Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Grabs Student's Life's Savings
An anonymous reader writes "ABCNews is reporting on a 19-year-old college student at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y. He created a site named ChewPlastic.com where students could search for files on the university network. Mind you, this is not a music file sharing software, this is just a search engine. Presumably, the search engine was being used to search for music files as well. The folks over at the RIAA did not take too kindly to the idea, and sued the student. He settled but denies any wrongdoing. What was settlement, you ask? His life's savings."
People suing Google because their 10 year old found porno?
Suing Yahoo because someone found copyright material on an unauthorized page? GASP!
--------
Free your mind.
what is it with government and big business.. they crap on us and we allow it. They lie to us and we allow it. We elect them.. we need to change things. If you don't vote don't bitch! ROCK THE VOTE.
doesn't the RIAA have something better to do than sue some college kid for making a search engine. hell, you can use Google and find some MP3s, I guess they are next.
When the RIAA does stuff like this, it just makes people more likely to steal from them.
Now we know where all the ex-KGB agents went. They now work for the RIAA. It's a sad time when your afraid to develop something because it 'MIGHT' be used for illegal things. Bastards!
Why worry? Each of us is wearing an unlicensed "nucular" accelerator on his back.
Sig changed for readability by G.W.
Holy crap, I'm really glad I graduated from RPI in 2002 before the RIAA decided to sue the entire student body.
Seriously though, I'm gonna have to start donating money to support student lawsuits rather than to build new dorms if this keeps up.
Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
Very few articles make me angry. This one did.
RIAA _is_ a bully. Someone needs to stop them.
The only thing I can do is stop buying music - which will hurt the artists I like - and listen to it on the radio. Neither truly feeding the flames, nor the coffers of the RIAA.
BlackNova Traders
Corporations own the politicians. A perfect example of marketing in action. People vote for the person they see in commercials, not the candidate that best matches their beliefs. Most people couldn't tell you where the people they vote for stand on any issues at all with confidence. It takes money to buy commercials and as a consequence to win you have to kiss ass to corporate America.
"They agreed to allow Jesse to deny their allegations. They agreed to dismiss the case and all allegations against him," Andy said. "Basically they agreed that he didn't do anything wrong, but [they're] taking his 12 grand."
Andy is the kid's father, and he fully stands behind him, which is encouraging to read.
While Andy questions the motives and actions of the RIAA, he basks in pride at his son's steadfast resolve.
"He has stood up to the schoolyard bullies that are pulling this and he's said, 'You are not going to make me say something that's not true,'" Andy said.
Apart from wondering how things have changed since I was a student that any university student can have $12,000 in savings, this just plain sucks. How the #$%^ do they get away with this? Read that again...the kid gets to pay $12,000 for the privilege of being graciously permitted to continue denying he did anything wrong!
So the RIAA knows they haven't a leg to stand on (unless you can believe they were being altruistic in not forcing a black mark on the student's permanent record -- yeah, right), and still somehow forces him to pay them all his money.
Blackmail, 'blak-"mAl
a : extortion or coercion by threats especially of public exposure or criminal prosecution b : the payment that is extorted
With organizations like the RIAA, people are going to fear innovating. This kid, obviously fairly smart or innovative, gets slammed for coming up with a nifty way to searc for files on his school's network. Granted, he probably should have checked with the school, the President, God, Homer, and a few others to make sure it was ok to do, but he got nailed for solving a problem. In our lawsuit-happy society, people will fear getting sued and thus will stop trying to come up with solutions to problems.
It's just very scary how as a society we are unable to solve simple things now. I'd be afraid to open a lemonade stand because of the IRS coming down on me or someone suing me for getting sick, maybe I didn't meet some health code. And yet I probably could have made 50 people in my neighborhood happy. You're probably thinking "what does lemonade have to do with this?" A bit. Read the my first paragraph. Read the second. What kind of idea have you or a friend come up with? If not fearing the lawsuit itself, the costs associated with hiring a lawyer to make sure it's legal is certainly cost-prohibitive enough.
*sigh* I fear our great nation of innovators will be too scared to use their brains...
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
He settled
This seems a predictable outcome in a contest between Godzilla and Bambi.
