home

Music Industry Sues College Kids Over 'Ihub2'

If you are a college student who downloaded music or movies this past year from 'IHub2', get ready for an unpleasant surprise - 405 lawsuits were filed yesterday. More are planned.

The suits are targeting users of IHub2, also called Internet 2. "a separate network used by universities and colleges for sharing research and other academic works."

For the uninitiated (and that included us):

I2hub was founded by Wayne Chang, a former executive at Napster Inc., which launched the music-swapping revolution before the entertainment industry forced it to shut down.

Yesterday, Chang said I2hub is similar to AOL Instant Messenger or Internet Relay Chat communications programs in that it permits an exchange of data between users: "We do not host any offending files on our servers," Chang said, "nor do we have an index of files."

I2hub is much faster than the Internet:

Songs can be downloaded on Internet2 in 20 seconds, Sherman said, with movies taking less than five minutes. This marks a significant speed advantage over the Web, Sherman said, where it can take one to two minutes to download a song and well over an hour for a movie.

As for the schools, they include, according to the Post and the LA Times:

the University of California, San Diego, and the University of California, Berkeley, Boston University, Harvard University, Ohio State University, University of Southern California and Michigan State University, among others.

Who is Wayne Chang?

Curiously, the LA Times describes Wayne Chang's role at Napster a little differently than the Post:

The i2hub program is the brainchild of Michael Chang, on leave from the University of Massachusetts. ....The program is reminiscent of the original Napster, in which Chang played a minor role while he was a high school student. Among other voluntary contributions, Chang developed a way for users to circumvent the anti-piracy filters Napster added after a federal judge's order.

So, was Chang an executive or a bit player? Here's his bio from IHub2. Then there's this news article, which says Wayne Chang is 21 years old and a college sophomore at UMass.

And this article which says Chang was "the administrator of the message board for Napster" and decided to take a year off before college to start a job in Chicago that was going to pay him $70,000. a year. His parents own the China Blossom restaurant in North Andover, MA.

He sounds like one smart kid. I hope he saved something for legal fees.

More on IHub2 here.

< Pot-Cooking Granny, The Sequel | Right Wing Groups Break Ranks Over Filibuster >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Thank you Bush, "you little so and so", this is what bush means about laws and "order", soon some will be going to prison.

    Re: Music Industry Sues College Kids Over 'Ihub2' (none / 0) (#2)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Apr 12, 2005 at 11:26:06 PM EST
    Uh... I hope I'm not named in the suit.

    Color me surprised. Never heard of the thing.

    I guess this doesn't fit into Bush's "lawsuit culture"...it just goes to show that this administration's idea of tort "reform" is nothing more than to protect the powerful from the weak.

    TL: I would like to hear your opinion on this. I'm not an Ipod type of person (XM radio is the way to go), but one or two songs isn't bad is it? It is stealing someone's intellectual property though. Bottom line for me: I have to set the example and do the right thing in front of my kids. Fred: Are you saying that if Bush was not president, this company would not have sued? Or the kids would not have downloaded the music? I am confused to how it is Bushes fault. I am wearing clashing PT (physical training) gear today. Should I blame Bush? Justin: Should Bush plead with RIAA/MPAA or the Artists they represent not to sue? I would rather he plead with the woman who spilled coffee on herself then sued MacDonalds.

    Re: Music Industry Sues College Kids Over 'Ihub2' (none / 0) (#6)
    by scarshapedstar on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 03:48:13 AM EST
    Ah, yes, Wile starts the old McDonald's strawman. 1)Was this the first time McDonald's had been sued for coffee burns? Was it even among the first dozen times? Two dozen? (On a related note, was the jury trying to send a message?) 2)Did McDonald's have thermometers on their coffeepots? Were they ordered to buy thermometers in the past? The answers, in next week's episode of: Questions Republicans pretend don't have answers!

    The world is changing fast and the music industry is making all the wrong moves. They better find new ways to distribute and protect their artists. Law suits are just like building sand castles against the incoming tide.

    Scar: Ok I'll bite, please provide a link on how many has sued MCDs for hot coffee. I would have hoped juires would have ordered McD to stopselling coffee if it is widespread. Anyway what do you think of the article? Is it correct to sue over downloading songs?

    in the 80's they said "home taping was killing the record industry". they were wrong, REO SPEEDWAGON was killing it. hey, has your business model outlived it's usefulness? have you failed to anticipate how new technology will effect your profit margin? Sue your customers!

    I think this is a civil offense only, isn't it? I've been posting music at my blog for over a year, and no one ever contacts me. They pick on students because they're not anxious to see someone fight this in court, and I certainly would.

    et al - If you download and don't pay, that's stealing the artist's work. No way around it. Having said that, The only reasonable way to go is to purchase the music one song at a time, for whatever the market will bear. But, the music industry hasn't exactly been dynamic about this, mostly because it upsets existing distribution channels and the old method of doing business - selling high priced CD's that people only want two, maybe three songs off of.

    To, Wile E. Coyote, Yes on all points, remove bush save our nation from bin Laden, And What fun i am having watching bush get a-way with mass-murder of our country. Stop Bush before he uses a nuke on us. its not a joke, bush would kill us all for his real ideal's.

    "If you download and don't pay, that's stealing the artist's work. No way around it." "...The only reasonable way to go is to purchase the music one song at a time, for whatever the market will bear." Not true. Anyone old enough to have waited to hear WE WILL ROCK YOU by Queen with a cassette ready to tape it off the radio will realize the lie inherent in the RIAA's stance. The recording industry had a perfect tool to market new artists and releases, and they have instead stuck their heads in the sand. Downloading does not rip off musicians. I am a recording artist and have been for over twenty years. having my stuff online is an excellent way to promote my work. you'd be a fool to think major labels have the artists best interests at heart. This about a dinosaur becoming extinct. when your customers demand a new business model, wouldn't it make far more sense to listen to them?

    old paradigms vs. technology, fight that battle just about everyday at work, sadly, don't see it changing no time soon.

    Re: Music Industry Sues College Kids Over 'Ihub2' (none / 0) (#15)
    by nolo on Wed Apr 13, 2005 at 12:11:21 PM EST
    Wile E., here's a helpful summary of the facts relating to the McDonald's coffee lawsuit.

    Thanks nolo!

    BE - The fact that the industry is not modernizing its marketing efforts is true, and it doesn't have anyone interests at heart except its own. But it owns the product, and being dumb isn't illegal. So your argument is that those who are downloading songs are not stealing, are but actually engaging in a non-structured promotion of the artists works. Hmmm. At $2.30 a gallon, I think I'll do some promotion for Shell Oil. Think they'll mind?

    Re: Music Industry Sues College Kids Over 'Ihub2' (none / 0) (#18)
    by pigwiggle on Thu Apr 14, 2005 at 11:28:47 AM EST
    Theft cut and dried. Although, Ed has it right; the industry better revise their model. Illegal or not, unchecked free distribution of their property will continue long after their will or ability to prosecute.

    The model is a problem. Technology and broadcast (even digital broadcast now), tape reproduction way back when, the CD burning, now IPOD storage of broadcast or copied music - this is a longstanding problem for the recording industry. Remember digital audio tape? That was supposed to make it harder to enjoy copied analog music. I think this is theft of intellectual/artistic property. I would be more concerned about it if the music industry had a better record of sharing the profits with the artists, but most of the labels have been shameful in that regard. Given the industry's treatment of the artists, there is a bit of Robin Hood flair to this particular criminal activity. But I am sure the country will be safe and secure if we can stop the theft of music and gay marriage. Those are the the real threats to our way of life, aren't they?