Rapidshare to Shutdown? - GoFuckYourself.com

zyorker · 01-29-2008, 05:48 AM

Google Translate-version of the GEMA press release (gema.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/pressemitteilung/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=688&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D =73&cHash=2c827de5c9):

Quote:

GEMA achieved another important victory against RapidShare

München / Berlin: 24.01.08 Munich / Berlin: 24.01.08

Das Landgericht Düsseldorf hat mit einem Urteil vom 23. The country has Duesseldorf court with a verdict of 23 Januar 2008 die Haftung des weltweit größten ?1-Click-Webhosters? RapidShare für Urheberrechtsverletzungen bestätigt. January 2008, the liability of the world's biggest "1-Click ISP" RapidShare for copyright violations.

RapidShare bietet seinen Nutzern die Möglichkeit, beliebige Inhalte - darunter auch in großem Umfang Musiktitel - anonym bei dem Dienst abzuspeichern und unbegrenzt abzurufen. RapidShare offers its users the option of any content - including large-scale song - anonymously at the service save and retrieve indefinitely. RapidShare hatte sich bislang darauf berufen, dass allein die jeweiligen Nutzer für die illegalen Inhalte haftbar gemacht werden könnten. RapidShare had previously rely on the fact that only the respective user for the illegal content could be held liable.

Dieser Ansicht hat nun das Landgericht Düsseldorf eine deutliche Absage erteilt. This view, the country now has a clear Duesseldorf court rejected. Wie bereits die Landgerichte Köln und München erlegt auch das Landgericht Düsseldorf den Dienstebetreibern umfassende Handlungspflichten auf. As the country courts Cologne and Munich also imposes the Regional Court Düsseldorf service operators comprehensive action obligations. Nach dem aktuellen Urteil ist RapidShare verpflichtet, ?auch solche Maßnahmen zu ergreifen, welche die Gefahr beinhalten, dass ihr Geschäftsmodell deutlich unattraktiver wird oder sogar vollständig eingestellt werden muss?. Under the current ruling is RapidShare committed, "including such measures, which include the risk that their business model is significantly less attractive or even completely ceased to be". Dies begründet das Gericht insbesondere damit, dass der Dienst ?nicht hauptsächlich für legale Aktivitäten genutzt? werde, für die Verbreitung urheberrechtlich geschützter Inhalte ?besonders gut geeignet? sei und gerade hieraus ?in nicht unerheblicher Weise? ein finanzieller Vorteil gezogen werde. This justifies the court in particular that the service "is not primarily used for legitimate activities" will, for the dissemination of copyrighted content "particularly well-suited", and just this "in the not insignificant way," a financial advantage will be considered.

Der GEMA ist es damit gelungen, ein weiteres Gericht nun auch in einem Hauptsacheverfahren von der Verantwortlichkeit von RapidShare für die über den Dienst begangenen Urheberrechtsverletzungen zu überzeugen. The GEMA is thus succeeded in another court now in a main proceedings of the responsibility of RapidShare for perpetrated on the service of copyright infringement to convince.

Dr. Harald Heker, Vorstandsvorsitzender der GEMA: ?Diese Entscheidung ist ein Meilenstein im Kampf gegen die illegale Nutzung unseres Repertoires. Dr. Harald Heker, chairman of royalties: "This decision is a milestone in the fight against the illegal use of our repertoire. Sie setzt ein klares Signal, dass Dienste, die von unrechtmäßigen Nutzungen unserer Werke finanziell profitieren, umfassende Maßnahmen zum Schutz der Rechteinhaber ergreifen müssen und sich einer Haftung nicht einfach durch Verweis auf das Handeln der einzelnen Nutzer entziehen können. It sets a clear signal that services provided by illegal uses of our works to benefit financially, comprehensive measures for the protection of the rights holders have to take a liability and not simply by reference to the actions of individual users can escape. Mit dieser Grundsatzentscheidung ist der Weg für ein Vorgehen gegen weitere vergleichbare Dienste geebnet?. With this landmark decision paves the way for similar action against other services paved. "

Die GEMA vertritt in Deutschland die Urheberrechte von mehr als 60.000 Mitgliedern (Komponisten, Textdichter und Musikverleger) sowie von über 1 Mio. Rechteinhabern aus aller Welt. GEMA in Germany represents the copyrights of more than 60,000 members (composers, lyricists and music publishers), and over 1 million rights holders from around the world. Sie ist weltweit einer der führenden Autorengesellschaften für Werke der Musik. She is one of the world's leading companies for author's works of music.