Clearly, the student didn't have much money to defend himself in court, otherwise this obviously weak case would have been lost by the RIAA. If misuse of a local search engine was a crime, then may we expect RIAA to sue google for its role as people search for online music using that search engine? I don't think so.
The RIAA is reinforcing their reputation as greedy bullies, which will serve to exacerbate the problem they're trying to combat.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
I'm torn between the idea of helping out this guy who got the ol' shaft, and paying off the RIAA. I'd rather donate to a legal defense fund than OK paying off the music Mafia.
For a 19 year old college student, that is an amazing amount of money. It can mean the difference in a good graduate school and no graduate school. It might even mean the difference between continuing school. It will mean that he will probably come out of college in debt from student loans, not ready to buy a house and start a future. It means he won't have the liberty of waiting to take a job he will enjoy but will have to take the first good paying job available after he graduates. only $12000 That's worse than bank robbery, thats robbing a kid of a future. Yes he might be able to get another one, but perhaps not.
Little Brother, watching the watchers
Just to remind everyone: when this was a new story (weeks ago, in the first weeks of may) it was calculated that his tuition for the semester was something on the order of $20,000. This is pretty standard for a decent school. Now, consider this: in order for him to go through the court proceedings, he would have missed his finals, thus losing him all the money he spent on that semester.
That would necessitate counter-suing, then, to recoup that $20,000, plus legal fees.
So in the end, if he wanted to fight this, he would have needed to not only argue for his innocence, but also that the RIAA was sufficiently innapropriate in suing him that they were responsible for both his legal fees (which could exceed several thousand dollars, most likely) and also his lost $20,000 from school. Conferring with a few friends who are lawyers in this field, the consensus is that to get the legal fees at least, he'd have to demonstrate far more than his innocence, but also the RIAA's foreknowledge of his innocence most likely. As for the lost $20,000, he'd have to demonstrate both the foreknowledge of his innocence, as well as an intentional effort to time their lawsuit to cause him those damages. Thats not locked in stone - different judges can apply the rules differently.
Basically, my point is that this kid lost $12,000 this way. If he had fought it, he'd have lost $20,000 at least, plus legal fees, plus potentially losing tens of thousands of dollars if he lost the court case. Worse, he could face academic punishments for failing a full courseload (that would depend on his school).
Now, I'm not saying this is fair, since I dont necessarily agree with the RIAA intentionally targetting individuals who cannot afford to fight back, but I'm just trying to make it clear to everyone here why this kid did what he did.
"Stumble before you crawl"
My favorite quote from the article: "They agreed to allow Jesse to deny their allegations. They agreed to dismiss the case and all allegations against him," Andy said. "Basically they agreed that he didn't do anything wrong, but [they're] taking his 12 grand."
Think about that next time you buy a CD and give these greedy pigs another $18.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."
Probably would have cost more than $12,000 in legal fees if it went to trial. The RIAA is threatening lawsuits and bullying people into accepting settlements, because they KNOW that the people they're going after can't afford the legal fees to take a case to trial.
Do you really thinkg a college student with a life savings of $12,000 could take on the RIAA and it's team of lawyers in a US court?
Seriously...
5,000 music CDs printed at a cost of 5 bucks each, and sold for 15 dollars is 50,000 dollars profit. In record contracts, usually you have to sell millions before you see an equivalent amount of money. People pay as much for a band t-shirt.
The best act of revenge against the RIAA would be to encouraged this with every local band you know. This would choke them off. Best of all, a good band could grow the business to be really huge, they would just cut out the middle men every step of the way.
If most bands did this, the big record companies would to cut back to their own traditional staples, such as classical music. And even then...
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
If we really want to get serious and cripple the MPAA and the RIAA there is only one way to stop them: take away their money. Stop patronizing member companies. Don't buy their movies, don't buy their music. Don't watch their shows, and don't do anything that gives them monitary benefit. I claim our very freedoms are at stake. Aren't they worth giving up a little entertainment?
Hint: a lawyer who advises you to settle when you have done nothing wrong is not a good lawyer.
