RIAA (the Recording Industries Association of America) on a specific matter has to do with your first post, which relates not to the RIAA as you erroneously claimed, but to The Spanish recording industry federation - a totally different organisation.

Come on, if you're going to pounce on random news items you might at least get your facts straight.

  dogbreath1 16:46 05 Nov 2006

I'm simply making the point that this whole thing is not as one sided as the anti p2p lobby would have us believe.

You're right. One swallow and all that..

But in the light of the majority of national legislative precedents, one judge in Spain has nevertheless stuck his head above the parapet to voice his concern over the way this matter has been handled in the courts so far. And that speaks volumes.

My second post was similarly intended. Namely to demonstrate just how nebulous this whole thing is.

  dogbreath1 16:48 05 Nov 2006

Do you sleep with one eye open at night?! ;-)

  Forum Editor 17:04 05 Nov 2006

Actually that Spanish judge was acting as he saw fit in the circumstances. I don't have full details of the case, but as I understand it his judgment turned on the fact that the accused person had made no financial gain from his activities. He simply made numerous CDs from the music he had downloaded, and distributed them to his friends. As I say, I don't know all the facts, but the judge did, and his decision was based on them, and on his view of how the current Spanish legislation should be interpreted.

The decision is being appealed by the Spanish recording industry federation, so we'll see. What is interesting is that Spain is known for having the highest rate of illegal downloading activity in Europe, and the lowest spend per capita on recorded music. The Spanish authorities are determined to do something about that hence their pretty stiff legislation. It makes this judge's decision all the more interesting, as I'm sure you'll agree.

The american case is very different, it involves a woman who is suing the RIAA because she says they wrongly accused her of downloading huge quantities of copyright-protected rap music. She says she has evidence that they (the RIAA) knew she hadn't done it, but that they intended to bring the prosecution anyway, so that other downloaders were deterred. It will also be an interesting case, because it seeks to bring the RIAA and its methods into disrepute. If proved that would be enormously damaging to an organisation that has trumpeted its role as a defender of the legal stance with regard to copyright theft.

  dogbreath1 17:13 05 Nov 2006

" seeks to bring the RIAA and its methods into disrepute."

Far be it from me to attempt something like that!

We both know where we stand on this issue and for now it seems best to await the outcome of the two cases.

Thanks for acknowledging that these are potentially very important judgments...coz if they do go against the establishment (and I think that they might) they are likely to colour future cases.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

AMD Ryzen news - release date, UK price, features and specifications

The pulp art of 80s computer game magazine covers

Best value Mac: Which is the best £1249 Mac to buy

Comment faire des captures d’écran sous Windows 10 ?