Slashdot Mirror
Report From RIAA v. Verizon Case
LawGeek writes "Adam Kessel has provided Greplaw with exclusive coverage of today's RIAA v. Verizon hearing, in which the RIAA is attempting to force Verizon to produce information about a user who allegedly shared files using P2P technology. It sounds as though the judge had a good grasp of the technology, and has promised to rule quickly. Slashdot has previously covered Verizon's stance on this and other P2P issues."
-- Heinlein, "Life Line".
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
RIAA: Ok, we'll go after users. Verizson, tell us who this guy is.
Geeks: You can't go after the users, they have a right to being anonymous.
Bottom line is you can't have it both ways. The law (good or bad) is being broken. Who should the copywrite holders go after? The tools or the abusers.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Verizon by its own admission is protecting the privacy of its subscribers and thats a good thing to do - sounds good and feels good. You would have thousands of companies who would want the names of Internet subscribers if an ISP gave out the name of a subscriber just like that. Verizon would be hoping that the RIAA wouldnt win this case because that would set a bad example and companies who fight for their user's privacy will stand out...so there is more at stake here for both the parties.
I hope Verizon wins.
It looks like we are seeing more and more tech saavy judges who are really interested in this issue. Really though more people should be involved as it's a whole new area of law to be researched.
Hopefully with this trend we'll be seeing more fairness in our laws and not have another Dmitry type affair here.
I think things are looking up here.
sri
The gist of their arguement goes like this:
I hate to say it, but this time, the RIAA is right (legally). They got the DMCA passed, and Verizon is pretty much screwed here. Of course, Verizon -- AFAIK -- will not get penalties, except for possibly not providing the required information (name, address, phone) in a timely manner.
Stupid DMCA.
The law already provides provisions for the RIAA member companies to use the courts to seek subpoenas for the information that they want from Verizon. The DMCA put in certain provisions for an expedited subpoena process relating to certain information that ISP's have.
The ISP's are arguing that this exception does not extend to information about users who are merely using Verizon's IP pipes rather than storing an offending file on Verizon's servers (which Verizon has control over). So, Verizon wants the RIAA companies to go through the normal channel to request the subpoena. Why? Well mainly because it's more complicated, time consuming, and expensive for the RIAA companies to go through the normal channels. This means that the number of subpoenas served to Verizon is decreased and keeps them from being swamped. If the RIAA companies don't have to go through that process then they can have crawler-bots spew out subpoena demands and swamp the ISP's with information requests.
It's not a Verizon's defending the small guy or trying to be a scoff law. It's a "there's already a way to do this, follow the rules" thing. It's really a question of who has to bear the brunt of the costs of protecting these copyrights. It would seem quite logical that the ones generating the revenue should bear it.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
If your not joking about that part, I suggest you stop unless you want to share a cell with Mr. Tresco.
You don't try and fight MPAA and Verizon; you get MPAA and Verizon to fight each other.''
You act like the RIAA is an artifical intelligence sitting in a server somewhere. The RIAA are fighting for their cause and their way of life. These things aren't stored on a computer. We're trying to make ourselves look intelligent and moral, not just re-inforce what they already think of us. This war will be won by us in a legal, grassroots way. People like you are the reason the majority of us aren't taken seriously. I for one would not desire to have someone like you on my side in this issue. You're negative and counter-productive.
/. crew could, you couldn't be more wrong. Not to talk shit, but people with the skill to go where they want and do what they wish on the net..this /. is a joke. Not trying to talk shit, but it's the truth. We're seen as a collection of software pirates hiding behind the false pretense of a cause. All the TRUE hackers I know, people that are 40 now, have houses and kids and jobs, etc, people that used to be in Acid and LOD, etc, think this webpage is the scene's ultimate bad joke. Just the truth...