What planet do you live on? Litigation is a fact of life - sometimes, people get sued. Your mission as a defendant is to make it go away. If you have a really strong case, you can make it go away by fighting and winning. If you don't, or you don't have any money, or your time is worth enough that it's too much trouble to fight it, you settle.
It works this way even in criminal cases. It's a cost-benefit analysis: do I plea-bargain to just pay a fine and get a slap on the wrist, or do I defend it and risk a higher penalty? Whether or not you did anything has little to do with it.
A good lawyer is one who advises you to settle when it would be in your best interest. Foolish pride has nothing to do with it.
ASA
All employees must wash hands before seeking equitable relief.
Hint: Don't talk about things you know nothing about.
He had two choices:
1) lose his life savings.
2) find a pro bono attorney and hope he doesn't lose his life savings and more.
1) The RIAA has deep pockets. He would have blown through $12k in attorney's fees in no time, had he decided to fight. I have a good attorney, and he charges $300/hr. $12k is one week of his time.
2) How many 'good' attorneys would work on a case such as this pro bono? Almost none. If the case were very high visibility (i.e. constantly in the pulbic's eye of short-sight), then he may have stood a chance of finding a good attorney who would represent him pro bono.
Also, you might want to tone down the "challenge" language if you really want them to take the bait. Of course, you can probably also recruit some fellow defendants from the small group of people already in the RIAA's crosshairs and make your legal defense group a bit broader. It does have the advantage of getting into the legal battles and getting some battlefield experience before becoming a target personally.
Good luck.
> The only thing I can do is stop buying music
Wrong. You can donate to the EFF. You can purchase music or otherwise support artists on CD Baby, an "online record store that sells CDs by independent musicians" (not distributors). There's pleny of things you can do to thwart the efforts of the RIAA mafia.
First, I would say that helping the kid is a better "good thing" than paying the RIAA is a "bad thing." To them, $12,000 (or whatever the lifesavings of an undergrad) is nothing save symbolic - to him, it's a ton. If we help him out, any symbolic victory of theirs is lost, he has no financial damage, so effectively all that's happened is that 120 people are out $100 and the RIAA is up 12 large.
The problem of course is that 1) this will encourage people in the future to settle if they think they'll get paid off, and 2) the RIAA will lose whatever shred of remorse they MIGHT have had about nuking some poor kid (laughable, I know), as they'll see it as a rightful, distributed tax.
So I think you're right - I think we need to get the EFF on board, help collect a war chest, and defend the next poor bastard they try this with. That way, there will be a clear, established precedent for the next time they try this crap after that.
The sad thing in this case is they have no leg to stand on. He never collected info about what was traded, and never got the opportunity to be helpful to the RIAA by blocking mp3's (which was one of the counts against Napster). So I have little doubt the RIAA would have lost given appropriate representation.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
IANAL either, but legal defense costs money.
If I bait the *AA into prosecuting me, falsely or otherwise, I'll lose lots of money and time defending myself. _Their_ lawyers are already budgeted for and paid. _My_ lawyers can drain my savings in a few days.
The litmus test for the merits of your little honeypot is whether you're willing to try this _yourself_ and face the risks of your own idea. Trolling for someone else to do it doesn't cut the mustard.
I dunno... $7 for a CD single with 1-3 songs (one of which might be a remix) vs. $15+ for the full album. Doesn't take Alan Greenspan to determine which is the better value there.
While Andy questions the motives and actions of the RIAA, he basks in pride at his son's steadfast resolve.
"He has stood up to the schoolyard bullies that are pulling this and he's said, 'You are not going to make me say something that's not true,'" Andy said.
Sorry, dad, he didn't stand up to the schoolyard bully. Instead, he said "I'll give you all my money if you don't hit me", and it worked. This is the wrong approach. I know it's intimidating for a 19-year-old college student to be threatened by a powerful industry, but he gave in and gave them all his money. That will simply encourage the bully further, it will not help the problem.
ChewPlastic.com is asking for donations to help recover the $12,000 settlement. As of June 6, the site has collected more than $1,700.
Yeah, great. Why don't I just make that check out to the RIAA? Seriously. Tell us ahead of time next if this happens again and we'll get together a legal defense fund for him. That way the money goes to an attorney, not the RIAA.