Drake · 01-29-2008, 05:53 AM

English version: http://torrentfreak.com/rapidshare-t...defeat-080129/

The music industry in Germany has secured a legal victory over the hugely popular file-hosting service, Rapidshare. According to the rights holders, Rapidshare is going to have to stop its users from downloading infringing music tracks from its servers, or face the prospect of being shut down.

Last week we reported on rumors that Rapidshare had, or was about to be, shut down, rumors that now look likely to resurface. The company, one of the world’s largest ‘one-click’ file hosting services, has lost a copyright infringement case against German performing rights outfit, GEMA. Representing a claimed 60,000 members and more than 1 million rights owners worldwide, GEMA has taken an aggressive stance in pursuing legal action against Rapidshare, trying to force it to be accountable for the infringing actions of its users.

For its part, Rapidshare has always insisted that it cannot be held responsible for these actions, such as when users upload copyright works (in this case, music) to their servers for subsequent downloading by others.

On 23 January 2008, the district court in Düsseldorf (Landgericht) disagreed with this assertion after GEMA succeeded in convincing the court that Rapidshare should take responsibility for infringements carried out within its service.

GEMA are trying to imply that as a result of the decision, Rapidshare will be forced to take preventative action to stop GEMA works from even getting onto their servers, rather than a DMCA-style after-the-fact removal. GEMA says that if Rapidshare are forced to filter they will likely end up with a service that’s not worth operating, so they may decide to shut it down completely.

The GEMA press release has been published before the complete court decision, so it should be digested with at least a degree of scepticism, considering the huge amounts of spin employed by anti-piracy agencies and the music industries alike.

In a statement, Dr. Harald Heker, Chairman of the board at GEMA said: “This decision is a milestone in the fight against the illegal use of our repertoire”, which was almost a carbon-copy of a statement he made about the decision from a previous court case against Rapidshare. He went on to explain that measures have to be put in place for the protection of rights holders and claiming that file-hosts are not responsible for what their users do, is no longer an option. “With this decision of general principle,” he said, “the course of future action against comparable services has been smoothed.”

In their press release, GEMA speaks about the decision of the District Court of Düsseldorf but also mentions a decision from the District Court of Cologne.

TorrentFreak spoke to Christian Solmecke a lawyer at the Cologne Chambers of Lawyers Wilde & Beuger, to see what is likely to have happened in these cases.

He told us: “The normal way is as follows: GEMA files a lawsuit against Rapidshare because of alleged copyright infringement on three or four songs. If GEMA wins, Rapidshare is then obliged not to host these particular songs.”

Lots of anti-piracy and industry bodies state that it’s possible for file-hosting services and even ISPs to monitor, police and filter copyright works from their servers and networks. This case is no different, except this time it’s the court that has demanded this type of action.

Christian explains: “From a legal point of view, it is interesting that the District Court of Düsseldorf decided that Rapidshare has to carry out a lot of preventive actions (if the GEMA press release is correct on this point, of course). This could mean that Rapidshare has to check all of its hosted material for copyright infringements - which is nearly impossible.”

The instruction for Rapidshare to take preventative action is new, and despite another similar court case reaching a different decision. Christian explains: “Only 30 kilometers away from Düsseldorf, we’ve already had a similar law suit in Cologne. In that case the Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court and Court of Appeal) decided that Rapidshare is only obliged to delete specific songs stated by GEMA. They were not obliged to take preventative action.”

“The future will tell us which interpretation of the law is correct.” Christian told us. “Perhaps in one or two years we will get a decision on this question from the Federal Court of Justice.”

As the world struggles to update its laws to cope with the digital revolution, the courts - and lawyers - are being kept very busy indeed. So back to the original question: Is Rapidshare going to be closed down - or be left with no alternative but to shut itself down?

Well - maybe……maybe not.

Christian finishes up: “I believe that Rapidshare will appeal against the decision of the Landgericht (District Court) of Düsseldorf. If they do so, we will have to wait and see what the Oberlandesgericht (Higher District Court) of Düsseldorf (as the Court of Appeal) says.”

In the meantime, while the legal wheels turn and turn, Rapidshare.com and Rapidshare.de continue to operate as usual.

zyorker · 01-29-2008, 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike33

English version:

The music industry in Germany has secured a legal victory over the hugely popular file-hosting service, Rapidshare. According to the rights holders, Rapidshare is going to have to stop its users from downloading infringing music tracks from its servers, or face the prospect of being shut down.

