Slashdot Mirror
University Bows to RIAAs Demands for Student Names
jcgam69 writes "Hours after a federal court judge ordered Oklahoma State University to show cause why it shouldn't be held in contempt for failing to respond to an RIAA subpoena, attorneys for the school e-mailed a list of students' names to the RIAA's attorneys. But now that the RIAA has what it wanted, the group is unsure about how to go about sending out its pre-litigation settlement letters. Some of the students are represented by an attorney, meaning that the RIAA is barred from contacting them directly."
They (RIAA) are being sued for what they do, so don't come with that. However, as an association backed by large music companies, they have more money and thus can stand (delay) longer in court before giving up even though what they are doing is illegal and unethical, it's the corrupt system that allows them to do that.
On another note, what the University did here might be illegal too. They are giving probably without a court order, a LIST of students' names to a third party. The RIAA is a PRIVATE organization, not a government or public benefactor and a judge can't order something that is against the law (that's what the RIAA is trying to force though). I know where I work (University) that would be against New York State, HIPAA and internal policy and if somebody in my group were to be sued, I would take it all the way to supreme court before I release anything.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
It isn't at all the fault of the people who actually broke the law?
Depends, they have the right to due process. They have the right of a fair trial.
These people distributed copyrighted material that they had no right nor authorization to distribute. Representatives of the copyright holders found out about it, and are suing. Unless the representatives found out about it in an illegal way (read: non-admissible in court), they are fully within their rights to sue.
These people are SUSPECTED of these actions. It is not clear that there is sufficient proof or any viable proof at all.
But let us not forget that that there is evidence that the people being sued have broken the law and that the plaintiffs are completely within their rights to sue, and to use the facilities granted to them by law (i.e. warrants and subpoenas).
Yes, and lets look at that evidence. It is a witch hunt.
In fact, with the exception of one high-profile slam-dunk case for the RIAA with a judgment of a quarter million dollars for the guilty music pirate, they have dropped every single other case that actually gets beyond a settlement phase into the bonafide legal system. And even then they drop the cases after shaking them down with subpoenas and discovery and other abuses of process with the hopes to bankrupt them and teach them a lesson.
RIAA shouldn't have the power to demand a list of students with certain IP addresses for what they think is happening any more than I have the right to demand the name of the person using the IP address who I suspect was cheating in my FPS server. The POLICE and other law enforcement are the ones who should have the power to do that, with the burden of criminal just cause to obtain a warrant.
If it's really a matter of law, why not just file a complaint with law ENFORCEMENT? I'll answer: to game the system because they know once casual sharing actually gets tested and appealed upwards then so very many of the copyright and DMCA clauses are in trouble under judicial review.
More Twoson than Cupertino
An insightful reply demands a informative one:
http://moneyline.cq.com/pml/home.do
http://opensecrets.org/
Please check your candidates this time.
From the Summary: (emphasis mine)
In case you are unfamiliar with the definition of a subpoena, it means "a court order". Reference a dictionary or even Wikipedia.
The RIAA managed to convince one judge that they were wronged by someone on the university's network. That judge ordered the university to hand over the list so they could "identify" the specific individuals. They initially refused. When the judge said "Explain to me why you think you shouldn't have to comply with the court order," the university said "Oops. sorry. our bad. here you go."
Whether you agree with the reasoning behind any of the events, or even the right/wrongness of them, that truly is a summary of what had happened.
And, somewhat ironically, my captcha (since I don't stay logged in to SlashDot) is "freedom".
These people distributed copyrighted material that they had no right nor authorization to distribute. Woah boy! Since when does being accused by the RIAA automatically mean someone is guilty?
There have been numerous examples of the MAFIAA targetting the wrong people and even worse, the standard level of evidence they routinely bring to court has been laughably vague. They don't verify that the material being distributed is their material, they just go by keywords in filenames, some of them so general as to be meaningless.
You've made one hell of a leap of logic there and you should be ashamed of yourself for not applying some critical thinking beforehand.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.