Aug 5

Who's Suing Who on the Web
Sun Review August 5, 2000

Napster's legal battles seem never-ending. While Napster hopes to settle with the recording industry out of court, industry sources say that a deal is unlikely. "I think there is an opportunity for a settlement," Hank Barry, chief executive of Napster, told Reuters last weekend, but added there were no substantive discussions. The San Mateo, California-based company has been making overtures to record labels in an attempt to bring both sides together. Barry intends to continue that effort in spite of the fact that a federal appeals court reversed a district judge's order to shut Napster down.

Although recording stars like Madonna, Dr. Dre and Metallica are publicizing their anti-Napster sentiments, Dexter Holland, main man for The Offspring, is not so concerned. "About a year ago, we were the most downloaded band on the Internet... and geez, it certainly didn't hurt our record sales," Holland said in a press release. " So I think it's good. It's the spirit of music. It's the spirit of rock & roll. More people coming to the party. Not less."

Many people feel the best the recording industry can hope for is a legal victory, which could set a precedent for intellectual property on the Net and discourage investors from backing companies like Napster. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to control song-swapping as scores of users continue to flock to Napster, Napster clones and other file-sharing programs such as Gnutella. Gnutella in particular poses an interesting legal and technological challenge. It allows files to be shared from other users' hard drives, so there is no central server to shut down or control.

Last week I mentioned Carnivore, the FBI's e-mail snooping system. The FBI appeared in federal court Wednesday to defend itself against a complaint made by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). The civil rights group EPIC submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on July 12, asking for all records pertaining to Carnivore and a related product, known as EtherPeek.

"There is no substitute for a full and open public review of the Carnivore system," said David L. Sobel, general counsel for EPIC, in a statement. "The only way that the privacy question can be resolved is for the FBI to release all relevant information, both legal and technical."

The FBI has repeatedly argued that disclosing the details of the system, especially the source code, would make Carnivore vulnerable to criminal hackers and make its proprietary code public.

With or without the source code, computer-savvy criminals will find a way around the system's snooping abilities, said Barry Steinhardt, associate director of the ACLU. "Anyone that wants to evade it can use strong encryption," said Steinhardt, adding that the FBI's claims are "like saying, 'We can't know how a tape recorder works, because it will let people avoid being recorded.' "

The shoe is on the other foot for Apple as Cobalt Networks Inc., manufacturer of the Qube server appliance, accuses the G4 Cube maker of infringing Cobalt trademarks. Cobalt's Qube, which was launched in May 1998, is a deep blue, 7-inch-square server for hosting Web applications. Apple is now on the receiving end of the same sort of legal pressure it has recently applied to Windows PC manufacturers such as eMachines Inc. and Future Power Inc., accusing them of mimicking the look of the popular iMac system.