SBC Refuses To Name File-Sharing Users

securitas writes "The New York Times reports that Internet provider SBC Communications has refused to identify computer users accused by the RIAA of file-sharing copyrighted material. SBC is the largest high-speed DSL provider with over 3 million subscribers. It continues to refuse a response to the 300 subpoenas served by the RIAA despite a ruling against Verizon earlier this year. 'We are going to challenge every single one of these that they file until we are told that our position is wrong as a matter of law,' said James D. Ellis, general counsel for SBC. He continues, '...We've got a long heritage in which we have always taken a harsh and hard rule on protecting the privacy of our customers' information.' Mirrors in Tuscaloosa and Lakeland."

Comments

privacy value

[Neppy]

Its a good thing user privacy isn't worthless to everyone; just the government and microsoft.

Sigh.

[PakProtector]

I wish these guys served DSL where I live. It would mean I could get rid of the 'emergency Plan B' device I keep in my bedroom, one of those magnets they use to move cars.

I mean, it's great, and it's sure to work, but the switch is so close to my light switch.

Re:Bravo

[computerlady]

Perhaps, for once, a company actually does have its customers' rights in mind?

Or just maybe the CEO of SBC has 3,000 illegal MP3s on his hard drive?