After Hijacking Site, Scammers Move to Seize Shareaza Trademark
Written by enigmax on March 02, 2008After taking control of Shareaza.com, imposters trying to pass themselves off as an open-source dev team have stepped up their action to destroy the GNU GPL licensed project. In an audacious move, lawyers representing Discordia Ltd have filed to register the “Shareaza” trademark at the US Patent Office.
In a December 2007 hostile takeover, a company took control of Shareaza.com, the domain name used previously for the real, open-source Shareaza P2P client. The real Shareaza client is 6th in the Sourceforge all-time Top 10 downloads and is completely free (GNU General Public License), but this company is passing off its own closed-source software as the real thing. Essentially, they are stealing the Shareaza brand name and goodwill from right under the operators noses in an effort to crush the project.
Last week, the corporate battle against this almost defenseless collective of people working on the Shareaza project took a somewhat miserable twist when the operators of the fake Shareaza site (Discordia Ltd) threatened legal action against the real Shareaza, all because of a comment made by a user on their forums.
If you’re starting to get a little annoyed that this company is pushing its luck, you may be interested to know that their lawyers - Meister Seelig & Fein in New York - have links to the new owners of iMesh and Bearshare, both initially free, both now converted to pay services after legal action.
So if it doesn’t unsettle you that some music-industry backed company has come in and stamped all over a GNU GPL project, took their domain name, passed their own software off as the real thing and threatened legal action, then maybe this will:
On January 10th 2008, lawyers representing ‘Discordia Ltd’ filed for registration of the ‘Shareaza’ trademark at the United States Patent Office. As yet, the trademark has not been granted to them but according to staff at the real Shareaza project, it must be urgently contested. Discordia claim that the first commercial use of the Shareaza trademark was December 17 2007 but other documentation suggests Discordia claim copyright since 1999. The real Shareaza project has been running since 2004.
If Discordia are successful in their application, it will put the original real Shareaza in a position where they infringe on the imposter’s trademark and will doubtless be subjected to legal action.
According to a source at the real Shareaza: “Discordia Ltd. under which the trademark was sought is a Cyprus shell company designed to shield MusicLab, iMesh, parent companies and business partners from the exceedingly high risk of liability in this case. Private information will not be disclosed, however there is significant circumstantial evidence regarding the source of their unethical and illegal behaviors that ought to be brought to light for the greater internet community.”
The real Shareaza guys are calling out for support, you can read exactly what they need here, but they are also calling on all of the budding internet investigators out there to research Discordia, iMesh, MusicLab and lawfirm Meister Seelig & Fein to dig up any information that could be of use to them in fighting these imposters.
To defend against the trademark application, the Shareaza team really need support as the financial burden is quite high, they explain:
No Shareaza developer or enthusiast has ever recieved money as a result. However, several volunteers now out-of-pocket for hundreds of dollars are facing the prospect of thousands. Shareaza has always been and will always remain free, non-commercialized software - regardless of the high value of its use that must be protected. Donations will now begin to be accepted for the sole purpose of partially compensating these unfortunate expenses. (Including a possible $900 at very short notice.) A ChipIn account has been established for PayPal (account/credit card) payments large or small. Please consider sending at least the loose change in your account to show your appreciation for enthusiasts who could scarcely afford these costs themselves. Feel free to offer in other ways as well.
Personally I think this is a very worthy and symoblic cause. No-one likes being bullied, particularly by the music industry so when they choose to pick on people with few resources, the only way they can be beaten is if people stick together and act together. Shareaza isn’t my favorite client - even with its support for BitTorrent - but it’s free in every possible way with its GNU GPL license and these people from Discordia are determined to tear it all apart. It’s unthinkable that they can be allowed to get away with it.
Discordia should consider this statement about the legal standing of trademarks:
“Immoral, deceptive or scandalous matter or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols or bring them into contempt or disrepute is not trademarkable.”
The real Shareaza team sends the final message:
You Can Help Most of All by Spreading the Word - SHAREAZA™ is the property of the Shareaza development team.