I'm sorry to be such a jerk, but IMNSHO a settlement of this type is usually seen as a de facto confession of guilt. I understand why someone would want to back down when threatened by the RIAA, but please don't call him "brave" for doing it.
Karma to burn, damn the torpedos...
Michael
Do you have ESP?
I just couldn't. I think I'd completely flip out, barricade myself in my dorm/apartment before I settled, and call/email every news outlet in the world. Let people see the cops called in to go after a student whose only crime was to write a search engine.
--- Ban humanity.
Okay...
The whole thing I'm not getting, is how is this good for the music industry?
Sure, they're bullying college students, who are indecently the target audience for a lot of the stuff they produce. They might make a few grad here and there, but this is the worst possible publicity they could EVER hope for.
In yet another move to demonstrate how woefully behind the times they are, they have beaten yet another college student into submission. That's good. But I would be willing to bet that there are probably a few hundred more college students who will never buy another CD as a result of this.
I think the reason sales of CD's are down is because people are disgusted with the behavior of the Music industry. In particular, the RIAA has acted in a manner that is not only disturbing, but only questionably legal.
Wouldn't it make sense that in a time of slower sales, that they would be focusing their efforts on promotion of their products, R&D product development, cheap sales ploys to get people to.. I don't know... buy stuff? This pre-occupation with internet file sharing is not only in bad taste, but it's a complete waste of resources.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
True, but with their tactics sales have been declining, when were the music sales the highest? Napster days wasn't it.
Which was also when I bought the most CDs, I downloaded alot, I had a CD burner, but I still bought alot of music.
Now with the true face of the RIAA revealed, I don't want to suppor them. The good artists will always be around, for the love of the music, if the recording companies fizzle out, something will fill the vacuum that's left.
Eventually the RIAA has to realize a change in their industry is inevitable, they can't fight it, they have to learn to roll with the punches. You look at the most successful companies in the world and they aren't stagnant, they change and become their own toughest competitors, google is constantly pushing the search engine envelope because if they don't the alltheweb/altavista team could leap frog them and become the number one SE. Intel is still running with Moores law and upgrading their technology, because if they don't AMD will and they will fall behind in the race. These companies don't wait for their competitors to make the next move because they know it will happen, they try and make the next move first. That's business the right way.
The RIAA isn't paying attention. Personally I would pay a monthly fee or a per song fee to download music legally. As long as they don't continue trying to extort us, or jack the prices up. But once I download the music, it's mine, I should be able to store it in any format and play it on any device I want. Be it CD, Cassette, MP3, or broadcast it through my house like a mini radio station. Don't try and lock it into a proprietary format so I can only run it on a M$ computer with windows media with copy protection that prevents me from listening to music, I paid for, in my car.
The problem they have now adopting this business model is that they have pissed off so many music listeners with their mafia like extortion tactics that while they may be able to create a viable model for all parties involved, there is nobody left wanting to support them.
They are becoming King Nothings, they will sue people till they are king...but they will be the kings of nobody.
Eventually someone will adopt the pay per song format and undercut the RIAA, and steal some talent, if someone with enough power can convince a few major bands to leave their current contracts and sell their next CD online with a download format that gives people what they want, the RIAA will be done for, they will have lost their opportunity because a viable alternative will exist.
It's only a matter of time.
Gibble: Descriptive of an emotional state in which one's mind is scrabbling for some purchase on reality
You are also pointing out a reason why CD sales are going down. The cost of CDs is ridiculous. When CDs came out they were about $10, and the should have gone down. They haven't gone down instead the cost went up and the quality has gone down. I think they just need to keep paying the billionare CEOs that sit on top of the Record Companies.
Apperently RIAA has determined the best new revenue stream is racketering because that's what it is they are currently doing. We put mobster in jail for doing this, but it's perfectly legal for companies to do it. Go figure.
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
couldn't the student have claimed that he was protected under section 512 of the dmca? seems to me (admitidely after only a very quick glance) that he qualifies for the safe harbour provision.
... how embarressing! :o)
ooh, this is my first ever post. been reading for ages and just never said anything
Isn't that the way civil law works in the USA? The RIAA hasn't only sued this guy, they've sued numerous others as well... and won.
