Not exactly what I was looking for again I am afraid Mate. I have a website. I have several links on it (say, in order to exchange traffic and/or to increase Google PR). Some links lead to the site(s) with links to copyrighted content. Note- there are NO LINKS to copyrighted materials on my site and on the moment I exchanged links with the site(s) they all seemed to be OK (i.e. NO ILLEGAL MATERIALS). As I have shown in my Google example - my site does quite the same. I do not place any links to infringed materials, neither I distribute any copyrighted materials myself. I do not create any damn cracks and other illegal things. From what I have learned while reading 17 U.S.C was: linking to copyrighted content (as I can see it - placing DIRECT LINKS to the infringed files) is prohibited. I exchange with several sites that provide my site with EXTRA HUGE traffic and I don't want to remove links to the sites from mine. You mentioned "trafficking" so as you can see - I do not make, do not sell, do not give away anything on my site. Linking to the code was in fact LINKING TO HARMFUL (and hence- illegal) SOFTWARE CODE.
I think I understand what you are saying. you don't have links showing where to find the material, but some of the sites that you link to do. From what I can see, as long as you are not directing people to specifically find access, you may not be liable, but that "may:" is at the discretion of the court should civil action be brought..that instance is not very clear. I think it will be determined by context...if you write about rapid share or music, and link to rapid share search engines, without naming specific files, you are still promoting and "trafficking", but if you write about politics, and one of the music sites that you link to happens to link to illegal downloads, then possibly not. At least that's the way I interpret it. I have a few music sites, and to avoid any confusion I will not link to any site that sponsors, discuses, or provides access to file sharing, or rapid share type links...at all. Mainly because I don't want to be associated with them, and don't want to assist them in any way, or have anyone that I deal with to think that I support that type of action...so for me it's a "no brainer", there is no link that I need that bad because it takes away the credibility of my own site. It seems to say that you have to be promoting, to be held liable, but where is that line ? Could a link that drives traffic be considered promoting ? That's up to you and how important a link is to assume the risk.
No problem, glad I could help a little. That link also talks about other instances, and links to some other legal sites, so it looks like you may have to comb through it , to get an exact answer for your particular situation, but it seems that the basics are pretty clear. I never asked what country you are in...most western nations have the same agreement with each other, U.S., Canada, G.B., France, Italy, Germany, Aus, etc.
tvangeste, I've noticed that hmansfield and a few others have pretty much said no, no, no, no without actually presenting any real "definitive answer". Their just stating there opinions. I'm not real sure where your going to find a specific law that says its wrong. Unfortunately this whole topic of law is still uncertain with a lot of debate (as seen above). Like I've stated as of right now your not really going to find a specific line that states whether it is legal or illegal. Law has to be interpreted and unless your a judge or a lawyer your never going to successfully interpret the law. My advise is to speak with your lawyer. I mean if your really planing to go the direction you mentioned above your going to need one. Even if someone does put what seems to be a "definitive answer" to your question on here, you are still going to have to decide for yourself as to whether you are going to follow your own interpretation of that law or someone elses. Best of luck to ya. hmansfield, there isn't a definitive answer to his question, I'm not trying to say whether pirating is right or wrong all I posted were examples of why this is a "GREY AREA". Yeah, stealing is wrong but if a law can't be enforced then what purpose does that law serve. I can understand why people get upset about this but just as with anything else in life, it happens. And people do get away with it. And if enough people get away with it then it becomes a social issue and not an individual issue. Try to stop millions of people from breaking the law and let me know how successful you are. You can go around and point your finger and slap people on the wrists but at the end of the day you've only reached maybe 0.0000001% of the people who are doing this. I'll state it again LAW IS RELATIVE. If enough people think its wrong then yes its wrong but if enough people think its right then its right. Law has to be interpreted and there is nothing definitive about interpretation. This is why a police officer does not have the right to determine your sentencing after they just saw you break the law. A judge first has to interpret the law that you are in question of breaking and then decide base on the circumstances if your are guilty or not. Innocent until proven guilty. It is the burden of proof which determines someones guilt. Which thus determines the almighty answer to what is right and wrong.
Promoting the pirating is bad. I also misunderstood exactly what you were asking. And as a side note, we computer programmers are a little more picky when it comes to these things than musicians are. Most musicians love music and want everyone possible to listen to it (except, as you said, the sell outs to the big labels). We're a tad more picky as the amount of time and effort that goes into a decent program can take a long time, at least months (same as a song) and even years depending on the complexity of the program and the amount of time that goes into it. That is why you see companys like Microsoft protecting their property so aggressively v. music companys. (that and money). I think, the way you described it as, you MAY be ok. I want to stress that may. It really is up to a judge to decide when he interperates the law, thus setting case law into play. There is not much on this particular subject. My opinion (not a lawyer here, just a legal buff and former federal drug investigator) you should be ok so long as you site is completely different than the copyrighted content that is linked to through the site you link to (if that makes sense). It is a very gray area, and I personally would not want to play in that area, seems kind of dangerous if you ask me. If your goal is not to promote the sharing of pirated content, or promote the site that is doing it, you may be clear of liability. Thats not saying you won't go to court and have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees. I personally, don't want that liability. I would think about registering your site as an LLC if you gain any type of money for it to limit your liability as much as possible and do it all under the business entity. But, the answer to your question, is it ok to do it? Maybe. Sorry we can't be of any more help.