EFF Calls RIAA Tactics 'Reign of Terror'

nanday writes "What happens when the RIAA prosecutes people for alleged illegal music downloads? In an article on Newsforge (also owned by OSTG), lawyer Ray Beckerman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation explains the RIAA's favorite tactics, and why they play fast and loose with the law. Beckerman also explains why two of these cases may stop the RIAA in its tracks - and what you can do for help." From the article: "In UMG vs. Lindor, the defendant 'is a home house-aid who's never even used a computer,' according to Beckerman. 'She's never operated a computer, she's never even turned on a computer. The only connection she has ever had to a computer is that she has on occasion dusted near the parts that she believes are a computer. And yet she is being pursued as an online distributor in peer-to-peer file sharing.' Since Beckerman became involved in the case after it had gone to federal court, he has tried to learn the details of the charges -- so far with little success. 'The RIAA is trying to conceal the information about how it conducts its investigation,' he says. 'They have stalled every discovery request we've made' -- presumably because to reveal this information would also reveal the weakness of all the similar cases."

Comments

Non-RIAA Labels of the World, Unite!

[kthejoker]

How come non-RIAA labels can't form an "anti-RIAA" coalition? Most labels not on the RIAA are pretty hip, they have tracks for download without DRM on their sites, they're real big on freebies and artist promotion, and they're generally more about the music itself than the big labels.

So why can't they generate some sort of composite publicity for their activities? Why can't they call themselves soemthing fun like "AWESOME" (Association of Wedding Evil SOBs Out of the Music Enterprise) and run press releases like the RIAA? Donate some money to the EFF? Have some benefit concerts to Kill the RIAA?

Get your acts together, people! Let's synergize our paradigms, or something! Go go go!

Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand

[sjwaste]

I'm wondering if the blame doesn't lie with the clerks. Let's face it, federal judges have enormous case loads. I'm not sure if the 2004 case reference was at the district level, but it's especially busy there.

So I'll ask, where were the clerks, if this account is correct? Federal clerkships are fairly prestigious, and many clerks are young enough to have direct exposure to this technology. Are they not doing the research? I'm fairly certain any due diligence by the judge would be carried out by the clerks on these matters.

Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand

[lgw]

This is the truth of the DRM war.

Today geeks are pissed, mostly because we see a dark future if trends continue, and consumers aren't upset by this. However, consumers *will* be upset if trends continue! If DRM moves to a place where consumers choke on it, it will be as dead as Divx, and all technology assoiciated with whatever consumers hated will be dead as well, as fast a a boy-band becomes no longer cool.

I work with engineers who are working on the TCG standards, and there is a lot of awareness of this problem. If, as many Slashdotters fear, Trusted Computing gets used to lock down consumer DRM, then Trusted Computing is dead, and years of work are wasted.

This doesn't mean that DRM is going away, however. There's plenty of room for less intrusive DRM that won't annoy the average customer, but will still seem restrictive to geeks. iTunes is there, more or less, for example.

Re:technology is outstripping Justice's understand

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

If you want to put an end to this, the simple answer is to cease all activities involving consumption of the product. Don't steal it, don't buy it, don't listen to it on the radio

I actually have to disagree there.

If you dissosciate yourself completely from the RIAA's music, you deliver the message loud and clear that it is the music, not the company that you object to. Sure you can "make sure you let everyone know your position and explain why you're taking that position", but that level of detail doesn't reach the sales figures of the RIAA. Show demand for the music (if there is any demand for it), just not the company's "Reign of Terror". So called piracy boycotts the business model thrusted upon us every time we want to listen to music, but still retains the demand for the music. I know everyone has said it, but give me a good-quality, DRM-free system (read: the system allofmp3.com uses), and I will be generous with my hard-earned cash.

Please note also that boycotting music (or movies for that matter) is not easy for everyone. I love my music, and I couldn't imagine my life without it. Right now, the RIAA could boycott me and I'd come crawling back, humble and submissive, within weeks.

Why does the RIAA does the ivestigation?

[houghi]

The RIAA is trying to conceal the information about how it conducts its investigation,

That should not matter. What they should do is file a complaints and then the COURT should do the investigation. The fact that they even know who the person is, is a bad thing. What is happening is:

RIAA to ISP: Give us all the details of IP XYZ:
ISP: OK, there you are:
RIAA to ISP: Sue this basterd, he must die.
COURT: Sure, whatever you say.

Here is how it SHOULD go:
RIAA: We want to report a copyright crime:
Court: Ok, please specify
RIAA: IP adress 127.192.168.172 at GMT 23:12 shared song "Some_music by Some_person_or_band" wich is in violation of ....
Court: Ok, we will see what is going on.
Court to ISP: Give us the data of the person who connected with IP on ...
ISP: There you are
COURT: Ok. Now let us proceed.

What happens in Belgium is that the court says: Fuck off if they don't ask money for it. We ain't got no time to do that. Come back when we have nothing to do or if you have people who are SELLING the stuff for profit.

Also if the local RIAA would come with the adress of the person, a serious investigation into the ISP will be done because of violation of the privacy laws AND the evidence (the name of the accused) will be dropped as evidence, making them loose the case almost immediatly.

America: Home of the give-your-privacy-away-for-free. :-(