Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Is RIAA's Linares Affidavit Technically Valid?

Posted by kdawson on from the helping-out-the-judge dept.

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In support of its ex parte, 'John Doe,' discovery applications against college students, the RIAA has been using a declaration by its 'Anti-Piracy' Vice President Carlos Linares (PDF) to show the judge that it has a good copyright infringement case against the 'John Does.' A Boston University student has challenged the validity of Mr. Linares's declaration, and the RIAA is fighting back. Would appreciate the Slashdot community's take on the validity of Mr. Linares's 'science.'"

4 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. The companies behind the RIAA... by Barkmullz · · Score: 4, Informative

    I do not feel particularly qualified to validate Mr. Linares's claims. However, over the years I have 'forgotten' that the RIAA is just a trade organization, comprised of many different companies. It was interesting to read through the list of plantiffs and put a face on who the RIAA really is. Here they are if you did not RTFA:
    • Arista Records, LLC
    • Warner Bros. Records, Inc.
    • Atlantic Recording Corporation
    • Virgin Records America, Inc.
    • UMG Recordings, Inc.
    • BMG Music
    • Capitol Records, Inc.
    • Sony BMG Music Entertainment
    • Motown Record Company, L.P.
    • Maverick Recording Company
    • Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc.
    • Laface Records, LLC.
    • Interscope Records
    This may not be a good thing, as my hatred will now be diluted
    --
    Ronald said nothing. He flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse, and rode madly off in all directions.
  2. It been done... by HaeMaker · · Score: 4, Informative

    This sounds vaguely familiar...

  3. Hey, I'll reply anyway. by khasim · · Score: 5, Informative

    The biggest mistake is that they're trying to imply that an IP address is tied to a specific person at a specific point in time.

    It is not.

    It may be tied to a specific computer. Or a specific router / firewall. Or even a specific UNSECURED wireless access point.

    But it is NOT tied to a specific person.

    Their second biggest mistake is claiming (without any evidence) that each file being "pirated" represents a lost sale. So the courts need to work REALLY REALLY FAST to stop the money being lost.

    Their third biggest mistake is that the machine with the IP address, that is associated with the "piracy" is 100% under the conscious, knowing control of the person who is being charged. As opposed to your neighbor using your unprotected wireless access point to download files without your knowledge.

    Anyone have any others?

  4. Re:Don't feed the lawyers by sconeu · · Score: 4, Informative

    It wasn't Linares. It's Ray Beckerman, aka NewYorkCountryLawyer.

    Sheesh, if you won't RTFA, at least click the submitter's name before you go all conspiracy.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.