dmca-activists
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DMCA-Activists] FTC P2P Workshop Source Document


From: Seth Johnson
Subject: [DMCA-Activists] FTC P2P Workshop Source Document
Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 08:50:26 -0500

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.





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]