OurTunes

RDM_83

Does anybody know how you can get OurTunes to access the Shared Music folder, specifically in the hamilton mac rooms.Need to get the right IP address i think. Cheers.
(this possibly should be in the computer forum, but sticking it up here)

ApeXaviour

Shared music folder? Can you copy the music into another folder and then get it to access that?

I know sweet f.a. about macs tho.. Anybody else able to offer insight?

nosmo

RDM_83 wrote:

Does anybody know how you can get OurTunes to access the Shared Music folder, specifically in the hamilton mac rooms.Need to get the right IP address i think. Cheers.
(this possibly should be in the computer forum, but sticking it up here)

I have barely any idea what Ourtunes is, but I think it's some sort of p2p iTunes client with which you can download. Not only would I imagine there's sfa music on the machines, using this software would probably violate a myriad of College rules

I'm not going to tell you how, but there are much more efficient and faster ways of transferring things across the network

Nietzschean

afaik ourtunes is an app that plug's into what itunes shares out, its media lib and allows ye to copy the files off it...(itunes won't copy a file just play it..)
http://ourtunes.sourceforge.net/

Thirdfox

Isn't that illegal? (kinda a rhetorical question)

Nietzschean

well its a curious position, who's at fault? itunes is designed with those features in it so that you could let other people listen to what you listen to while ur there...some sort of shared listening thing which i imagine must be legal for the system to be there at all. And downloading mp3's is questionable enough as to prosecuting people....

Thirdfox

But just because something is there doesn't mean that it is necessarily right (or legal to do it). e.g. Child pornography on the internet.

Boston

Thirdfox wrote:

But just because something is there doesn't mean that it is necessarily right (or legal to do it). e.g. Child pornography on the internet.

This is very different. Apple wouldn't include a feature that would leave them liable.

Thirdfox

They didn't... but other people developed software that took advantage of a component in Apple's software to conduct illegal activities (never mind the morality/ethical side of things).

RDM_83

Haven't used it that much, but as far as i know there is certain songs that can't be played without a password which i think must have been purchased of Itunes store (so possibly it only lets you share music that you didn't buy of them), also is there that much difference in listening to music on a computer in which the files have been accessed from a network than listening to music on a computer with the music being on some other form of storage

Boston

Thirdfox wrote:

They didn't... but other people developed software that took advantage of a component in Apple's software to conduct illegal activities (never mind the morality/ethical side of things).

Computer enginneering hat on:

They would have had to engineer the feature into their software/hardware, to allow supllimentary software to take advantage of it.

Nietzschean

Thirdfox wrote:

They didn't... but other people developed software that took advantage of a component in Apple's software to conduct illegal activities (never mind the morality/ethical side of things).

well the software itself that can dl the files can't be illegal as it has perfectly legit uses..... Also my point still stands, who is to blame? the person with the library where you can dl it from or the downloader?

Thirdfox

Liou's point... but there are various bugs/exploits in software like Microsoft etc... surely there was no intention on behalf of the producer to have these bugs there?

Legally the downloader is to blame I should think. Morally though there have been arguments that we should be able to share music that we haven't purchased.

Nietzschean

Thirdfox wrote:

Liou's point... but there are various bugs/exploits in software like Microsoft etc... surely there was no intention on behalf of the producer to have these bugs there?

Erm, this is why law people should really get some sort of computer degree before commenting on technology cases.(more referring to a recent judge ruling which referred to downloading mp3's as thieft, which it isn't, obviously...)

Microsoft don't build bugs into their software, apple did build this feature in, and could have if they wanted to have built in measures such that it streamed the mp3's in such a manner as this ourtunes software wouldn't be much use.

Legally the downloader is to blame I should think. Morally though there have been arguments that we should be able to share music that we haven't purchased.

Well there have been no successfull legal cases against music downloaders anywhere in the world that i'm aware of. so its gotta be on pretty shaky legal ground...

Thirdfox

Nietzschean wrote:

Well there have been no successfull legal cases against music downloaders anywhere in the world that i'm aware of. so its gotta be on pretty shaky legal ground...

Erm this is why computer science people should get a degree in law before commenting on legal cases (lol)

There were out-of-court settlements in America (so technically it didn't go to court but would have if the mother of the teenage girl didn't pay $2000 to the music companies).

Rightly or wrongly the law, as it currently stands forbids you to download music without paying... I think technically it may even be illegal to rip a C.D. into MP3 format (which if true I think is ridiculous).

But we should try to change the law instead of trying to circumvent it...

Nietzschean

Thirdfox wrote:

Erm this is why computer science people should get a degree in law before commenting on legal cases (lol)

There were out-of-court settlements in America (so technically it didn't go to court but would have if the mother of the teenage girl didn't pay $2000 to the music companies).

Could you link me to one of them? i think you'll find that in every case the user was using an application which also shared music, and thats what their law suits related to. Not the downloading. Please corrected me o fresher law student.

