U. Maine Law Students Trying To Shut RIAA Down

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Remember those pesky student attorneys from the University of Maine School of Law's Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic, who inspired the Magistrate Judge to suggest monetary fines against the RIAA lawyers? Well they're in the RIAA's face once again, and this time they're trying to shut down the RIAA's whole 'discovery' machine: the lawsuits it files against 'John Does' in order to find out their names and addresses. They've gone and filed a Rule 11 motion for sanctions (PDF), seeking — among other things — an injunction against all such 'John Doe' cases, arguing that the cases seek to circumvent the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act which protects student privacy rights, are brought for improper purposes of obtaining discovery, getting publicity, and intimidation, and are in flagrant violation of the joinder rules and numerous court orders. If the injunction is granted, the RIAA will have to go back to the drawing board to find another way of finding out the identities of college students, and the ruling — depending on its reasoning — might even be applicable to the non-college cases involving commercial ISPs."

Comments

Re:What a bucnh of idiots

[sm62704]

How about anonymous cowards learn to IDENTIFY THEMSELVES and stop trolling?
What the hell is wrong with discussing who is downloading copyrighted material then laughing at the RIAA cunts?
If you don't have a clue you cant have it. You are at slashdot to learn and teach, not troll your fucking ass off.
Idiot.

Re:No evidence

[cpt kangarooski]

Well, although my normal policy is to continue to discuss issues with anyone for so long as they're willing, and we're both able to, I think I'll decline here. If we were ever having a civilized discussion on this subject, it seems to me that you're not holding up your side now. You're not supporting your position -- particularly in the context of RIAA file sharing suits, which was the topic at hand -- and you're getting into attacking me personally, which is interesting, as you're doing so anonymously. You're free to, of course, and I defend your right to do so, but I do find it distasteful, especially with my pseudonymity having been brought into play. On the plus side, I can be pretty sure that I am not acquainted with you offline.

Against my better judgment, and with the caveat that I won't bother to read it or respond to it, let me ask you to answer a simple question directly, and with specific citations: Alice creates a nondramatic musical work and a sound recording of that work, registers their copyrights, and publishes them in the form of phonorecords. While the works remain in term, and lacking any sort of license, Bob then rips a copy of the phonorecord to his computer, and offers the files for others to download from him. Carol downloads the files from Bob to her own computer. Did Bob and/or Carol infringe Alice's copyrights? If so, would their mens rea matter? Again, if you answer, and I'd like it if you did, please precisely cite the relevant authority re: mental state, and which level of mental state, e.g. willfulness, recklessness, etc., is the least required.