US prosecutors challenge P2P companies

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
Date: August 6, 2004 8:38:31 PM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] US prosecutors challenge P2P companies
Reply-To: dewayne () warpspeed com

Original URL: <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/06/p2p_law/>

US prosecutors challenge P2P companies

By Tony Smith (tony.smith at theregister.co.uk)
Published Friday 6th August 2004 13:49 GMT
P2P software companies have been told to clean up their act and do more 
to protect their users from the seedier side of the file-sharing scene 
- or risk facing legal action.

The call comes from US attorneys general from 45 states, the District 
of Columbia and the US Virgin Islands in an open letter to the P2P 
software industry and asks P2Pers to "take concrete and meaningful 
steps to address the serious risks posed to the consumers of our states 
by [their] peer-to-peer file-sharing technology".

"The illegal uses of P2P technology are having an adverse impact on our 
states' consumers, economies and general welfare," the letter adds.

The huddle of lawyers essentially wants P2Pers to block porn, 
unauthorised MP3 files, viruses, spyware and the like. At the very 
least, they say, P2P companies should do more to warn users of the 
dangers of mis-using their software - including the risk of prosecution 
from the states the legal eagles represent.

Perhaps it's time to introduce the P2P equivalent of the Surgeon 
General/Chief Medical Officer's ciggie pack warning. "Caution! 
Unauthorised music-sharing may damage your unborn foetus..." Something 
like that, perhaps.

"The letter is significant in what it doesn't say, which is that we are 
presumptively engaging in illegal practices," responded P2P United 
executive director Adam Eisgrau, cited by Reuters.

That's already been proven not to be the case, in the MPAA's failed 
legal attack on Streamcast and Grokster. The original ruling, that 
P2Pers can't be held responsible for the unlawful actions of their 
users, is being challenged in the court of appeal.

The case went Streamcast and Grokster's way because P2P does have legal 
uses. The trouble is, arguably most folk use the software for illicit 
purposes: downloading movies and music. Surely, then, the attorneys 
general be warning the users not the software companies?

"We will, as appropriate, continue to initiate... actions in the future 
to stop deceptive and illegal practices by users of the Internet, 
including users of P2P software," they warn.

Not that they're letting the P2Pers entirely off the hook, and if they 
can't be challenged directly for contributory copyright infringement - 
the accusation that was successfully leveled against Napster - law 
enforcement agencies may choose other approaches.

"The undertaking of enforcement actions against individual users does 
not excuse your companies from fostering deceptive practices on our 
consumers that invade their privacy and threaten their security," the 
lawyers write. "Nor do they excuse your companies from avoiding 
software design changes that deliberately prevent law enforcement in 
our states from prosecuting P2P users for violations of the law."


Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/