You can donate to the cause by clicking here.
Previously: BitTorrent Rip Off Sites, and How to Avoid Them
Next: Nine Inch Nails Uploads New Album on Torrent Sites
124 Responses (Add yours or TrackBack)
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 » Show All
[quote comment="302513"]Get your heads out of your asses - there are plenty of valid legal uses for p2p networks (think livecd distribution). Just because there are a group of people who use p2p protocols for somewhat less than savory enterprises does not mean that the whole of p2p are thieves. You can’t just paint broad overarching brush strokes and expect them to fly. Try again.
Jerome[/quote]
I couldnt agree with you more. However, you would have to agree that the majority of p2p is not legitimate, and this alone is the sole reason for the unscrupulous taking advantage of the vunerable in p2p. If everyone were using p2p only for downloading linux distros, or legal p2p content there would be a fraction of the malware and fakes on p2p networks. If Shareaza were not used by a majority of illegal downloaders, this article wouldnt be here plain and simple.
The only logical solution in this case can be to turn the forces of Anon or /b/ loose against these people.
C’mon…who’s with me?
Anons+ /b/ + /i/ vs. the RIAA battle royale?
Donated & dugg. Lets show them what open source movement is capable of.
[quote comment="302513"]
What /needs/ to be done is to a. have someone from the team sue them for infringing on the GPL license (if they aren’t providing the complete derivative source code), as well as any other issues that are relavent. It would certainly make sense to contact the EFF here as well.[/quote]
My previous comment is awaiting moderation, but there’s also passing/palming off law as covered by unfair competition sections of the Paris Convention, of which the U.S is a signatory.
Using that, it should be possible to stop discordia in its tracks regardless of whether they used the GPL code or not.
And yes, the EFF should definately have an interest in this case.
[quote comment="302351"]Shareaza another useless software like kazaa full of malware & virus.
Only dumbs using them :)[/quote]
That is one the stupidest statements.
Shareaza is Open Source and is on sourceforge.net. It does not have any malware and/or spyware.
This is about an open source software’s name being hijacked and has nothing to do with whether not P2P is legal.
Commenting on the legality of P2P in an article about brand hijacking is like arguing about drug abuse when people are talking about a drug company stealing a drug researcher’s trademark.
DevilsAdvocate, if you are to argue whether not P2P is legal, it would be much more effective to do it in a more related article than this one. Just because someone might be trademarking “AK-47″ doesn’t mean you should start yelling how Izhevsk Mechanical Works (or whatever company that should rightfully own the trademark) deserves it because you believe guns should be illegal and banned due to people killing people.
HAHAHA…what a bunch of maroons…
It’s called Karma…
What goes around, comes around…
You reap what you sow…
I still like the old fashioned approach by finding these lawyers and kicking them in the head afew times.
If anything, you get the satisfaction of kicking the shit out of a lawyer, that’s just worth paying for.
Nonetheless, EFF should be contacted asap.
Or you could ask the President of iMesh for clarification. His name is Talmon Marco, and his email address is durasio@hotmail.com.
KTHXBAI
[quote comment="302546"]This is about an open source software’s name being hijacked and has nothing to do with whether not P2P is legal.
[/quote]
Slightly off topic yes, but in defence to my initial statement, and all relevent none the less. The reason for the hijacking is simple. Its exactly the same reason they sued Bearshare. If it is easier and cheaper to go after the p2p applications people use than it is to go after each and every filesharer using the application, thats what they will do. In the case of Bearshare iirc, it was given up as part of a settlement, whereas in the case of Shareaza its a legal dispute more about brand ownership and trademarks and the application itself is fodder. Of course this is worrying as it may set a legal precident and leave any filesharing application that has not been regigistered as a brand or whos name is a registered trademark, open to similar takeovers wether the application itself is public licence or not. I still stand by my statement however that had the majority of users of these application been legitimate, this would not be an issue. Filesharers themselves are partialy responsible by their actions, which has resulted in yet another p2p application having defend itself.
