Comments on: Double Whammy for Peer-to-Peer Creators and First Uploaders http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/double-whammy-for-peer-to-peer-creators-and-first-uploaders Internet Safety, Windows Updates, Internet News, and More Thu, 20 Nov 2008 10:51:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Ricardo Xantos http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/double-whammy-for-peer-to-peer-creators-and-first-uploaders#comment-898 Ricardo Xantos Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:47:32 +0000 /?p=317#comment-898 Since the law "would require the developers of peer-to-peer and <b>other</b> file-swapping software to take “reasonable careâ€? to ensure that their software cannot be used in the exchange of either copyrighted material, or child pornography." I would say that a computer network could be used for swapping illegal material, as well as FTP, BITS or any other products. Since technically the ISP is used as an instrument for this illegal activity they can be sued for an acomplish. Thus efectively the law will make the internet illegal, since it could be used to interchange copyrighted material. Also the word "reasonable" is in question here. What is reasonable. One can argue that is unreasonable to track every file on the network. Thus the only "reasonable" protection thing to do is to put a warning stating "This software should not be used for any illegal activities". Which will make the law very stupid in nature. In other words, the law is yet another example of politicians trying to rule something that they do not understand. Since the law “would require the developers of peer-to-peer and other file-swapping software to take “reasonable careâ€? to ensure that their software cannot be used in the exchange of either copyrighted material, or child pornography.”

I would say that a computer network could be used for swapping illegal material, as well as FTP, BITS or any other products. Since technically the ISP is used as an instrument for this illegal activity they can be sued for an acomplish.
Thus efectively the law will make the internet illegal, since it could be used to interchange copyrighted material.

Also the word “reasonable” is in question here. What is reasonable. One can argue that is unreasonable to track every file on the network. Thus the only “reasonable” protection thing to do is to put a warning stating “This software should not be used for any illegal activities”. Which will make the law very stupid in nature.

In other words, the law is yet another example of politicians trying to rule something that they do not understand.

]]>