It only works that way if the case actually goes to court and has a ruling handed down by a judge. Out of court settlements have absolutely zero influence on the law. I don't believe any suits have actually been brought to full term - instead the RIAA has settled every single one out of court, and all (I think) without admissions of guilt. Just money. And don't bring up the last one against 3 different students -- they all settled without a judge's ruling, and none admitted guilt (yes, I checked).
Suing people doesn't make a lick of difference until a judge actually rules on a case. To date, that hasn't happened. And I think the RIAA is afraid of that honestly -- they're simply using their much larger pockets to bully the little guys into line. And, frankly, defending yourself is inadvisable. You'll wind up paying far more in legal fees than you'd have to pay them -- and your lawyer will tell you this, straight up. The RIAA can easily drag the civil suit out over a number of years - they have the lawyers on retainer and it's a minor expense to them. Having a lawyer in court 4-8 hours/month for 2-3 years could cost you nearly $60,000 for court time alone (at $200/hr, which is low). And that doesn't count time spent doing research on the case - so double or treble it.
Is it surprising people are settling? Not a bit. Nobody wants to be the sacrificial lamb -- and you're kidding yourself if you think you do. Oh, and anyone with the resources to actually defend against this kind of thing won't be sued. They may be bullies, but they're not going to try and beat up the kid with bodyguards. Let him keep his lunch money -- there are far more undefended targets available.
he would have lost in a second and probably would have ended up owing the RIAA millions. Yet this way he still gets to dny any wrongdoing and may actually manage to have some money
I'm not saying that the settlement amount is right. I'm saying that that's the only way for him to not have his life ruined utterly by the RIAA
read my blog
musings on politics and technol
No it isn't. It is a contract issue. Why doesn't anyone understand that "free speech" only applies to the government not being able to censor speech. If you write an article critical of the government and the newspaper decides to publish it, the government can not come in and tell the paper to remove it. That is free speech. If you write an artle critical of the govennment, newspaper, your dog... whatever and the newspaper refuses to publish it--thats business--you can always try to buy ad space but it is not a "free speech" issue.
If you sign a contract (legal settlement) and agree to do or not do something then it is something that you agreed to in a contract in exchange for some consideration and has nothing to do with free speech.
However, it only takes 3 guys with some modpoints, an agenda, and a bad attitude to wreak some karma havoc.
Contact Me (got tired of viruses emailing me).
I see this as a 2-fold effect:
(1) You deny them money to lobby and litigate, and...
(2) You destroy the hope of artists who want to make tons and tons of cash (maybe) off being signed to a music company who is aligned with the RIAA.
I think the artists are just as complicit in this as the RIAA - they create the demand for a corp. like the RIAA to exist, and they're on the front lines helping us sign our innocence away to corps. that treat us as guilty first. Yes, I feel sorry that some bands will be hurt by this action, but making a transition to a new model of music distribution and moneymaking is gonna hurt somewhere, and I believe it's going to have to hurt the artists first since any other solution seems to be a pipe-dream and blocked by greed and lobbying/litigation.
Yes, lots of people keep buying CDs. Everyone here who hates the RIAA and wants to see its end will have to do their best to steal CDs and music for all their friends and family. Be the first one to say "Hey, never mind buying the CD, I'll download you a copy and make you the CD for free."
Hell, we're being treated like criminals already. Might as well start acting like it and REALLY show them who we are.
i'm amazed that i survived - an airbag saved my life.
I disagree. The answer isn't one or the other -- the answer is NEITHER. Don't support the 'AAs, OR the artists. They're in this together; Pimps and whores. Drug makers and drug dealers. You're the addicted customer they can count on to come back time and time again to lay down your money for a temporary distraction.
Don't you see? By supporting one, you support both. The only way to fix this situation is to support artists who completely refuse to associate with the major labels or just attempt to live without all the stupid noise. Before recording technology existed, people lived their lives just fine without being subjected to never-ending soundtracks.
Or are you afraid to admit that you're addicted to their silly noise?
