LimeWire Settles with Record Companies for Only $105 Million

[Yopaz]

I love the way these people overexaggerate their losses so badly.

However what I don't love is Lime Wire, 90% of the computers I fix, have that god awful program and they're stuck with viruses galore.

My thought when LimeWire was taken down was "Finally, the word's biggest virus distributor is offline" It's really a terrible program that should have been taken down for many reasons besides sharing of copyright material ages ago. I am impressed that it's been able to stay alive this long though.

 

[DEAD34345]

When someone buys a knife and stabs a man, do we punish the person who sold the knife?

When someone buys a computer and hacks a website, do we punish the person who sold the computer?

Yet when someone pirates some music, it's perfectly acceptable to punish the one who provided the software?

It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, just because something CAN be used for illegal purposes doesn't mean that giving it to someone else is a crime. If that was the case nothing in the world would ever be created because everyone would be too afraid that the washing machine they just sold was going to be dropped on a guys head, or that the DS they just sold was going to be turned into a gun.


This doesn't make ANY sense! You can't sue people for allowing other people to do illegal things!

 

[Yopaz]

What about Frostwire? You know, the one that went live the day Limewire went down.

Uhm, you might want to check your facts there. FrostWire started in 2004. The popularity increased when LimeWire went down because it looks the same and the name is basically the same.

When someone buys a knife and stabs a man, do we punish the person who sold the knife?

When someone buys a computer and hacks a website, do we punish the person who sold the computer?

Yet when someone pirates some music, it's perfectly acceptable to punish the one who provided the software?

It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, just because something CAN be used for illegal purposes doesn't mean that giving it to someone else is a crime. If that was the case nothing in the world would ever be created because everyone would be too afraid that the washing machine they just sold was going to be dropped on a guys head, or that the DS they just sold was going to be turned into a gun.


This doesn't make ANY sense! You can't sue people for allowing other people to do illegal things!

I think that is because LimeWire never had any other goal but to be a peer to peer downlaod service for illegal files. There have been requests to take it down, but they never went through with it.

This kinda pisses me off... How is limewire any different than getting on youtube, looking up a song, and downloading said song for free via online downloading programs? The fact that you didn't have to use a downloading program?

*sigh* Record companies can just go in a pit and... Nevermind, I'll try to remain civil...

If you check Youtube you'll often see that videos or audio is removed due to copyright infringement, some videos can't be shown worldwide, it does not provide you with downloads in case you want to listen to it on a media such as a mp3 player and it's run by a big evil corporation that is big enough to waste RIAA's resources if they were to sue. Streaming is not illegal for some reason beyond me. Downloading copyrighted material from a streaming site is in the gray. Don't ask why, the law is complicated and often stupid.

 

[DEAD34345]

I think that is because LimeWire never had any other goal but to be a peer to peer downlaod service for illegal files. There have been requests to take it down, but they never went through with it.

LimeWire is a peer to peer download service that allows you to download and share files with other people. It's not like you can ONLY share files illegally, any files can be shared. Saying this should be took down is like saying CD writers should be shut down because they also allow you to share files, including ones which are illegal to share.

 

[Pandaman1911]

Another victory for justice. I'm glad to see that this company won't be contributing to the spread of pirated music any more.

 

[Yopaz]

I think that is because LimeWire never had any other goal but to be a peer to peer downlaod service for illegal files. There have been requests to take it down, but they never went through with it.

LimeWire is a peer to peer download service that allows you to download and share files with other people. It's not like you can ONLY share files illegally, any files can be shared. Saying this should be took down is like saying CD writers should be shut down because they also allow you to share files, including ones which are illegal to share.

Which does not change the fact that the person responsible for the software should take responsibility for its use. If you sell someone an object that can be sued as a weapon you can't be blamed for it because you can't control the use. If you are running a restaurant selling food that might not be good you can be punished for that.
The practice of selling things, and selling a service are 2 different parts of the world. If you're selling an object you have no responsibility for usage of it, that's why you need a license to buy certain things. Are you selling a service you have responsibility for it as long as the service is being used. Thus he should be responsible for all the files on LimeWire, and he should have removed files that violate copyright laws.
Edit: and don't forget the warnings.