Shareaza is useless anyways, gg’d.
[quote comment="302434"]Oh the irony. P2P’ers taking the moral high ground becuase someone took something that didnt belong to them. Smacks of hipocracy dontcha think?[/quote]
Oh dear, have the idiots invaded our comment section yet again?
Go watch a real movie for once:
http://stealthisfilm.com/Part2/download.php
and this time, try and UNDERSTAND it.
Get a clue, fool. You’re living in the dark ages.
[quote comment="302570"]Slightly off topic yes, but in defence to my initial statement,[/quote]No it isn’t. What do you think? That the people on planet earth will grow a liking for idiots like you somehow? For fools and corporations ruining their software and freedoms? Then you’ve got some waking up to do, mister. If anything, the HATE is growing because of this. And if you can filesharing (and copying data) “theft”, which it isn’t, this sort of actions from lawyers and disturbia (or whatever their sucky name is) will ONLY CAUSE more advanced “theft”. The incentive to NOT share files is lowered by news like this.
[quote comment="302528"]Keep in mind - it’s the user’s, not the software, doing the stealing.[/quote]What stealing? Can you provide examples of the “stealing” you so easily think you can drop here? Copying data is NEVER stealing, it is USING sold and available tech of today, nothing more nothing less.
[quote comment="302578"][quote comment="302434"]Oh the irony. P2P’ers taking the moral high ground becuase someone took something that didnt belong to them. Smacks of hipocracy dontcha think?[/quote]
Oh dear, have the idiots invaded our comment section yet again?
Go watch a real movie for once:
http://stealthisfilm.com/Part2/download.php
and this time, try and UNDERSTAND it.
Get a clue, fool. You’re living in the dark ages.[/quote]
Already seen both of them. I never said I agreed with the law, I never said the law made any kind of sense, I never said the law was right or just, of couse some of you are not smart enough to see that. It doesnt matter WHAT your opinion is of the law and you can argue semantics all you like, it does not change the law nor does it change the accepted interptitation of it. Copying IS illegal, unless you have the rights holder’s permission to copy ANY work or intellectual property that is protected either by national or international copyright law. That is a fact. You can despute that it is fact, but then you just look stupid. Well its a bit too late for that.
I suggest you read, and absorb some facts instead of spouting the same old uneducated ‘it aint illegal’ nonsense.
http://www.copyright.gov/ <-US copyrigt law
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/index_en.htm <-European copyright law
[quote comment="302570"][quote comment="302546"]This is about an open source software’s name being hijacked and has nothing to do with whether not P2P is legal.
[/quote]
Slightly off topic yes, but in defence to my initial statement, and all relevent none the less. The reason for the hijacking is simple. Its exactly the same reason they sued Bearshare. If it is easier and cheaper to go after the p2p applications people use than it is to go after each and every filesharer using the application, thats what they will do. In the case of Bearshare iirc, it was given up as part of a settlement, whereas in the case of Shareaza its a legal dispute more about brand ownership and trademarks and the application itself is fodder. Of course this is worrying as it may set a legal precident and leave any filesharing application that has not been regigistered as a brand or whos name is a registered trademark, open to similar takeovers wether the application itself is public licence or not. I still stand by my statement however that had the majority of users of these application been legitimate, this would not be an issue. Filesharers themselves are partialy responsible by their actions, which has resulted in yet another p2p application having defend itself.[/quote]
Slightly off topic? You mean greatly.
It’s John Doe’s fault for having his money robbed because money provokes the evil thought of robbery. It’s Shareaza’s fault that their name is being hijacked because Shareaza can be used to download copyrighted content.
[quote comment="302582"][quote comment="302528"]Keep in mind - it’s the user’s, not the software, doing the stealing.[/quote]What stealing? Can you provide examples of the “stealing” you so easily think you can drop here? Copying data is NEVER stealing, it is USING sold and available tech of today, nothing more nothing less.[/quote]
Some of you people are blatently stupid. Copyright infringement=copyright theft, theft=stealing. What part of that has trouble penetrating your thick heads?
