Any lawyer can help me with the following Q's? (please, thank u)

Have ISP's an obligation to track to who they hand out a certain IP address? Can they b forced to do this by a court ruling, or by a simple sub?

Subpoena's are beeing haded out, which allow the RIAA to ask ISP's for the identity of their clients, without any judge involved. Could this b an invasion of privacy?

Is Copyright infringement technically the same as stealing? Often people who download music are referred to as thieves, but since 95% or so of what is downloaded would never be bought in the first place, i wondered.

When u make copyrighted songs available to file-sharing networks you are distributing copyrighted material. Does it matter to the law that you are not trying to make any profit?

When u make songs available to file-sharing networks you are not 'actively' doing anything. It's like leaving your car with with the keys on the door: sure u almost 'invite' people to steal it, but technically you're not doing anyting wrong (i think). How does this work with copyrighted works?

(Hey, there are no stupid questions, only stupid people )

SpcMs said:

Technically, the crime of theft is usually strictly defined and is a specific offence under the legislataion of different countries.

However, the term 'theft' is usually not being used within its strict legal definition when copyright infringement is discussed. Rather, copyright represents the legal interest in a form of property belonging to someone, and where copyright is breached then the legal rights to that property have in some way been affected. It is common to say that the copyright holders property has been 'stolen' when copyright is breached.

The argument that the material could never have been bought in the first place is generally no defence. When a piece of work is created, it is usually automatically copyrighted in the eyes of the law. People only register the copyright to protect their interest more easily. That piece of work may never be made available for sale or only for a limited time, but that in no way diminishes the fact that the work will still be under copyright for a period of time during which it is generally not permitted for it to be copied without permission of the copyright holder.In the first instance, no. There has been a technical breach of copyright - period.

There are legitimate defences that can be made - usually falling within the 'fair use' doctrine. Non-profiteering from use of the material may help shore up that defence - but is no defence whatsoever itself. It will also be considered when damages are assessed in favour of the copyright holder - but it won't mean that you won't pay costs.

Nonetheless, in the context of simple filesharing, it is no defence to a breach of copyright to suggest that you were simply not out to make a profit. Moreover, in the case of general music filesharing, you would have to state a very good case to try to uphold the 'fair use' doctrine in defence of copyright breach.Wrong - in the case of property copyrighted to someone else - you are making available property which does not belong to you.It's not technically your car in the first place. the law would say that you should hand the car back to the owner and stop dealing (regardless of whether you are making a profit or not, or whether you are ever claiming that the car belongs to you)Basically, you are wrong. the file you place for someone else to share is a copy of work which is copyrighted to someone else. You are effectively 'publishing' that work by placing it on a server somewhere, and thereby creating a further copy of the work - and therefore breaching copyright.

When people draw analogies like these, they often lose sight of the right that copyright represents. In the case of music, a musician creates legal interest in a piece of original work when it is created. That means that, generally speaking, and for a specific period of time determined in law, no-one else can copy that original piece of work unless they have permission from the copyright holder. If you have a piece of copyrighted work, authorised or not, then generally speaking, if you share a copy of that by placing it on a server (where it might be downloaded by others) you are creating an unauthorised copy, and therefore breaching the copyright holder's rights.

-----

I have no specific detailed understanding of how a subpoena will work in the case of the RIAA action, and within which legal jurisdictions it will be capable of being enforced.


.
[This message was edited Thu Aug 7 2:03:47 PDT 2003 by langebleu]

Thank you, Sir.
That was perfectly clear and you helped me out big time.