The Geek Professor » RIAA

ACLU and EFF to Cripple RIAA Lawsuits

Jeremy — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 19:26:04 +0000

While I don't support downloading music and movies instead of buying them, I also don't support abusing the legal system to bully people and make money. The RIAA has been doing just that for a long time according to several consumer groups.

In this case, the The American Civil Liberties Union - ACLU and the The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) are arguing that when the The RIAA - Who They Are In a Nutshell sues thousands of "infringers", they have to file thousands of separate lawsuits and not just one.

Filing one is cheaper and easier, but makes it harder and is unfair for the victims… er, I mean defendants.

If the court adopts the approach suggested here, the costs of the current anti-P2P litigation strategy could become untenable. If each anonymous defendant requires several hundred dollars in filing fees, individual paperwork, individual subpoenas, and detailed information on their alleged distribution, settling for a mere $1,500 doesn't sound so hot.

Let's hope for the best. Leave people alone and worry about pirating organizations and criminal groups instead.

Source: Ars Technica

EFF Takes Opportunity to Shut Down All RIAA Lawsuits

Jeremy — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 12:17:03 +0000

In a recent case, the judge has asked for public comment which the Electronic Frontier Foundation was happy to do. In brief, the EFF is trying to show the judge that the RIAA can't win judgments against people only by showing that someone had a copyrighted song in a share folder. In other words, just because it was "available" for download, doesn't mean a crime occurred. Second, just because MediaSentry (the company paid by the RIAA to find copyrighted material online) downloads the song from someone doesn't suddenly make the providing person a criminal. Hear, hear.

Sent a Peer Downloading Settlement Letter? Ignore It!

Jeremy — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:30:15 +0000

Some people have been sent letters to pay up or go to court that have ignored them with no consequences. I’m not actually suggesting that you simply ignore any letter you see, but perhaps be cautious about who is actually sending it, what they’re suggesting, and whether or not they can prove it. Most importantly, if the letter sounds like a scam (threatening things they can’t do like taking your house and only giving you a week or two to respond), there’s a good chance it is.

RIAA Tries to Fine People for Defending Themselves in Court

Jeremy — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:03:50 +0000

The RIAA likes to send people settlement letters whether they’ve done anything wrong or not which leads many people to pay up just to end the issue (much like traffic tickets which, even if you’re right, it’s often cheaper to just pay). Now, if someone tries to defend themselves in court, the fee will more than double thus providing stiff motivation to avoid using our own justice system.

U of W Kicks RIAA and MPAA in the Butt!

Jeremy — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:28:07 +0000

The University of Washington has proven how ineffective the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) bully corporations have been identifying suspected infringers on their copyrighted works.

The paper finds that there is a serious flaw in how these trade groups finger reported file-sharers. It also suggests that some people might be getting improperly accused of sharing copyrighted content, and could even be purposely framed by other users. An inanimate object could also get the blame. The researchers rigged the software agents to implicate three laserjet printers, which were then accused in takedown letters by the M.P.A.A. of downloading copies of “Iron Man ? and the latest Indiana Jones film.

So they've show that it's possible to frame others for the download of materials. I wonder what that will do to the lawsuits. (H/T to schneier for the link)

Judge Strikes Killing Blow to RIAA?

Jeremy — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:22:14 +0000

A judge just ruled against the RIAA’s theory of “making available”. What this means is that the RIAA can’t pursue a lawsuit solely on the fact that someone has a song available for download, but that someone actually downloaded it from them. This one ruling could derail future (and past?) RIAA lawsuits and make filesharing a whole lot safer for the masses. Interestingly enough, the judge also helpfully offered the defendant a bunch of other possible defences that they could have used which the judge (presumably) would have ruled in their favor with.

DoJ Says 200k Award in Thomas v Capitol is Not Unconstitutional

Jeremy — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 12:22:54 +0000

Warning! Warning! You have found a RANT. Articles in this section are sounding boards for my frustrations. They usually (more like always) lack impartiality and may include arguments and "facts" that may not be supported.

With time I may calm down and make this a real article, but for now, you have been warned...

So the Department of Justice, in an attempt to prove once-and-for-all, that they hate us all, has argued that the over $200,000 award in the Thomas versus Capitol case is not unconstitutionally excessive. Excuse my French, but bull shit! What crime did this lady commit? She shared a few music files? Oh woe is us! Oh poor, poor Capitol! They lost so much money to this lady and her dastardly ring of thievery. What we didn't realize is that she's actually the head of an international crime syndicate who's sole purpose is to lower the profit margins of Capitol records. Using her ability to speak 14 foreign languages, natural charisma, slight psychic power, and the ability to perfectly mimic a harmless American Citizen, she developed a web of deceit and criminal activity whereby she coerced otherwise upstanding people to perform acts of supreme depravity (like downloading or sharing music). Thank you, thank you, Capitol Records, for taking a stand against Jammie Thomas, who is surely evil incarnate come to Earth to destroy us all.

Update – May, 17th 2008

Apparently, the judge is considering a new trial. Maybe Thomas has a chance after all.

Update – 2008.09.24

Woohoo! It's been overturned.

Update – 2009.06.18

In a new trial, they upped the damages she owes to almost 2 million! I wonder if they consider it constitutionally excessive now.

Free Software Foundation To Support RIAA Victims

Jeremy — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:11:22 +0000

The RIAA has been able to run free for years suing just about anyone it can using dubious legal methods. Well, their glory days may be over. The Free Software Foundation has pledged funds to “pay fees and/or expenses of technical expert witnesses, forensic examiners, and other technical consultants assisting individuals named as defendants in non-commercial, peer-to-peer file sharing cases brought by the RIAA, EMI, SONY BMG, Vivendi Universal, and Warner Bros. Records, and their affiliated companies, such as Interscope, Arista, UMG, Fonovisa, Motown, Atlantic, Priority, and others”. That is awesome.

Article here Link to the Free Software Foundation here

Universities Fighting RIAA and Winning In Some Cases

Jeremy — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 18:35:22 +0000

Here’s a little summary of the battle between the RIAA and university students. Looks like things are getting harder and harder for the RIAA meaning as their exploits become more public, less people are willing to bend over and take their abuse.