[quote]It’s OK to use copy or publish other peoples work if I don’t make any money out of it
No, except in specific circumstances permitted under fair dealing/fair use rules, any copying or publication without the consent of the copyright owner is an infringement, and you could face legal action[/quote]
[quote]If I change someone else’s work I can claim it as my own
The act of copying or adapting someone else’s work is a breach of copyright. Also any adaptation will be legally regarded as a derived work; so if you simply adapt the work of others, it will still be their work, and they have every right to object, (and are also entitled to any money you make from their work).
[/quote]
[quote]Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, is the current UK copyright law. It gives the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works the right to control the ways in which their material may be used. The rights cover: Broadcast and public performance, copying, adapting, issuing, renting and lending copies to the public. In many cases, the creator will also have the right to be identified as the author and to object to distortions of his work.
[/quote]
..and so it goes for US law too. Y’all some ignorant fools.
[quote comment="302575"]Shareaza is useless anyways, gg’d.[/quote]
Does not matter, if it is or not; it matters that a open source project is being attacked.
file sharing falling like a house of cards. all you thieves / bandwidth hogs must be shakin in your boots. :)
[quote comment="302603"]file sharing falling like a house of cards. all you thieves / bandwidth hogs must be shakin in your boots. :)[/quote]
I am guessing that is sarcasm because of the “:)”. If not forget about what application it is and remember it is a open source project, and this will not stop anything as there is always going to be a way to communicate with each other electronically. :)
yeah so. enough with the stealing/copyright infringement bullshit, its offtopic. stfu, go talk to a wall.
Yea, I usually see myself as Robin Hood, I “steal” from the real thiefs and give to the needing(read: me)
In most civilized countrys, copyright infringement != theft as they are two separate laws.
#66 annoyance.
Yea, the chance of me being sued/arrested or prosecuted for filesharing is slightly smaller then me being hit by lighting in my basement.
[quote comment="302591"]
Some of you people are blatently stupid. Copyright infringement=copyright theft, theft=stealing. What part of that has trouble penetrating your thick heads?
Y’all some ignorant fools.[/quote]
This is the age of the people, the age of democracy and freedom. We share and we care! So fuck u, bitch-ass! I hope you read the article which states that the RIAA and the other such industries have not paid the artists “”settlement dues”" they earned from suing such organisations and users like us. Then, why the fuck do ya think we shouldn’t be thick-headed to your words, sucker! I don’t understand based on what common-sense are you on their side? You must be some pervert left un-cared in your adolescence and gang-raped by stray dogs that you thought you could cover-up supporting these money-leechers and betray the common peeps. Hope you know that half of the wealth in this world is owned by these bastards due to such cases.
And last of all, most of us have bought and supported the materials tht we downloaded if they’ve served their purpose and our likes as they should! So STFU Biyatch!
DevilsAdvocate is clearly just a troll but I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s literally just that: Some paid dog whose purpose is to derail the discussion and spread propaganda. Someone here explained what the word “discordia” means and I think this is actually a big fucking hint. They are likely some MediaDefender-like (as in cheap, incompetent but willing) business with financial support by the RIAA/MPAA. Don’t you remember Sony/BMG and their rootkit? I think this is same kind of deal and maybe even Sony and Bertelsmann again. Of course it’s likely just a test run because Shareaza is really just a shadow of its former self nowadays.
It is really not difficult to get their domain back and prevent Discordia from getting the trademark but it requires a few thousand dollars of lawyer fees nonetheless. The maintainers of Shareaza don’t have that and since they are not accepting donations, there’s really no way to win.
People like to believe that laws are better than the rule of force but in reality it’s really the same except that force has been replaced by money. The only people who are benefitting from the law system are lawyers and those with lots of money. The current law system is nothing but EPIC FAIL.
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 » Show All
Add your response