Appeals Court Stays RIAA Subpoena Vs. Students

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The procedures used by the RIAA the past 5 years in suing 'John Does' without their knowing about it have never been subjected to scrutiny by an appeals court, since most of the 'John Does' never learn about the 'ex parte' proceeding until it's too late to do anything about it. That is about to change. In Arista Records v. Does 1-16, a case targeting students at the Albany Campus of the State University of New York, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has decided to put things on hold while it takes a careful look at what transpired in the lower court. The way it came to this is that a few 'John Does' filed a broad-based challenge to a number of the RIAA's procedures, citing the defendant's constitutional rights, the insufficiency of the complaint, the lack of personal jurisdiction over the defendants, improper misjoinder of the defendants, and the RIAA's illegal procurement of its 'evidence' through the use of an unlicensed investigator, MediaSentry. The lower court judges gave short shrift to 'John Doe #3,' but he promptly filed an appeal, and asked for a stay of the subpoena and lower court proceedings during the pendency of the appeal. The RIAA opposed the motion, arguing that John Doe's appeal had no chance of success. The Appeals Court disagreed and granted the motion, freezing the subpoena and putting the entire case on hold until the appeal is finally determined. As one commentator said, 'this news has been a long time coming, but is welcomed.'"

Comments

This is big

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

This is big. This will be the very first appellate scrutiny. By staying all lower court proceedings until the appeal is decided, the Court signalled that it's taking this very very seriously.

Re:This is big

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

I don't think we'll ever be out of the woods.

If the Second Circuit rules as I believe it will, this will mark the end of these abusive litigations by the RIAA.

After this, the RIAA will have to go to court only with proper, scientifically verifiable, legally obtained evidence showing that the person they're suing actually committed copyright infringement, and will have to have proper legal theories and pleadings.

Re:This is big

[lgw]

the RIAA have a nearly unlimited amount of money to throw at this issue.

Actually, they don't. These are not large companies in the scheme of things (unless you believe that Sony would throw it's core business over the side to protect its media properties), and the RIAA likely only has "millions" to work with. Grassroots opposition and donations from Slashdotters and others who know enough to care can make a real difference here.

The courts aren't vulnerable to being bought the way that politicians are, so it's not a simple matter of whoever writes the biggest check wins - the opposition to the RIAA just needs enough money to stay in the game, not to outspend the RIAA.

It was only a matter of time

[Locke2005]

The problem with threatening people at random, is that eventually you make the mistake of threatening someone who has the resources to take you all the way to the supreme court. The RIAA seems to have a pattern of targeting those least able to defend themselves (college students, single moms, seniors) but it look like now they have a ready, willing, and able opponent who wont just roll over. Let's all collective summon up our best Nelson Muntz impressions: "Ha-ha!"

Re:It's about time

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Is this a sign that the judicial system is finally going to start to treat the RIAA like the mobsters they mimic?

That I don't know. But it certainly is a sign that the Second Circuit judges consider the issues raised by John Doe #3 in the lower court to be serious and important.

Re:Give those Pirates What they Deserve!

[Tgeigs]

(a) The pirates deserve to be slammed for STEALING (Yes I said it, because that's what it is!)!

(b) The pirates ALSO deserve all the due process and constitutional protection that the US has to offer--and the RIAA assiduously tries to ignore! You can't slam the thieves until the thieves get a FULL and FAIR day in court.

The Pirates deserve to be hammered, but only after every last one of their constitutional rights is respected!

Assuming we're still talking about digital piracy here, it is NOT stealing, it is infringing. The two have separate legal meanings that have to do with a scarce good being taken away from another person/entity. Copying music does not take that original away, ergo it cannot be stealing, it is infringing.

Re:It's about time

[dwandy]

The worst case scenario from a RIAA lawsuit is that you wind up filing bankruptcy. Bankruptcy != murder, IMHO.

I disagree ... lawsuits are the modern equivalent of physical violence, and taking all of someone's assets is the modern murder. Just because we now have a system that allows pillaging and plundering without bloodshed doesn't decrease the devastation that this causes to people and their families.

Lastly, people who lose it all often end it all, completing the 'murder'.