Ares Connect

If I were to tell you that LimeWire – the filesharing service that epitomizes everything that is gung-ho and ‘wild west’ about the industry – were going to try and provide a subscription-based service, you’d think that I were mad. If I told you that this service had been in the pipeline for quite some time, and they LimeWire were in talks with record companies about it, then you’d think I was even more mad.

Well, bananas to you. I must be mad.

This announcement from LimeWire, on the back of a huge legal loss against the RIAA and with the threat of another legal battle looming, seems to us very much like a panic attack from the filesharing company. Their contention that this has be planned “for months” sounds like them spinning a yarn… as we see it this is the only way they can see to get out of this mess.

Whatever the motivation behind this sudden change of heart, it’s going to be interesting to see them manage such a huge upheaval in what HAS to be record time. Of course, we’ve all used LimeWire at one time or another (well, over 50% of us have, anyway, according to statistics), and we sure do wish them well.

If you were to think about LimeWire a year ago, you would be very surprised at the news of its decision to offer a ‘legitimate’ subscription based business model. A year ago, this subscription model would’ve represented a HUGE change of heart for what was a leading light in the world of filesharing.

On the back of one lost legal battle, and in the midst of others, however, the decision seems almost inevitable. Some are saying that this is LimeWire’s last-ditch attempt to save its company. Others actually believe the filesharing company’s contention that, honestly, it’s been planning this for some time now. Really? So the multimillion dollar lawsuit loss had nothing to do with it…?

The plans for the new service certainly seem to be ambitious. Perhaps too ambitious if this really is a last-minute thing. One spokesperson has said:

“Essentially, the new music service will be an ecosystem comprised of a desktop media player, mobile applications and a Web-based music experience for downloading and streaming,”

Sounds good, if a little vague. It will be intriguing to see where this move goes. Of course we, like everyone else who has ever shared a file, wish LimeWire the very best of luck in this venture.

It is difficult days for filesharing services across the world. The legal battles are coming quick and fast. It seems that governments and lawmakers everywhere are increasingly eager to bring in new laws that go out of their way to prevent filesharing services doing business.

So it is with LimeWire, the giant filesharing service that provides its client to a huge number of filesharing fans. First it was the RIAA – a battle which LimeWire unequivocally lost – now it’s the RIAA’s younger sister, the NMPA: National Music Publishers Association. The charge is very similar, and we cannot see how the result is going to be any different. Very unfortunate on so many levels.

LimeWire is allegedly in talks with music publishers to figure out some way to offer music in a legal and aboveboard manner. In our humble opinion this move is flawed, if not only because of the massively belligerent attitude that publishers’ groups have taken towards the filesharing service. We think it very unlikely that any move to go legitimate will be welcomed by publishers: they want blood.

But what good will that do, in fact? LimeWire will be in a position to start another filesharing service – one without the bad reputation, perhaps – and are very likely to do so.

LimeWire never has had an easy time of it. Now they’re struggling with yet another legal challenge from member companies of the National Music Publishers Association. This closely follows Limewire’s loss against the RIAA, in which it was found guilty of large-scale copyright infringement.

LimeWire has its back against the ropes right now. It has asked the courts to reconsider the summary judgment against it. It also claims to have held extensive talks with record companies, and, it claims, it is making good progress. The aim of these particular talks to is seek a license to provide the works of artists as part of a fully legal service.

LimeWire seems to have been sufficiently scared by all these cases to reconsider its market position. It is unlikely, we think, that it will continue in the old way as its heart will just not be in it now. Too many days spent stood in front of too many judges and courts must have taken their toll.

Is this the end of yet another Filesharing giant? Probably, yes. Will there be others to take its place? Most definitely. Will some of these others actually be part of the original LimeWire team… well, that would be telling, wouldn’t it?

Spanish filesharing fans may be having something of a party in response to the recent news that filesharing site cvcdgo.com has won a long-running battle against copyright holders.

A case against cvcdgo.com was filed by Columbia Tristar and a company called Egeda last year. That initial case was thrown out by a Madrid court. The two companies appealed the decision in the hopes of turning it over, but the courts came to a similar conclusion on the 9th of June this year.

The courts were apparently of the opinion that linking to the torrents or shared files did not constitute a crime in and of itself. Also since the data was on many different computers across the world, there was no way to connect the crime of copyright infringement with the things that cvcdgo.com were doing.

The judges actually likened filesharing to the ancient – and widely accepted practice – of lending books. An analogy that I’m not entirely sure about (maybe it lost something in translation), but whatever my views, it sends a strong and unambiguous signal to copyright holders: fighting your battles is going to be very hard work indeed.

Spanish site cvcdgo.com has struck an impressive blow for all people interesting in filesharing. It has beaten a case brought against it by Egeda – an audiovisual collection society – and Columbia Tristar. This is an appeal, and represents the second time the case has been dismissed by the courts. The first dismissal was in May 2009, when a Madrid court said that site did not store content, and that it linked to many diverse files that were shared all over the world.

This is quite different to the attitude taken by Swedish, UK and US courts of recent times, where even Google has been accused of exactly the same thing. The problem for legislators here is the international nature of the Internet. If you’re a Swedish filsharing company that wants to engage in activities that might be considered illegal in your home country, then just move operations to Spain. With some clever lawyer tricks and an appropriately placed server, you probably won’t have to actually move out of the country.

So, laws will remain easy to get around. That much is clear. What is not clear is how other countries are going to respond to these laws. Interesting.

British Industry watchdog Ofcom have got their wish. The law has been passed which now requires ISPs to keep track of alleged incidents of copyright theft and infringement. Users who are placed on a list by the ISPs detailing filesharing related infringements will receive a letter. If three such letters are sent within a 12 month period, the user may be in a position where his details can be made available as part of a court ruling. This will enable copyright holders to go after the very people who they consider are in breach of their rights.

The situation that ISPs now find themselves in with regards to persistent filesharers is a difficult one. It is actually a situation that is currently being battled in the Swedish courts after one ISP decided it actually took its data protection promises to customers seriously. It lost the court battle but intends to appeal against the decision. Good luck to them, we say.

These are going to be interesting times for UK filesharers. We have no doubt that this will affect only the most casual of filesharers, with others finding ways around the law very quickly.

Three strikes and you’re out. It’s a concept from the US that has made its way to British shores in the form of a new law that is likely to scare many filesharers. The law states that a user can be placed on an ISPs filesharing blacklist (in fact the ISPs are required to place filesharers on the blacklist) if they are accused of filesharing. Three strikes, and the publishers (or artists, or whomever) can go to the courts to request the details of these users. From there they may choose to file a legal challenge.

Accusations of filesharing will cause a warning letter to be sent to the user in question. Ofcom – the regulatory body responsible for this mess – hopes that these warning letters will significantly reduce infringements across the board. It certainly will scare a lot of people into quick submission.

Understandably the ISPs are not very happy about all this since it means a lot of extra work for them. It’s also something of a contradiction to whatever data protection laws, rules or promises that they hold themselves accountable to. Whether there will be any legal wrangles to test this new law remains to be seen.