>there is no law against having an illegal recording, OK, I'll bite. It's true that the express terms of the statutes typically address the copying and not, for the most part, possession. But to get a copy, you had to engage in some sort of transaction with someone who made the copy for you. You didn't just hatch the thing through some miracle of immaculate conception. You (I, we) conspired with another to have that other person copy a CD for you, a criminal act where, unlike virtually everything traded on etree, you have no license express or implied from the artist to do so. Two of the really cool (if you're a prosecutor) things about conspiracy law are that (a) even the loosest and most indirect of 'agreements' suffice to constitute conspiracy so long as the parties both contemplate that a criminal act (copying) will be done; and (b) conspiracy to commit even the tiniest misdemeanor is a felony. Yes, 'let's go into the 7-11 and steal a stick of gum" is a *felony* criminal conspiracy. So is 'burn me a copy of your unmentionable and i'll burn you a copy of mine.'
At an even simpler level, the intellectual property rights inherent in that recording can be characterized as "stolen property.' Note that I'm expressing no moral outrage here. Too much glass in my house. But it is erroneous, and in this context dangerous, to say there is no law against possessing an unlawfully recorded or copied recording. I have long held the view that such unauthorized recordings should not be listed on db.etree.org. Why? Look at that URL again. Those shows aren't listed because somebody just wants to brag about what they have - those are trading lists. A jury would rip you a new one if you tried to cutely deny that those lists constitute an offer to trade what's on the list for the right incentive. etree should not be hosting lists **on the etree domain** which list unmentionables. Certainly there's a way to put on your db.etree.org list a link that says 'see the rest of my list by clicking here,' and hosting that list elsewhere. The difference is that etree can't keep you from doing that on another server, but can (and I believe should) refuse to host lists *on its own domain* which offer opportunities to conspire to violate any law. Nobody can be held liable for not preventing that which they cannot prevent; but I can be held liable if I let you come over and set up a meth lab in my spare room. Or let you peddle stolen goods through my web server. Go ask the Napster guys, who thought they had it whipped just because the *music* wasn't on their server. Again, not moral outrage. Just sound legal advice to protect etree, not from prosecutors, who don't care, but from RIAA types, who very much do, because their industry is crumbling and they NEED to monopolize online transfer to survive. I've been practicing criminal defense for over 20 years now, exclusively for the past 12. I don't make this sh*t up. wilbur P.S. Hug a newbie today! _______________________________________________ etree mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://mail.etree.org/mailman/listinfo/etree
