FTC P2P Workshop Source Document
Seth Johnson <[email protected]> Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:50:26 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.dmca-activists |
|---|---|
| Organization | Real Measures |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Below is an entry at ipcentral.info which announces a paper from CapAnalysis that evidently is the inspiration for the FTC's Workshop on "P2P Filesharing" Applications this December 15 and 16. The paper calls the FTC to investigate whether KaZaA, Morpheus, iMesh, Audiogalaxy, LimeWire, BearShare, Grokster, Blubster, Ares Galaxy, and XoloX Ultra violate Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices, acts misleading consumers to their detriment. Seth --- > http://ipcentral.info/blog/2004/04/p2p-and-ftc.shtml > http://ipcentral.info/blog/P2P%20White%20Paper.doc P2P and the FTC 4.28.2004 CapAnalysis, which is the economic analysis wing of the law firm Howery Simon et. al., is submitting a paper to the FTC entitled Peer-to-Peer Software Providers' Liability Under Section 5 of the FTC Act (April 27, 2004). Prepared for the RIAA in connection with the FTC's April 19 workshop on spyware (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/spyware/index.htm), the paper focuses on P2P providers' failure to disclose risks of spyware, adware, viruses, litigation for copyright violations, and the possibility that a computer user can become a recipient or unwitting distributor of porn or other offensive materials. RIAA/CapAnalysis advocates an FTC investigation of P2P software providers. The FTC issued a Consumer Alert on potential problems of P2P in July 2003 (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/sharealrt.htm). posted by James DeLong : 4/28/2004 01:11:21 PM -- DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders! New Yorkers for Fair Use http://www.nyfairuse.org [CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of exclusive rights.