Last week we reported on rumors that Rapidshare had, or was about to be, shut down, rumors that now look likely to resurface. The company, one of the world?s largest ?one-click? file hosting services, has lost a copyright infringement case against German performing rights outfit, GEMA. Representing a claimed 60,000 members and more than 1 million rights owners worldwide, GEMA has taken an aggressive stance in pursuing legal action against Rapidshare, trying to force it to be accountable for the infringing actions of its users.

For its part, Rapidshare has always insisted that it cannot be held responsible for these actions, such as when users upload copyright works (in this case, music) to their servers for subsequent downloading by others.

On 23 January 2008, the district court in Düsseldorf (Landgericht) disagreed with this assertion after GEMA succeeded in convincing the court that Rapidshare should take responsibility for infringements carried out within its service.

GEMA are trying to imply that as a result of the decision, Rapidshare will be forced to take preventative action to stop GEMA works from even getting onto their servers, rather than a DMCA-style after-the-fact removal. GEMA says that if Rapidshare are forced to filter they will likely end up with a service that?s not worth operating, so they may decide to shut it down completely.

The GEMA press release has been published before the complete court decision, so it should be digested with at least a degree of scepticism, considering the huge amounts of spin employed by anti-piracy agencies and the music industries alike.

In a statement, Dr. Harald Heker, Chairman of the board at GEMA said: ?This decision is a milestone in the fight against the illegal use of our repertoire?, which was almost a carbon-copy of a statement he made about the decision from a previous court case against Rapidshare. He went on to explain that measures have to be put in place for the protection of rights holders and claiming that file-hosts are not responsible for what their users do, is no longer an option. ?With this decision of general principle,? he said, ?the course of future action against comparable services has been smoothed.?

In their press release, GEMA speaks about the decision of the District Court of Düsseldorf but also mentions a decision from the District Court of Cologne.

TorrentFreak spoke to Christian Solmecke a lawyer at the Cologne Chambers of Lawyers Wilde & Beuger, to see what is likely to have happened in these cases.

He told us: ?The normal way is as follows: GEMA files a lawsuit against Rapidshare because of alleged copyright infringement on three or four songs. If GEMA wins, Rapidshare is then obliged not to host these particular songs.?

Lots of anti-piracy and industry bodies state that it?s possible for file-hosting services and even ISPs to monitor, police and filter copyright works from their servers and networks. This case is no different, except this time it?s the court that has demanded this type of action.

Christian explains: ?From a legal point of view, it is interesting that the District Court of Düsseldorf decided that Rapidshare has to carry out a lot of preventive actions (if the GEMA press release is correct on this point, of course). This could mean that Rapidshare has to check all of its hosted material for copyright infringements - which is nearly impossible.?

The instruction for Rapidshare to take preventative action is new, and despite another similar court case reaching a different decision. Christian explains: ?Only 30 kilometers away from Düsseldorf, we?ve already had a similar law suit in Cologne. In that case the Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court and Court of Appeal) decided that Rapidshare is only obliged to delete specific songs stated by GEMA. They were not obliged to take preventative action.?

?The future will tell us which interpretation of the law is correct.? Christian told us. ?Perhaps in one or two years we will get a decision on this question from the Federal Court of Justice.?

As the world struggles to update its laws to cope with the digital revolution, the courts - and lawyers - are being kept very busy indeed. So back to the original question: Is Rapidshare going to be closed down - or be left with no alternative but to shut itself down?

Well - maybe??maybe not.

Christian finishes up: ?I believe that Rapidshare will appeal against the decision of the Landgericht (District Court) of Düsseldorf. If they do so, we will have to wait and see what the Oberlandesgericht (Higher District Court) of Düsseldorf (as the Court of Appeal) says.?

In the meantime, while the legal wheels turn and turn, Rapidshare.com and Rapidshare.de continue to operate as usual.

That's a bit more readable, thanks!

L-Pink · 01-29-2008, 05:58 AM

Good news!

