Slashdot Mirror
RIAA May Be Violating a Court Order In California
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In one of its 'ex parte' cases seeking the names and addresses of 'John Does,' this one targeting students at the University of Southern California, the RIAA obtained an order granting discovery — but with a wrinkle. The judge's order (PDF) specified that the information obtained could not be used for any purpose other than obtaining injunctions against the students. Apparently the RIAA lawyers have ignored, or failed to understand, that limitation, as an LA lawyer has reported that the RIAA is busy calling up the USC students and their families and demanding monetary settlements."
Invalidate the copyright? You must be thinking of trademarks. You can't invalidate a copyright by lack of defending it (or in this case, bad faith). If someone reproduces a book I've written for 10 years and I don't do anything, I can still sue them at anytime even if I was previously aware of the violation. You can't 'lose' a copyright.
Religion is the best example of mass psychosis
The legal word is extortion, but I concur.
Laches only applies to "equitable relief", ie, compensation. Basically, you can't let someone sell your stuff for 10 years (knowingly) and them hit them for all the money they've made distributing it since they started. However, it will not in any way invalidate your copyright. You can still stop them from redistributing your works, you just can't go after them for a zillion dollars.
Religion is the best example of mass psychosis
That is what they're already doing. I work for one of the top 10 universities targeted by the RIAA, and the "offer" they make the students has absolutely no legal authority to it. They're quite literally "promising not to sue" if the student pays them some number of thousands of dollars. There is no suit being filed, no legal action being taken, no trial. Just a letter, an offer, and instructions to visit their handy website to make paying as easy as possible: www.p2plawsuits.com
Protip for those of us a bit south of canada
Never buy music CDs. The MAFIAA gets a cut. Always buy "data" CDs. They're the same physical thing.
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
NYCL is a L (from NYC), and therefore is going to be careful what he says.
Unlike the L's the RIAA uses.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Not according to this: "The levy applies to "blank audio recording media", such as CD-Rs."
Never buy music CDs. The MAFIAA gets a cut.
True.
Always buy "data" CDs. They're the same physical thing.
Partly False. They have a header on them so that standalone CD recorders, like the Pioneer PDR-609 can recognize them, those recorders will not record on regular DATA CD-Rs.
Otherwise though, they are pretty much the same.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
All blank CD media in Canada are taxed, not just music CD-R's.
You don't really understand how the legal system works, do you?
Most judges who even suspect you're working both sides of the aisle will toss you and your case out of court. You'll probably be fined for wasting the court's time. Not to mention that a lawyer who does as you suggest, and throws a case for the purpose of setting precedent will probably never be able to practice law in that jurisdiction ever again.