Rapidshare: We're going to appeal shut-down ruling

Rapidshare has announced that it is going to appeal a recent ruling of a German court that could have potentially forced the company to shut down its website. A Dusseldorf court ruled in January that Rapidshare has to block access to musical works from rights holders that are represented by the German music rights group Gema. The ruling included a mandate to "take measures that might have the risk of making Rapidshare's service substantially less attractive or even close it down completely."

The company has now told the German online magazine Netzwelt.de that it is going to appeal the ruling. "Rapidshare wants to clarify the legal situation for hosters", a representative told the magazine. She explained that there have been different rulings with sometimes contradictory requirements for file hosters in the past, and argued that it is impossible for Rapidshare to filter its uploads because files can be renamed, split up or saved in different formats.

Rapidshare's spokesperson also added that not all uploads of musical works were illegal, because music fans could use Rapidshare to make back-ups of their own MP3s for personal use without giving the links to anyone else.

Gema on the other hand told Netzwelt that it is in settlement negotiations with Rapidshare btut didn't want to comment on any details. It will be interesting to see if the two sides can actually agree on a solution.


Go Rapidshare!

[aznvdz]

RapidShare is the best sharing website in the world, users only hate it because they haven't purchased an premium account yet. But when you have its the best thing in the world.

Good luck Rapidshare.

[Bornies]

Yeah I agree that when one has an account Rapidshare is tops.

The whole concept idea to share is up to the individual. Once you’ve acquired material you own your copy. You can share it if you wish since again you control it.
I still think the idea of someone else complaining about patent rights and rights for creation should be waved because once you set something up for sale that item / software / music becomes their property. They can thus share it if they want.

Putting it on a file sharer is not forcing it down everyone’s throat nor does if force you to download it. All this happens by choice.

The guys creating the software / music / item does just that in order to make money from and therefore inevitably run the risk that someone will copy or make a duplicate of it.

How many fake paintings were made, copied etc. in the old days? Did the Japanese people not copy everything from the west after the war and so uplifted their stance in society today?

Another thing to consider is that if people do not try to copy and better an idea / item the world would still be in the Stone Age.

If one feels that you must safeguard your idea / music and the like then invent a system to do just that. Don’t use the LAW protection as we all know that does not really work in today’s life?



Mmmm now I’ve let the cat out amongst the pigeons’ hey. I like a good argument. People do not want to be controlled and want to freely do as they see fit. Even if they choose to live amongst a society that has rules.

The bottom line though is to test the system and the rules etc. If the work then one will obey them. If they don’t we will circumvent them.

It’s all a cat and mouse game.


OK come up with your ideas.

[Oceansoul]

No rapidshare? deadset? f**k I LOVE RS fast, reliable, anon no Adds its the best fileshare on the net, megaupload and those ones suck why RS....im devastated.

[dusty6669]

Originally Posted by Bornies

The whole concept idea to share is up to the individual.... Putting it on a file sharer...

Ok, its kind of hard to say this such that if the idea was entirely the individuals, don't you think they would have called it something other than a 'file sharer'. Rapidshare was created for just one purpose...to download files!

Originally Posted by Bornies

Once you’ve acquired material you own your copy. You can share it if you wish since again you control it.
I still think the idea of someone else complaining about patent rights and rights for creation should be waved because once you set something up for sale that item / software / music becomes their property. They can thus share it if they want.

This is most definatly wrong! In a sense, you are right. I can buy a cd and loan it out, share it, whatever...the physical CD is mine to do with as I wish, nobody is arguing that. It is when the music on it is copied, that the problems arise. You said (sorry didn't quote it) if it wasn't for sharing and people building on top of previous things that we'd be in the Stone Age (again, just paraphrasing). I believe if everyone could copy or duplicate everything they get and could share it with others our economy would crumble, there would be no one out there to create anything...why bother won't make you any money, save $14.99, in the case of a CD, One person buys it, shares it with a couple friends, each in turn sharing with a couple of friends, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I love Rapidshare, have a premium account myself. I am also an avid downloader. I might think about joining 'the other side' if the 'music industry' would get there noses out of 'corporate americas' ass and stop letting them make 'clone bands' and such. In actuality there shouldn't be an issue with music media (band CD's) how much do they really make off of 100,000 CD's? The money is in the touring, and if more bands gave out more of their recordings, more people would be able to hear them, hence a much larger turnout at their shows!

I hope this wasn't to 'all over the place', this is my first post over a couple of sentences.

[Stig]

Originally Posted by Bornies

Once you’ve acquired material you own your copy. You can share it if you wish since again you control it.

No, I don't think that is correct. I believe you are buying a license to own a copy. When you buy a £10 CD for example, you are basically paying, for arguments sake, £9 for the license and £1 for the physical copy of the CD.
Similar to computer applications, again you are paying for a license to own your copy of the program. Sure, you can copy it again and give it to your friends or make it available for 'download' but then the person who gets it from you must then buy a license to own it also.

The point that was made about 'sharing the physical CD' is correct. When you share the physical item then the license is being shared (handed over) at the same time. If you make a copy and then share it, then the license stays with the original and the copy is license-less (i know, it's a made up word but you know what i mean)

Tbh, I agree that they should stop all the file-sharing of copyrighted material. It is a bad thing and it is detrimental to the industry. If it doesn't stop then the artists/creators will just charge more for the items to try and make up for lost revenue, and then we'll get the 'product buyers' getting on our backs because we are the cause of the price increases.

HOWEVER until they can actually stop the sharing from happening, then I will still do it

[Astral]

Good points made all round, I think you will never stop copying software in all its forms and look at it another way if individuals didn't copy then the companies would be in full control and would you rather live in a creative world or a dumbed down world?