{"id":2965,"date":"2005-03-04T16:00:49","date_gmt":"2005-03-04T20:00:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/2005\/03\/04\/more-on-artists-and-p2p\/"},"modified":"2005-03-04T16:00:49","modified_gmt":"2005-03-04T20:00:49","slug":"more-on-artists-and-p2p","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/2005\/03\/04\/more-on-artists-and-p2p\/","title":{"rendered":"More on Artists and P2P"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a name='a1051'><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Patrick Ross posted a <a href=\"http:\/\/weblog.ipcentral.info\/archives\/2005\/03\/artists_and_pir.html\">follow-up<\/a> to <a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/2005\/03\/04#a1050\">my post below.<\/a>&nbsp;<br \/>\nI think, in some sense, Patrick is absolutely right &#8211; this case is not<br \/>\nabout P2P. It is ultimately about the secondary liability standards by<br \/>\nwhich we will judge all technologies.&nbsp; It is about the<br \/>\nfar-reaching consequences of the so-called &#8220;bad actor&#8221; or, perhaps more<br \/>\naccurately, bad-business-model standard that Ross advocates, as well as<br \/>\nthe many other offered alternatives to <em>Sony<\/em>.&nbsp; To many<br \/>\nartists who see the Internet and digital technologies as opening up<br \/>\nmyriad beneficial distribution channels, the threat such&nbsp;standards<br \/>\npose is grave. Counter to Ross&#8217; claim, artists&nbsp;will indeed &#8220;lose<br \/>\n&#8230; valuable distribution outlet[s].&#8221; <\/p>\n<p>A<a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/2005\/03\/04#a1050\">s I suggested below<\/a>,<br \/>\nthis point holds even if you think P2P will still exist if respondents<br \/>\nare held liable.&nbsp; On that point, I&#8217;m not sure either &#8211; in<br \/>\nparticular, I highly doubt that decentralized P2P will be allowed to<br \/>\nexist under the forced redesign standards suggested by numerous<br \/>\nparties.&nbsp; As suggested in the petitioners&#8217; amici, filters will<br \/>\nrequire at least some form of centralization.<\/p>\n<p>Regarding Ross&#8217; proposed standard, I highly recommend reading <a href=\"http:\/\/eff.org\/IP\/P2P\/MGM_v_Grokster\/20050301_intel.pdf\">Intel&#8217;s argument<\/a> (18-19) against the <a href=\"http:\/\/eff.org\/IP\/P2P\/MGM_v_Grokster\/050124_US_Amicus_Br_04-480.pdf\">SG&#8217;s standard.<\/a>&nbsp;<br \/>\nAs an aside: it&#8217;s also worth noting that, given how Ross sets up the<br \/>\nstandard, it will not reduce piracy in the least, as any amateur,<br \/>\nnon-commercial P2P distributor will be allowed to exist. Of course,<br \/>\nRoss&nbsp;proposal could still, as a legal matter,&nbsp;be a principled<br \/>\nview of what the standard should be, but it&#8217;s worth realizing that it<br \/>\nwill probably&nbsp;not produce the beneficial policy consequences that<br \/>\nthose who push for reversal are hoping for.&nbsp; In this way, too,<br \/>\nthis case has little to do with P2P &#8211; <a href=\"http:\/\/crypto.stanford.edu\/DRM2002\/darknet5.doc\">P2P and the infringements it enables will likely keep rolling along just fine.<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Patrick Ross posted a follow-up to my post below.&nbsp; I think, in some sense, Patrick is absolutely right &#8211; this case is not about P2P. It is ultimately about the secondary liability standards by which we will judge all technologies.&nbsp; It is about the far-reaching consequences of the so-called &#8220;bad actor&#8221; or, perhaps more accurately, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":72,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[85],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2965","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-big-ideas"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2965","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/72"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2965"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2965\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2965"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2965"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/cmusings\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2965"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}