Rightly or wrongly the law, as it currently stands forbids you to download music without paying... I think technically it may even be illegal to rip a C.D. into MP3 format (which if true I think is ridiculous).

No its not, it falls under fair use. In some countries (Ireland included iirc) copyright law is such that it isn't illegal to download mp3s.




And sure downloading mp3's should be illegal, makes perfect sence to be. Most of the issues i have with paying for music are DRM related.......

Thirdfox

Please have a look at:
BMG MUSIC, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CECILIA GONZALEZ
citation: 430 F.3d 888; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 26903

where it was held inter alia that
"The foundation of this holding is a belief that people who post or download music files are primary infringers."

"She contends that her activities were fair use rather than infringement. The district court disagreed and granted summary judgment for the copyright proprietors (to which we refer collectively as BMG Music). 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 910 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 7, 2005). The court enjoined Gonzalez from further infringement and awarded $ 22,500 in damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)."

Hopefully that clears things up

Thirdfox

I have read that people who download the music are rarely prosecuted as it would take too long to catch everyone... rather the companies go for the big fish with the people who distribute them.

The above case is on lexis-nexis btw.

dermot_sheehan

Thirdfox wrote:

Please have a look at:
BMG MUSIC, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. CECILIA GONZALEZ
citation: 430 F.3d 888; 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 26903

where it was held inter alia that
"The foundation of this holding is a belief that people who post or download music files are primary infringers."

"She contends that her activities were fair use rather than infringement. The district court disagreed and granted summary judgment for the copyright proprietors (to which we refer collectively as BMG Music). 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 910 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 7, 2005). The court enjoined Gonzalez from further infringement and awarded $ 22,500 in damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504(c)."

Hopefully that clears things up

Not really, you're applying a U.S. District Court Decision (not even circuit or Supreme) which applies a U.S. federal statute, it would be of minimal to none persuasive value in Ireland since we have a different statutory arrangement.

In particular s. 50 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act 2000 provides for fair dealing http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA28Y2000S50.html This would include things like transferring your cd collection to your ipod.

But downloading isn't even infringement under the act, uploading is infringement as it violates the "making availabe right" under s. 40 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA28Y2000S40.html downloading isn't.

Of course if you redistribute or sell the works you download you'll be liable for secondary infringement.
s. 45 deals with infringing copies and secondary infringement thereof, which basically states if you make infringing copies available to the public, you commit an offence, not from private possession http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA28Y2000S45.html


Perhaps Law Students shouldn't really comment on law until at least they've passed their first year exams, or IP law till they've sat through paul coughlan's class in the sophister years

Thirdfox

Lol... if you look at Nietzschean's post that I responded to you will see he was asking for an American case. We were talking about law cases "anywhere around the world" - post no. 14

And as for commenting on the law look at my signature:
"comments offered by myself do not constitute (nor do they replace) professional legal advice."

Also anyone can comment on the law... they don't have to be law students. I was just commenting as a general member of the public.

xeduCat

Part of my PhD is on this topic, so I can say with faked authority that you are all right and all wrong; the law is murky (in both the US and Ireland), as is the technology. And don't get me started on judges who don't get the technology...the worst are the ones who get someone to half-explain caching to them and then write decisions that totally misunderstand the entire concept...

Crash

what is your phd btw daithai?

xeduCat

Regulation of cross-border media and information flow. Basically an attempt to try and pull together different bits of new media regulation (copyright, defamation, telecoms regulation, Internet governance, etc) and put some sort of theoretical framework on it. In particular things like:

* what is the role of technical standards / programming decisions in influencing / stopping the lawyers
* what is webcasting and how is it regulated
* what role does the UN / international law play
etc etc etc

I did previous work on domain names, copyright for free / open source, and online radio, so it takes bits from those three papers and adds on new stuff.

Currently I am working on two themes - 1) domain names and 'language rights' (i.e. non-standard characters and how the technical problems are dealt with etc) and 2) the EU's regulation of cross-border TV as applied to webcasts.

Very offtopic, but you did ask :P

RDM_83

My knowledge of copyright law is now greatly expanded but unfortunatly no closer to getting OurTunes connected to Shared music.Would the request for an I.P address apply to the specific computer that was hosting the music or the college network?
Also it plainly says on the 'about' of OurTunes 'don't steal music', and I find that people would assume that I would infringe copywrite simply because I've a wooden leg and a parrot simply reinforces trinity's reputation as being a haven for reactionary idealogues, now i'm of to talk to the hunchback that lives in the campanile to discuss setting up a society to combat this sort of discrimination, which we stereotypes face every college day, from being forbidden to wave around a cutlass to the lack of gallion facilities at the Pav.

Thirdfox

And you should also complain about the lack of the complimentary busty barmaid... wouldn't it be cool if Trinity had a few cannons?