 

[DEAD34345]

Which does not change the fact that the person responsible for the software should take responsibility for its use. If you sell someone an object that can be sued as a weapon you can't be blamed for it because you can't control the use. If you are running a restaurant selling food that might not be good you can be punished for that.
The practice of selling things, and selling a service are 2 different parts of the world. If you're selling an object you have no responsibility for usage of it, that's why you need a license to buy certain things. Are you selling a service you have responsibility for it as long as the service is being used. Thus he should be responsible for all the files on LimeWire, and he should have removed files that violate copyright laws.
Edit: and don't forget the warnings.

You don't seem to understand what LimeWire does. The illegal files are not held by LimeWire, LimeWire merely enables 2 (or more) people to share files between themselves, whether those files are illegal or not is impossible to tell, and it is even more impossible to prevent only illegal files from being shared this way. He can't remove files that violate copyright laws because he doesn't actually have any.

A web browser allows you to connect to IPs and download files. The maker of the browser does not know what these files will be, and many illegal files can be downloaded through the use of a browser. By your argument, this would mean that every single web browser should be shut down too, because they are "allowing" people to view illegal websites by providing this service. Luckily, browsers aren't outlawed because the browser doesn't control which websites can be viewed, just as LimeWire doesn't control which files people choose to share among themselves.

This quote is the most telling: "If you sell someone an object that can be sued as a weapon you can't be blamed for it because you can't control the use.".

The maker of LimeWire cannot control the use, it is merely providing a program that allows people to share files among themselves. It seems you pretty much agree with me, except that you think LimeWire does something which it does not.

 

[DRSH1989]

Big deal; nobody uses LimeWire anyway. They use FrostWire.

or Ares.

 

[SuperNova221]

105$ million towards record companies? Why not put the music somewhere useful, like education, or research, instead of into funding more and more careers of overpaid pop stars?

 

[Yopaz]

You don't seem to understand what LimeWire does. The illegal files are not held by LimeWire, LimeWire merely enables 2 (or more) people to share files between themselves, whether those files are illegal or not is impossible to tell, and it is even more impossible to prevent only illegal files from being shared this way. He can't remove files that violate copyright laws because he doesn't actually have any.

A web browser allows you to connect to IPs and download files. The maker of the browser does not know what these files will be, and many illegal files can be downloaded through the use of a browser. By your argument, this would mean that every single web browser should be shut down too, because they are "allowing" people to view illegal websites by providing this service. Luckily, browsers aren't outlawed because the browser doesn't control which websites can be viewed, just as LimeWire doesn't control which files people choose to share among themselves.

This quote is the most telling: "If you sell someone an object that can be sued as a weapon you can't be blamed for it because you can't control the use.".

The maker of LimeWire cannot control the use, it is merely providing a program that allows people to share files among themselves. It seems you pretty much agree with me, except that you think LimeWire does something which it does not.

If every web browser came with tools to make it easier to access illegal sites, then yes, every browser should be shut down then. You know the difference between a browser and LimeWire? Most big browsers block out sites that have been reported containing illegal material. Some browsers prevent you from getting illegal material even on sites you can access.
Limewire lets you connect to the Gnutella network and bit torrent trackers. I stated that it is a peer to peer network, so obviously I know what it is. If I am not mistaken. Yes, he might not be able to see all the files, but when his system is notoriously known for being used to piracy he should question if he should keep updating it.
You can use it for legal means, but do you have a number on how many legal files were there? I don't, and I don't know anyone who used it for legal means.
LimeWire kept on updating the software after the main use of it was apparent. It kept making the software do what it was doing easier and more effective.
Saying he is innocent is far from true. He might not be able to shut down the servers, but he should have been able to shut down the primary LimeWire servers to prevent more from downloading. if I don't miss my guess completely, he could have made an update that would block out the users. Sure, this wouldn't stop it from being used, but it would be enough to avoid a lawsuit, but then he wouldn't make any money from the advertisement.
Fun fact at the end. You can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you can't be punished if you gave it a try and failed.