One last parting thought. As recently as 30 years ago, music was created by adults for adults; the "bandstand" programs were popular, middle-age adults routinely listened to music in social settings (danced to it, even!). But these consumers are a picky bunch -- they demand high quality which is difficult and expensive to produce, so the music industry has given up on adults as a lost-cause and today they're selling music by kids, for kids because children are easier to control, tempt, and addict. Think about it.
Not only questionably legal, but to me it sounds like plain old fashioned extortion: "We found footprints, so we think you walked on our sidewalk. Give us all your money and we won't break your kneecaps."
Hey, RIAA, you wanted to make sure a whole class of people never, ever buy another new CD? You got it.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
And just who <COUGH!>CBDTPA</COUGH!> will oversee <COUGH!>DMCA</COUGH!> the legislature? <COUGH!>SBCTEA</COUGH!>
Eliminating the common law system would allow Congress and the Executive Branch free rein to trample our rights because doing so would eliminate the only one of the "checks & balances" with the power to declare a statute, executive order or other official act unconstitutional. Just how much do you trust your elected representatives to represent your interests over those of the large corporations who have the money to pay LARGE bribes^H^H^H^H^H^H"campaign contributions" into the "reelection" kitty.
utter rubbish
This is a clear cut case of EXTORTION!
âoeGive us $12K or we'll sue!â
Jesse admitted no wrong-doing and they still took his money in exchange for not suing. That is extortion, exactly like having the Mafia knock on your door and offer you âoeprotectionâ for a sum of money in exchange for not taking over your business/killing you. He (or someone involved) needs to bring this to the attention of the FBI â" assuming that they are less corrupt than the RIAA.
(Note: FBI guys, could you please inform me if you are or are not corrupt, and whether you will take this case or not? Thanks)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I used Google to search for St. Anger (Metallica's newest release) and found it in about 10 seconds. RIAA should go after Yahoo, Google, Lycos, et. al and leave this kid alone. What a bunch of felch-monkeys....
People are pointing out that RIAA is only going after an easy meal in this case. And, that they won't go after Yahoo or Google (or MSN or AOL) because those beasts have teeth and claws of their own.
But...think who the RIAA are really after. They are not after file sharing geeks regardless of the network. They are after geeks that build file sharing networks in the first place. They want to kill off the *next* napster before it is even born, by getting the message out to would-be developers that the RIAA actually *prefer* to track down and eat little people like them, and clearly have developed the staff and techniques (and moles?) to do so.
It really is horrendous and a blatant play to quash innovation in a field that is not only the next phase of the growth of the Internet, but also one that will erode the distribution Mafias of several big industrys besides the RIAA. What may be at stake here is the very concept of market control through scarcity.
=^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
How do you figure? The kid settled for $12,000. That's what's being reported by the national media. Period. If you manage to help him recover the money, that might get reported on a few nerd websites; but I don't see it damaging the RIAA's "symbolic victory" one iota.
I doubt we're getting the whole story -- here, or with the other four students who settled last month. I'd like to see someone ask them one question: "Did you have any pirated music?" I've never used Napster/KaZaA/etc. in my life. (I'm a Mac user.) If the RIAA came after me for writing one of these programs, you can bet that would be the first thing out of my mouth to any reporter who'd listen: "I have never traded music."
The software may not be as devious as the RIAA is painting it; but if these kids did in fact have pirated MP3s, then it's going to be pretty tough to convince a jury that their hands were squeaky-clean.
And BTW, did anyone else notice the kid's father beaming with pride? "He has stood up to the schoolyard bullies that are pulling this," he says of his son. The kid forked over his life's savings, without a hint of protest. It's pretty hard to keep a straight face listening to the nerd tell you how he beat up the bully, while his nose is still bleeding and his lunch money's gone.
One final note: This kid was a college student at a polytech school, with $12,000 in his bank account. You know a lot of college students who are sitting on $12,000? If you want to donate your money to charitable use, that's commendable; but there are better fronts to fight in this battle, and I suspect there are more needy victims than little Jesse Jordan.
My two cents.
crib
Please don't read my journal
This just goes to show that the RIAA is in it just for the money -- it doesn't care whether people do "the right thing" or not.
I just wish something would take the initiative and hit them with a barratry suit.
.
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'