response 121 of 134:

Mar 3 18:19 UTC 2001

So presumably users could get around any blocking based on
file names, simply by renaming files.  Is such an approach
likely to satisfy the court?

response 123 of 134:

Mar 3 22:12 UTC 2001

In the original preliminary injunction order from Judge Patel
last July, Napster was directed to halt all trading of copyrighted
material involving their service, even if it required Napster to 
shut down.   

In contrast, the directions of the appeals court seem to be saying
(this is based on press reports and fallible memory, remember) 
that Napster has to stop the exchanging of copyrighted files to the 
extent that their technology allows them to do so, while not 
unreasonably hampering lawful file transfers.  All Napster HQ
ever sees is the file names; the actual transfers of binary song 
files take place directly between the users.  So the file names 
are all Napster Inc. has to work with.

response 125 of 134:

Mar 6 03:40 UTC 2001

Napster was supposedly going to install filters this weekend to cut down
on the copyrighted song traffic, statistics right now are: 2075980 songs
10350 users 8874GB of data.

So much for filtering.

response 127 of 134:

Mar 6 20:48 UTC 2001

 regarding Napster song blocking, a friend sent me this..
 
 > I love this idea, from a headline blurb on Slashdot.  It can't see it
 > holding up, but it's a truly inspired idea.  :-)
 >
 >> AIMster is offering a Pig Latin encoder that will encrypt your mp3 titles.
 >> They state that, under the DMCA, it would be illegal for the RIAA to
 >> reverse engineer their encoding scheme and try and filter the encrypted
 >> filenames from Napster.
 
 I have to concur with his assessment that it's unlikely to prevent much of
 an impediment to the RIAA, but I love the ironic angle..

response 129 of 134:

Mar 10 06:03 UTC 2001

"The Music Business Thinks Like Napster:"
 
Found at Borders tonight is a sampler from the Verve label's new 
reissue program of old jazz classics:  Ella, Louis Armstrong, Count Basie,
Antonio Carlos Jobim, and so forth.   It's supposed to be free if 
you buy one album from the series: but if you want to buy it on its
own, Borders will sell it to you for a penny.
 
So far, pretty standard promotional stuff.  The twist:  for your penny, 
you get two identical CDs.   "Music so good we made it twice,"
reads the package.  "Keep one and pass it on!"
 
This is actually the second time I've heard of this gimmick, though
the first I've seen it in the store.
 
(Note to Twila: the package also says there is a bonus new Diana Krall
track in here, so you might want to scoop this up.)

response 131 of 134:

Mar 14 17:41 UTC 2001

resp:128 ::  I lost the news story where the record labels are complaining
that Napster is still allowing many song files to be traded.
 
The LA Times reports that Napster is asking Judge Patel to appoint 
a technically competent monitor to verify that Napster is doing 
everything possible to comply with the injunction crafted under the 
guidance of the 9th circuit appeals panel.  

response 133 of 134:

Mar 16 19:04 UTC 2001

As a law librarian, I've just had the privilege of cataloging a 
videotape recording of the appeals court arguments from last November 
by David Boies (for Napster) and other lawyers (for N's nemeses).

My private personal conclusion: They're all idiots, every one.