 

[IamGamer41]

So if I record a song off the radio and play it in my car I'm steeling music? Dose not matter anyway people will still find a way to get there music.Heck people rip music from youtube all the time

 

[DEAD34345]

If every web browser came with tools to make it easier to access illegal sites, then yes, every browser should be shut down then. You know the difference between a browser and LimeWire? Most big browsers block out sites that have been reported containing illegal material. Some browsers prevent you from getting illegal material even on sites you can access.
Limewire lets you connect to the Gnutella network and bit torrent trackers. I stated that it is a peer to peer network, so obviously I know what it is. If I am not mistaken. Yes, he might not be able to see all the files, but when his system is notoriously known for being used to piracy he should question if he should keep updating it.
You can use it for legal means, but do you have a number on how many legal files were there? I don't, and I don't know anyone who used it for legal means.
LimeWire kept on updating the software after the main use of it was apparent. It kept making the software do what it was doing easier and more effective.
Saying he is innocent is far from true. He might not be able to shut down the servers, but he should have been able to shut down the primary LimeWire servers to prevent more from downloading. if I don't miss my guess completely, he could have made an update that would block out the users. Sure, this wouldn't stop it from being used, but it would be enough to avoid a lawsuit, but then he wouldn't make any money from the advertisement.
Fun fact at the end. You can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you can't be punished if you gave it a try and failed.

Well part of this is simply not true, I know for a fact I could go onto The Pirate Bay (for example) right now with any browser of my choice, and the main use of that is illegally downloading files. In fact, The Pirate Bay comes up as the first result when you type "Pirate" into Google. The owners of The Pirate Bay know it's primary use is illegal, and the owners of Google know this too. Yet it is not illegal for Google to link directly to The Pirate Bay and nor should it be.

I have said it before, and I will said it again, you should not be punished because someone used something you provided to do something illegal. It MAY be morally wrong to provide a service that is primarily used for something illegal, but it should not be illegal.

You say "You can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you can't be punished if you gave it a try and failed.".
Well I say that yes, you can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you cannot be punished for selling a perfectly legal object if it is then used for murder.

P2P services are not illegal, only using them to copyrighted files is illegal.

 

[rayen020]

I'm really curious to see if sells go up in any significant way since limewire shut down. Honestly i used limewire, never for movies, but for maybe one or 2 songs that i was not willing to buy/couldn't afford a CD for. i'd be slightly surprised if suddenly the labels are making tons more cash since we have to pay on itunes or for CDs.

 

[Lionsfan]

So if I record a song off the radio and play it in my car I'm stealing music? Dose not matter anyway people will still find a way to get there music.Heck people rip music from youtube all the time

Fixed that for you. And to answer you're question technically yes. And if the RIAA could find a way to prosecute you for that I'm sure they would

 

[CardinalPiggles]

god i havent used limewire in years! i guess if i still did i would be pissed. i wish i had $75 trillion though, would be shweet.

I'm glad the candle industry didn't work this hard to murder the light bulb.

quote of the day

 

[Yopaz]

Well part of this is simply not true, I know for a fact I could go onto The Pirate Bay (for example) right now with any browser of my choice, and the main use of that is illegally downloading files. In fact, The Pirate Bay comes up as the first result when you type "Pirate" into Google. The owners of The Pirate Bay know it's primary use is illegal, and the owners of Google know this too. Yet it is not illegal for Google to link directly to The Pirate Bay and nor should it be.

I have said it before, and I will said it again, you should not be punished because someone used something you provided to do something illegal. It MAY be morally wrong to provide a service that is primarily used for something illegal, but it should not be illegal.

You say "You can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you can't be punished if you gave it a try and failed.".


P2P services are not illegal, only using them to copyrighted files is illegal.

Quote where I said Peer to peer is illegal. I stated the use of LimeWire as a peer to peer software.
I am not sure if you are quite updated on the news. Did you miss the fact that Pirate bay actually had to go to both criminal and civil court for their involvement in Pirate Bay? Not for copyright infringement, but for promoting copyright infringement. Because promoting copyright infringement is also a crime.

Well I say that yes, you can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you cannot be punished for selling a perfectly legal object if it is then used for murder.

If you actually witness the murder right after selling the perfectly legal hammer, then yes. It is a crime to not do anything about it. If the murder happens behind a few shelves, but still inside the store without you noticing the incident you can still be punished for it since it is in a loacation which you are responsible of.
Google will give you pirate bay as the first hit when you search for pirate because that's how Google works. It searches for the most popular site containing certain phrases. The reason this hasn't been changed is that they haven't been requested not to. If they had received a request to lock it out from their search and not done it, they too could go to court for promoting piracy. There are several sites that have been removed from the search, and there are browsers that wont let you enter sites with illegal material. The fact that some haven't been removed is because they haven't been reported.
Now answer me, how many legal files are there on LimeWire and how many do you know who use it for legal purposes?

