Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Duke Demands Proof of Infringement From RIAA

Posted by Soulskill on from the bluff-called dept.

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "According to a report at p2pnet, Duke University has told the RIAA that it will no longer forward the RIAA's 'early settlement' letters to its students unless the RIAA submits 'evidence that someone actually downloaded from that student,' and said that 'if the RIAA can't prove that actual illegal behavior occurred, then we're not going to comply.' While it is good news that a university is requiring the RIAA to put up or shut up, the forwarding — or not forwarding — of letters is pretty insignificant. What I want to know is this: 'When the RIAA comes knocking with its Star Chamber, ex parte, 'John Doe' litigation to get the students' identities, is the University going to go to bat for the students and fight the litigation on the ground that it's based on zero evidence, and on the ground that the students weren't given prior notice and an opportunity to be heard?' Over 1,000 infringement notices were sent to Duke students in the last year."

11 of 159 comments (clear)

  1. Too late.... by chefmayhem · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now, if only Duke could retroactively do this. I know one of the people at Duke who got bullied into paying the RIAA money last year. Being an international student, he felt he couldn't risk having a lawsuit on his record, so he paid a few thousand dollars, stressed out about it, and I do believe his grades suffered as a result. Duke has a Law school. Why doesn't it (and other similar schools) just make defending students against the RIAA part of the law school curriculum? Sounds like great practice, and it would do some good!

    1. Re:Too late.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      couldn't risk having a lawsuit on his record
       
      What? It's not a criminal suit. And it's not like having a civil suit filed against you means anything at all, since just about anybody can do it to anybody else. Sounds like his grades suffered because he was a dumbass, really.

    2. Re:Too late.... by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 5, Interesting

      make defending students against the RIAA part of the law school curriculum

      I've never studied law in my life, but "RIAA Defence 101" is a course i'd sign up for!!!

      Actually Prof. Nesson once assigned his students the task of drafting a motion to quash an RIAA subpoena. Now his law students are fighting the RIAA in SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum. Also law students at the University of Maine and University of San Francisco law schools have been fighting the RIAA, and I believe law students at the University of California are going to be getting into the act as well.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    3. Re:Too late.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Look, I once worked for a university, and I was asked to comment on a policy about this. What I told the university's lawyer was, we did not have any way to associate an actual person with an IP address, we didn't even have any way to associate a specific computer with an IP address because they changed from time to time, we had no business reason to implement this sort of tracking, and so if the RIAA came knocking, all we could tell them was "sorry, can't help you"... and doing so would be completely honest.

      Any university that is keeping enough tracking information to be able to say, upon receipt of a letter from the RIAA, who was using what IP address when, is wasting too much time and money tracking information it doesn't legitimately need.

  2. Re:Why not earlier? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So if the University says "bugger off" to the RIAA, why doesn't the RIAA go after the University as a contributor?

  3. Re:Why not earlier? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Advice from Harvard perhaps? Whom, as you pointed out before, the RIAA seemed to be avoiding. Maybe they finally read the advice you sent out too. The government dropped those weighted hints that the universities should work against copyright infringement in an overly broad manner and threatened funding, but if institutions like Harvard who could live without government funding for prolonged periods of time are willing to take up the fight then other institutions are more willing to stand up with them perhaps.

  4. Re:Why not earlier? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of the 2006-2007 list I posted I googled 5 of them...1, 2, 3, 13, and 22.

    Only 22 had no law school. My pals who are/were in law school cited money and prestige as primary reasons for attending, and given that most of these schools have their own law department...what the hell?

    Are the aforementioned top-25 lists results of left arms(regents and admin) not talking to the right arms(legally-schooled staff) or should we continue to despise 99% of lawyers(except Ray and the proud attorneys at EFF and other like-minded organizations)?!

  5. Re:Duke by ITEric · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would imagine they were tired of tracking down all of these students in order to forward the RIAABS. I doubt they're really thinking of the students, they're just saving themselves a little work. If the RIAA has any actual proof they'll come up with a court order, then Duke will track them down. In the end, Duke will likely have to track down fewer students that way.

    --
    The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...
  6. Re:Why not earlier? by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Damn straight. From your original post, let's do the math.

    1287+1068+1002+959+914+897+753+572+550+513+490+488+487+473+470+457+424+400+371+360+353+353+338+336+331=14646 letters sent to the top 25 universities in 06-07.

    14646*($3000) (the typical settlement amount) = $43,938,000

    Sure beats working for a living, doesn't it? Greed personified.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  7. Re:Why not earlier? by winwar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Because they don't give a damn about their students?

    The same way most CEO's and boards don't care about their customers (or employees). It's actually surprising that the University isn't giving in. Probably has something to do with the cost of complying.

  8. Re:Why not earlier? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Run the numbers from the more recent list in the pdf he linked and you will find their pay about doubled during the 2007/2008 academic year, if you assume as you apparently did that each settlement offer brought an average of $3,000 per.