NationStates Jolt Archive

Firstly, click here (http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/12/26/music.download.suit.ap/index.html).

You will read a CNN article explaining how once persecuted file-sharing software companies are going legitimate. At one point, the article states the view of File sharing software companies

"Such capitulation was once unheard of among the file-sharing operators who lobbied against Hollywood and the recording industry. They billed themselves as defenders of technological innovation who shouldn't be held liable because some people used their software for piracy."

Most of these have however, have been indeed held liable for people using their software for piracy.

The question is (and I will make no point of my own, I seek opinions) if this doesn't open a dangerous precedent. Next, we can have Weapon companies being held liable because their weapons were using in illegitimate ways (assaults), or Car companies being held liable because their cars were also used in illegal ways (imagine if we could sue mercedes for it selling cars to drug dealers, for example)?

Haven't people tried to sue gun manufacturers for just such a thing?

no surprise to me

Haven't people tried to sue gun manufacturers for just such a thing?
or suing fast food chains for making one fat.

You know... people could also sue computer companies because some random loser unleashed a virus that infects the computers of those who are too stupid to protect theirs...

OR!! sue the computer companies because a terrorist uses a computer for illegal purposes...

A dangerous precedent is right. It could extend to almost any industry or corporation, and one truly successful, highly publicized, not-settled-out-of-court case where a judge decided that the company could be held liable for their network's use - which I actually don't think has happened yet - would unleash a firestorm of successful, large-scale and/or class-action frivolous litigation on any and all industries, including gun manufacturers, fast-food chains, ISPs, Internet email services like Yahoo's or MSN's, and pharmaceutical companies.

Haven't people tried to sue gun manufacturers for just such a thing?

Those cases are a little more complex that people just blaming the gun. They happened where there was evidence that companies were deliberately targeting criminals as a market, by dumping excessive amounts handguns where a market is already saturated, or by refusing to make their guns tamper-proof.

Hmm

"I assumed that when I explained to them who I was and that I wasn't a computer downloader, it would just go away," she said in an interview. "I didn't really understand what it all meant. But they just kept insisting on a financial settlement."

Didn't they used to call that extortion?

OR!! sue the computer companies because a terrorist uses a computer for illegal purposes...
Sue the Wright (?) brothers who invented the plane for 9/11.

Hmm

"I assumed that when I explained to them who I was and that I wasn't a computer downloader, it would just go away," she said in an interview. "I didn't really understand what it all meant. But they just kept insisting on a financial settlement."

Didn't they used to call that extortion?
Welcome to Corpomerica, where corporations never break the law--they make the law.

Hmm

"I assumed that when I explained to them who I was and that I wasn't a computer downloader, it would just go away," she said in an interview. "I didn't really understand what it all meant. But they just kept insisting on a financial settlement."

Didn't they used to call that extortion?

Well, they still do, but the nice legal folks came up with the declaratory judgement so people that are sick of dealing with crap like this can take it head on.