 

[Digikid]

Nuts. I was seriously hoping that they would kill Limewire for sure.

Hopefully soon......Damn pirates.

 

[ProtoChimp]

What about Frostwire? You know, the one that went live the day Limewire went down.

Uhm, you might want to check your facts there. FrostWire started in 2004. The popularity increased when LimeWire went down because it looks the same and the name is basically the same.

When someone buys a knife and stabs a man, do we punish the person who sold the knife?

When someone buys a computer and hacks a website, do we punish the person who sold the computer?

Yet when someone pirates some music, it's perfectly acceptable to punish the one who provided the software?

It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, just because something CAN be used for illegal purposes doesn't mean that giving it to someone else is a crime. If that was the case nothing in the world would ever be created because everyone would be too afraid that the washing machine they just sold was going to be dropped on a guys head, or that the DS they just sold was going to be turned into a gun.


This doesn't make ANY sense! You can't sue people for allowing other people to do illegal things!

I think that is because LimeWire never had any other goal but to be a peer to peer downlaod service for illegal files. There have been requests to take it down, but they never went through with it.

This kinda pisses me off... How is limewire any different than getting on youtube, looking up a song, and downloading said song for free via online downloading programs? The fact that you didn't have to use a downloading program?

*sigh* Record companies can just go in a pit and... Nevermind, I'll try to remain civil...

If you check Youtube you'll often see that videos or audio is removed due to copyright infringement, some videos can't be shown worldwide, it does not provide you with downloads in case you want to listen to it on a media such as a mp3 player and it's run by a big evil corporation that is big enough to waste RIAA's resources if they were to sue. Streaming is not illegal for some reason beyond me. Downloading copyrighted material from a streaming site is in the gray. Don't ask why, the law is complicated and often stupid.

My bad, I only heard about it a few days later and assumed.

 

[DEAD34345]

Quote where I said Peer to peer is illegal. I stated the use of LimeWire as a peer to peer software.
I am not sure if you are quite updated on the news. Did you miss the fact that Pirate bay actually had to go to both criminal and civil court for their involvement in Pirate Bay? Not for copyright infringement, but for promoting copyright infringement. Because promoting copyright infringement is also a crime.

Well I say that yes, you can be punished for not stopping someone being murdered, but you cannot be punished for selling a perfectly legal object if it is then used for murder.

If you actually witness the murder right after selling the perfectly legal hammer, then yes. It is a crime to not do anything about it. If the murder happens behind a few shelves, but still inside the store without you noticing the incident you can still be punished for it since it is in a loacation which you are responsible of.
Google will give you pirate bay as the first hit when you search for pirate because that's how Google works. It searches for the most popular site containing certain phrases. The reason this hasn't been changed is that they haven't been requested not to. If they had received a request to lock it out from their search and not done it, they too could go to court for promoting piracy. There are several sites that have been removed from the search, and there are browsers that wont let you enter sites with illegal material. The fact that some haven't been removed is because they haven't been reported.
Now answer me, how many legal files are there on LimeWire and how many do you know who use it for legal purposes?

I don't actually know anyone who uses LimeWire, but that's beside the point because it doesn't matter how many people use it for illegal purposes and how many use it for legal ones. If a single person has ever used LimeWire for a legal use, then I think it should not be shut down.

My point is that all that Limewire does is allow people to share files, it takes no responsibility for what files are shared. The service LimeWire provides is not illegal in any way, so it should not be liable for any sort of punishment. Punish the people who actually commit the crime.

"If you actually witness the murder right after selling the perfectly legal hammer, then yes. It is a crime to not do anything about it. If the murder happens behind a few shelves, but still inside the store without you noticing the incident you can still be punished for it since it is in a loacation which you are responsible of."

Why is it that LimeWire is apparently responsible for what files are shared through it, when Microsoft isn't liable when a pirate downloads a game through Internet Explorer?

Why hasn't the Post Office been shut down because people have used it to send letter bombs?

Why hasn't Facebook been shut down, when psychos have used it to stalk innocent people?

Because that would be ridiculously stupid, is why. None of these services are illegal, and the actions of the people that use the services are not the responsibility of the service-provider. LimeWire provides a similar service to the Post Office, in that it allows people to share files between one another. LimeWire doesn't own, control, or even know what those files are, so why is it punished when someone exchanges something illegal?