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."
A person who isn't all alone and easy to scare. Whatever should they do if someone has a defense and won't give up thier lunch money so easily?
Sue the future consumers into oblivion.
every time we have a story like this it is assumed that the University should help protect students from the consequences of their (potentially) illegal actions.. err.. why?
I see no reason why universities should fight to protect the privacy of it's students in circumstances like this where a judge has pretty much given the approval for the plaintiffs actions. I would not want a uni to cave just because the MAFIAA contact them, but if a judge has reviewed their requests and then tells the uni to cough up the details, I tend to feel more comfortable with it.
Interestingly, this is the same attorney who back in 2006 won a case for Debbie Foster vs. the RIAA. A good choice.
I don't understand why universities dont just 'loose' these records. Is there a legal reason why records of student's online activity must be recorded? My university had a massive drive where all students could temporarily store their data. the drives were wiped clean every Friday. why not just wipe the students internet usage records every week or so?
I can't see what use that information is to the University, aside from handing it over to RIAA lawyers to screw over the very students who pay to go to that university.
you can't hand over evidence you don't have.
-I only code in BASIC.-
They might have mailed a list of names, but the important thing here is, are they the right names and were these the people actually sitting at the terminals requested at the time?
liqbase
...would be a headline which boils it down correct.
Wheter the judges order was ok in the first place is a diffrent story.
Sig? Where I go, I don't need
Funny how the RIAA got what it wanted, only to them find themselves facing something they did not expect, a prepared defense with direct experience against their tactics. One could almost say that they've fallen into a classic military maneuver, put a small token defense up first to bring the enemys offense to the front, to have it fall back, leading the enemy onto terrain of ones choosing, where you then spring the trap. Classic Sun Tzu.
I see Xerxes vs 300 Spartans in a legal sense here, so long as the defense does not leave the goat path to open up their backs they will do well.
Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
Surely there are large numbers of DoD employees and Federal employees generally who are illegally sharing too. The Federal government's networks are famous for a lack of policing. It will be interesting to see what happens when the RIAA goes after millions of attorneys who are paid to be a lot more ruthless than the RIAA.
still a bad analogy. Contrary to what all those 'mandatory viewing' promos and trailers on DVDs say, copyright infringement is not equal to theft. Yes, it's a crime, but it's definitely not theft.
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
Here, while most of the "online" activities are still fairly safe, camming movies in a theatre is now a crime and can net you jailtime. Interestingly, that law was pushed forward by one of our ministers who was fired for sleeping with a US Corp lobbiest, yet nobody ever reviewed the bills that she had pushed forth on their behalf...
IMHO movie cammers are idiots anyhow, but I think that our prison and justice system could be put to better use, and I'd rather not be arrested myself because somebody decided to nab me because my digital camera (which I tend to keep with me at most times) can do (crappy) video and some theatre thug decided it's close enough...
And no - this is not a cheap attempt at starting a flame war. I really do think the treatment of *most* individuals by the *IAA is pretty shabby, and in some case questionably legal. *IAA just has the financial backing to try, and the publicity mostly helps them, does not hurt them in a meaningful way. Since they *want* to be perceived as relatively evil group that you as the 'average joe/jane' are powerless against.
Now - the opinion part. I do hope they persist in this tactic. I recently have been turning to indie music in various forms and ya know what - found some *really* good material! Stuff I am happy to throw out a few $ to the artist, especially if they are getting a large cut of the money. And when I say really good - I mean excellent. Outstanding. Prime stuff. I haven't turned on my radio in vehicle or home since I started.
So - RIAA - keep it up. Indie music is my new crack - and their tactics are only ensuring a greater supply chain to me!
Since the RIAA has begged to reduce the fees they pay to artists yet AGAIN, ANY standing they have as being the "protectors of artist's interests" has gone by the wayside!
Artists and composers alike need to remember that the initials stand for the "RECORDING INDUSTRY of America," not the "Recording ARTISTS of America!"
Ask any artist who has been bilked out of millions that were made on their FIRST recording... especially when their SECOND one didn't do so well... notice how well the RIAA "protects" those artists from getting their backsides kicked to the curb instead of being given another chance by the label they had just made mega-bucks for, while they got zilch for their efforts!
Yeah, like that will *ever* happen.
Like terrorists, they prefer "soft targets".
There is a war going on for your mind.
D'oh!
Cowed to court order, We'll curse your name;
Oklahoma State, We hold you to blame.
RIAA will find us-and we'll be sued.
Thanks to our Alma Mater, O...S...U.
perl -e "eval pack(q{H*},join q{},qw{70 72696e74207061636b28717b482a7d2c717b343 637323635363534323533343430617d293b})"
And no one told them that MAC addresses can be faked? What the know is that their equipment is getting ethernet frames with the expected MAC address once the student has logged in.
I've done such faking several times. I even have a couple computers that regularly run with a faked MAC address (for development testing purposes at work, using Intel ethernet chips). All someone needs to do is figure out a working MAC address of some other student that regularly turns off their computer, ping it every now and then to see when it goes off, and when it does, start using it along with the IP address it had acquired.
They will need to go the extra step of requiring students operate through encrypted tunnels to prevent MAC spoofing (such tunnels running through a private IP network layer that cannot reach to internet ... to a central set of tunnel servers). If the MAC address is the only continuing authentication after the student logs in, and the traffic is not encrypted, then students that know what they are doing (and willing to do it) can take over in place of many others.
And then there is the whole issue of planted proxies.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
What we need here is a good car analogy. Let me give it a go.
GM makes one, admittedly average, car and it cost them $1,000,000 to make it. They then duplicate the car by the hundreds of thousands, and sell them for $2000 each. The problem is, most people only want the doors or the wheels which are the only appealing part of the car, and millions of people in the world have the ability to exactly copy the wheels and doors, even the entire car if they want, for $50, using similar technology to what GM uses to copy the original car. So, GM is upset by that and starts suing people that copied the car, even though nothing was actually stolen from GM.
How'd I do?
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
Of course, their whole modus operandi right now relies on the fact that civil cases don't require quite as much "beyond reasonable doubt" proof as criminal cases do. Then, of course, there is the whole "punish the entire Internet" because some clown just HAS to have the latest Britney crap. No, the Recording Industry Ass. of America has nobody to blame but themselves for the way the general public see them and, by association, their members.
Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
It's all based on your point of view. They see it as theft because pirates are depriving them of money that would otherwise have been in their pockets from the result of a sale.
The error in this assumption, which the MPAA suffers from as well, is that all other things being equal, a pirate likely would not have payed for the copyrighted work *anyway*, even if the work was not available to 'steal'! That's what is ridiculous about the whole affair.
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
s=summary...
"failing to respond to an RIAA subpoena"
see that last word in the quote above?
that is a court order, of a type that can be challenged
see the summary
"Hours after a federal court judge ordered Oklahoma State University to show cause"
see, 'cause' would be the challenge. The judge demanded a challenge or submission to the request.
the university submitted a response to a cort order, so the entire second half of your comment is moot.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
and they are violating multiple laws. We shall see how this comes out for the 11 students, and society will make even better laws to stop this kind of harassment. The recording industry is simply wrong and people know it.
Can somebody explain to me how this is possible in the US legal system? How can a university be obligated to provide information like this when it has nothing to do with the case, which is purely between the record company and the student? I can understand how a cowardly university board might cave to pressure, but this seems to be a judge ordering them to provide the information, without any evidence against the students other than a list of IP addresses, which is no evidence at all.