As for your comment on how if anyone could do it, the
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
It is interesting to note that Mr. Heinlein penned those words back in 1939.
function history(){
history();
}
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
hey man, all change that results in change that is positive is usually a struggle. the american revolution and the civil war turned out alright (american independence, the end of slavery). these were probably all accompanied by lawyers screaming about illegal activities. i think of napster, the riaa, kazaa, etc., as the birthing pains concerning a new understanding of intellectual property, all of which wrought by the introduction of the internet.
;-P see?
look, there are 3 things you can "steal":
1. atoms
2. data about atoms
3. data for its own sake.
1. atoms: you steal a car. a car is a thing. you stole it. end of story. the way it is and the way it should be.
2. data about atoms. amalgamated incorporated's secret formula 51x. if you steal that data and use the information to make your own production for pruchase of formula 51x, then you have stolen. stealing the information itself wasn't bad, because scientists were already using the information freely about formula 51x to research formula 52x. stealing it to make money off your own version is the badness here.
the way it is today is that amalgamated incorporated does try to call just using that information a crime, even though it stops scientific progress. see this slashdot story. the way it should be is that use of formula 51x should be free for research, illegal for capital production of products derived from that information. we have a long way to go to fix this mess.
3. data for its own sake. music, books, etc. we are not in gutenberg's time anymore. we live in a world where information like music and books is as transmuteable as water. in a way, information wants to be free. music is not like formula 51x. it is about nothing specifically, and is enjoyed for it's own sake. this should be free. this is what the promise of the interent is all about! the RIAA guards a world that existed before the internet. they are attempting to reverse history. let them go on with their bad selves, they can't possibly win. pandora's box is already open.
but who will make money off of music! no one will!???
so the future is about the status quo? things change dramatically sometimes because of new discoveries. besides, there are always alternative models for turning a dime. someone will learn how to stand at the portals that tell people what they might want to listen to, and artists or the groups that represent the artists will pay them to put their name on that portal. the artists will make money the old fashioned way, by working for it. live concerts. or they won't make money. they will do it because they love to do it. teen age boys will still try to play guitar even if they know they will never be millionaires... it was always about getting the chicks anyways.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Stop sharing your files on P2P networks Accually make a Peer 2 peer netowrk each person accually buy 1 CD a year, Rip it and share songs with people on the Peer to Peer network, Files can be sent with programs like ICQ, MSN, Yahoo, AIM, ..... the list goes on,
set up FTP's like we did back in the mid 90's remember??
Or just stop steeling!
I dislike the RIAA as much as the next guy, But If you wrote a book, then one copy was sold and it was then photocopied 1000 times how would you feel?? you spent say 10 months writing it, 500 dollars advertising it locally, then you sell it for 30 bucks,
1 copy is sold, it costs 10 bucks to make you get 20 bucks but are still short 480 bucks.
I don't want to see this guy sharing his files get busted, but I don't like P2P networks, they cause a huge drain on Bandwidth on LANs and ISP's
"This war will be won by us in a legal grassroots way"
There is no war, they lost a long time ago. This isn't a war, it's corporate grieving. Corporations don't have parents, they have business models. These corporations have all lost their business model due to advances in technology and they're in the process of grieving their loss. I think it would all make more sense to you if you read Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's work On Death and Dying. This is not a war, this is denial of a painful reality by a wealthy family that is being played out in the courts.
In essence, the judge is being forced to act as a counselor for a grieving family that refuses to face their loss. This is not an uncommon role for the courts and that's partly why we're seeing so much integration of mandatory mediation by counseling professionals into the court system.
In this particular instance I thought the judge's reference to the issue of "constitutional avoidance" was very telling. The lawyer for the plaintif tried to tell the judge when his own interpretation of the facts was and was not appropriate. This suggestion that the judge's thinking is muddled mirrors the counseling situation in which the client tells the counselor that the counselor is acting irrationally when all the counselor is doing is listening to the client. As a counselor, that's the kind of clue you look for to help your client begin their recovery.