“‘The following factors, taken together, establish that LW intended to encourage infringement by distributing LimeWire: (1) LW’s awareness of substantial infringement by users; (2) LW’s efforts to attract infringing users; (3) LW’s efforts to enable and assist users to commit infringement; (4) LW’s dependence on infringing use for the success of its business; and (5) LW’s failure to mitigate infringing activities,’ Judge Kimba Wood ruled,” Reisinger reports.
“The result of the ruling could mean the end of LimeWire, a long-time file-sharing service that enjoyed nearly unprecedented success in the market,” Reisinger writes. “LimeWire CEO George Searle said in a statement that although his company is displeased by the ruling, it plans to work ‘with the entire music industry’ going forward to deliver music-based services that appeal to listeners.”
“For its part, the RIAA couldn’t be happier. The organization wrote in a statement that the ‘ruling is an extraordinary victory for the entire creative community.’ It went on to say that it was ‘gratified by the court’s careful and thorough analysis of the facts and applicable law,'” Reisinger writes. “But whether or not the RIAA’s victory will actually work in the music industry’s favor is decidedly up for debate.”
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
Only kids or unintelligent windows users use limewire.. and even they are more apt for torrents than anything else..
LimeWire was a haven for pirating music and other software. It was only a matter of time. Simple as that. Good to see the RIAA doing something noble. Buy it from iTunes.
@Melan
I can’t believe you just put the word “noble” and “RIAA” in the same sentence. Pirating is b.s. but the RIAA is as foul as any organization on the planet.
I tried to use Limewire and other file sharing programs in the past, and almost always had to dig through heaps of rubbish to get what you want, even with a specific search. Blagh, never again.
The RIAA may do many, many things that you or I may not agree with, but that doesn’t mean they’re inherently evil. This is what they exist for, and this is an example of them doing what they’re supposed to do. Music has value. Go after the dealers, not their clients.
“… the RIAA couldn’t be happier.”
Anytime you read that you know a bunch of people just got fucked.
Fuck RIAA.
Hey – post that on Digg and you’ll get 14,000 diggs.
@ Melan Parkstrider
Are you with the RIAA? I agree with Macromancer. Using “noble” and “RIAA” in the same sentence is an abomination.
Total waste of time. A war on the illegal copying of music is about as useful as a war on drugs, or a war on terror for that matter.
Ever since tape records, people have been copying music. Killing Limewire will just move it’s music piraters on to torrents, then from torrents on to the next thing. Just like busting the drug dealer at the end of the street, will just move their clients on to the dealer at the other end of the street. Pointless!
It’s all about being ‘seen’ as accomplishing something rather than actually accomplishing something. Anyway, screw the record industry, they failed to embrace the legal online distribution of music and are still not entirely happy about the whole notion. Shit scared that it basically makes them redundant.
Record your own music, distribute your own music online, keep all of the money (after taxes of course) for yourself. Who the hell needs a record company?
edit…
that should say “tape recorders”, obviously.
My bad.
@ theabebo
You make it sound so easy! If only it were that simple.
I don’t have a problem with this. What’s with the sense of entitlement?!
Because music is easy to obtain ILLEGALLY, people feel they have the RIGHT to do so?
Sure, the record companies are greedy, but it still doesn’t mean it’s ok to steal. I have the same arguments with friends all the time about software.
Adobe OVERCHARGES for Creative Suite, but maybe if everyone bought the software it would cost a fraction of what it does now. Don’t like what they charge, use something else. You want to use the industry standard, raise your rates to cover the cost. If you’re a student, the prices are very affordable.
Waste of time. Sure.
But maybe if people grew up with morals and new right from wrong, these lawsuits wouldn’t be necessary.
Just because you can take something, doesn’t mean you should.
What pisses me off is that most of the people I deal with that have these opinions are graphic designers themselves.
What a bunch of hypocrites! Talk about double standards.
Don’t steal my designs or artwork, but it’s ok for me do steal from you because you’re a big corporation. Since I’ve decided you have enough money, it’s ok.
Ahhhhh…..I wax nostalgic when I think about Napster or LimeWire (which I still use on occasion). Those were the wild frontier days, kids!
Now, the RIAA needs to die. According to them, copying your CD to your computer is illegal. Don’t believe me?
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2007/12/riaa-copying-mu/
The fallacy here is that the music industry exploits and rips the musicians of a lot more than than everyone.
That being a sorry fact, that needs to be reckoned with, music should be purchased – Apple found the right formula and price point that worked. The record labels greedy pricing has been the source of pirating.
Musicians need to be payed and supported.
Pay The Man.
In the not so distant future, the music labels will be gone and artists will deal directly with iTunes to sell their music.
Probably a 70-30 split or something like that.
@breeze
I completely agree. People act like their Robin Hood, or at least they tell themselves that to satisfy their conscience.
I know it’s “they’re” before the spelling police come out
If we follow this sort of legal “reasoning”, car and gun manufacturers should be sued for assisting criminal activities.
After all, both industries are well aware that criminals use their products, and by being so aware the C&G;manufacturers “enable and assist” criminals to commit their heinous acts because C&G;manufacturers are doing nothing to mitigate the criminal use of their products.
While we’re at it, let’s add knife makers to the list.
And banks.
After all, if banks didn’t keep all that money on their premises, they wouldn’t be targets. They’re just enabling the criminal enterprise of bank robberies and they know it.
And every B&M;retailer, also.
@MacinScott
In the not so distant future, the music labels will be gone and artists will deal directly with iTunes to sell their music.
Already happening lots of independent artists are on iTunes.
Like this guy …………
http://www.myspace.com/thecidermilldrive
Judge Kimba Wood….. now that sounds like a band name
the ‘ruling is an extraordinary victory for the entire creative community.’
Actually, RIAA, the actual creative people in the “creative community” – you know, those of us who actually create the music – can’t wait for you to stop siphoning most of the money from fruits of our labors, and leaving us with crumbs.
You know all those songs that went up to $1.29 on iTunes, thanks to the labels pushing for higher prices? Yeah, those extra 30 cents go straight to the labels’ pockets. The artist doesn’t get any of it. The labels lobbied to increase prices, not to defend the rights of musicians to be paid, but to line their own pockets. And fund lawsuits like this.
Die, RIAA, die.
@Gabriel
Totally agree. Every “victory” for the RIAA is a loss by the actual artists, as it props up the rapists and pillagers that are the record labels. Only when the RIAA and music labels fail will musicians actual “win” anything.
Kimba Woods is my fav success story. Not a band. Almost a supreme court justice but withdrew aftervetting. She might have been a playboy employee.
@MacInScott
Economically speaking, there is something off about your arguement regarding price versus stealing. Adobe charges a small fortune for Creative Suite. You claim that if people stole it less, they would charge less. That doesn’t make any sense at all: if everyone paid Adobe the high price, what incentive would Adobe have to lower the price?
On the other hand, if Adobe lowered the price significantly, more people would pay, stealing would drop, and Adobe would collect more money.
Similarly, there was a study done, I think by a Canadian university, that said if the music industry dropped the price of songs to five cents per track, piracy would vanish and the labels would still make more money than they do now.
Piracy is bad, stealing is wrong, but greed is blinding and stupid. It also makes people FEEL justified in stealing, even though it is wrong.