Manowar · 01-29-2008, 05:58 AM

there will just be one to replace it

Zorgman · 01-29-2008, 06:08 AM

One gets take down, one starts up.

pornmasta · 01-29-2008, 06:13 AM

good news or bad news ?
in fact there is more than 20 host like rapidshare, and some others are easier to use than rapidshare.
Also we are talking here of music.. and i'm not sure that...(guess the end)

01-29-2008, 06:08 AM	#6
Zorgman Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 6,103	One gets take down, one starts up. __________________ ---

01-29-2008, 05:53 AM	#2
Drake Hello world! Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 12,508	English version: http://torrentfreak.com/rapidshare-t...defeat-080129/ The music industry in Germany has secured a legal victory over the hugely popular file-hosting service, Rapidshare. According to the rights holders, Rapidshare is going to have to stop its users from downloading infringing music tracks from its servers, or face the prospect of being shut down. Last week we reported on rumors that Rapidshare had, or was about to be, shut down, rumors that now look likely to resurface. The company, one of the world’s largest ‘one-click’ file hosting services, has lost a copyright infringement case against German performing rights outfit, GEMA. Representing a claimed 60,000 members and more than 1 million rights owners worldwide, GEMA has taken an aggressive stance in pursuing legal action against Rapidshare, trying to force it to be accountable for the infringing actions of its users. For its part, Rapidshare has always insisted that it cannot be held responsible for these actions, such as when users upload copyright works (in this case, music) to their servers for subsequent downloading by others. On 23 January 2008, the district court in Düsseldorf (Landgericht) disagreed with this assertion after GEMA succeeded in convincing the court that Rapidshare should take responsibility for infringements carried out within its service. GEMA are trying to imply that as a result of the decision, Rapidshare will be forced to take preventative action to stop GEMA works from even getting onto their servers, rather than a DMCA-style after-the-fact removal. GEMA says that if Rapidshare are forced to filter they will likely end up with a service that’s not worth operating, so they may decide to shut it down completely. The GEMA press release has been published before the complete court decision, so it should be digested with at least a degree of scepticism, considering the huge amounts of spin employed by anti-piracy agencies and the music industries alike. In a statement, Dr. Harald Heker, Chairman of the board at GEMA said: “This decision is a milestone in the fight against the illegal use of our repertoire”, which was almost a carbon-copy of a statement he made about the decision from a previous court case against Rapidshare. He went on to explain that measures have to be put in place for the protection of rights holders and claiming that file-hosts are not responsible for what their users do, is no longer an option. “With this decision of general principle,” he said, “the course of future action against comparable services has been smoothed.” In their press release, GEMA speaks about the decision of the District Court of Düsseldorf but also mentions a decision from the District Court of Cologne. TorrentFreak spoke to Christian Solmecke a lawyer at the Cologne Chambers of Lawyers Wilde & Beuger, to see what is likely to have happened in these cases. He told us: “The normal way is as follows: GEMA files a lawsuit against Rapidshare because of alleged copyright infringement on three or four songs. If GEMA wins, Rapidshare is then obliged not to host these particular songs.” Lots of anti-piracy and industry bodies state that it’s possible for file-hosting services and even ISPs to monitor, police and filter copyright works from their servers and networks. This case is no different, except this time it’s the court that has demanded this type of action. Christian explains: “From a legal point of view, it is interesting that the District Court of Düsseldorf decided that Rapidshare has to carry out a lot of preventive actions (if the GEMA press release is correct on this point, of course). This could mean that Rapidshare has to check all of its hosted material for copyright infringements - which is nearly impossible.” The instruction for Rapidshare to take preventative action is new, and despite another similar court case reaching a different decision. Christian explains: “Only 30 kilometers away from Düsseldorf, we’ve already had a similar law suit in Cologne. In that case the Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court and Court of Appeal) decided that Rapidshare is only obliged to delete specific songs stated by GEMA. They were not obliged to take preventative action.” “The future will tell us which interpretation of the law is correct.” Christian told us. “Perhaps in one or two years we will get a decision on this question from the Federal Court of Justice.” As the world struggles to update its laws to cope with the digital revolution, the courts - and lawyers - are being kept very busy indeed. So back to the original question: Is Rapidshare going to be closed down - or be left with no alternative but to shut itself down? Well - maybe……maybe not. Christian finishes up: “I believe that Rapidshare will appeal against the decision of the Landgericht (District Court) of Düsseldorf. If they do so, we will have to wait and see what the Oberlandesgericht (Higher District Court) of Düsseldorf (as the Court of Appeal) says.” In the meantime, while the legal wheels turn and turn, Rapidshare.com and Rapidshare.de continue to operate as usual.

01-29-2008, 05:58 AM	#4
L-Pink working on my tan Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Florida/Kentucky Posts: 39,151	Good news!

01-29-2008, 05:58 AM	#5
Manowar jellyfish Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 71,528	there will just be one to replace it

01-29-2008, 06:13 AM	#7
pornmasta Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 19,222	good news or bad news ? in fact there is more than 20 host like rapidshare, and some others are easier to use than rapidshare. Also we are talking here of music.. and i'm not sure that...(guess the end)