Reviewers Recommend
Sweat Equity 5Sweat Equity 5 - review by Captain Jack
Director: Laurent Sky, Julia Grandi
Starring: April Snow, Sawyer Cassidy, Serenity Cox, Eva Generosi. Read review
All Forums > Tech Talk > Tech Talk Forum Page 63 > Colleges delay unmasking music file-swappers
AuthorPost
Asmodeus
Lord of Lust


az-mo-day-us
6338 Posts
10/01
Posted - Jul 23 2003 : 7:58PM
By Matt Hines and John Borland, CNET News.com

Universities are reluctant to invest hours in fulfilling RIAA demands for the names of students trading material online

Some universities are balking at stepped up demands from the recording industry to unmask alleged student file swappers, citing procedural uncertainties over an avalanche of subpoenas filed with the courts in recent weeks.

Boston College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on Tuesday said they are barred from immediately handing over the names of students to the recording industry by the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, which requires institutions to notify students before releasing any personal data.

Both schools said they were opposing the subpoenas on procedural grounds, rather than contesting the RIAA's right to the information. As a result, the refusals could further delay -- but are unlikely to derail -- the recording industry's efforts to unmask the identities of file swappers and ultimately file suit against them.

"MIT of course has a policy of complying with lawfully issued subpoenas," said professor James Bruce, vice president for information systems at MIT, in a statement. "In this case we have been advised by counsel that the subpoena was not in compliance with the court rules that apply to these subpoenas, and did not allow MIT time to send any notice as the law requires."

The Recording Industry of America (RIAA) has filed close to 1,000 subpoenas in the US District Court in Washington this month requesting information from educational institutions and Internet service providers (ISPs) on users of Kazaa, the peer-to-peer file-sharing service. The group issued the requests as part of its continuing effort to crack down on individuals using the Internet to illegally distribute copyrighted music.

The RIAA has already won a key court decision upholding its right to use the subpoenas, which take advantage of a controversial fast-track provision that allows copyright holders to obtain information about alleged infringers without first filing a lawsuit. That decision, which forced Verizon Communications to turn over the name of a broadband subscriber accused of swapping copyrighted works on Kazaa, vastly simplified the RIAA's investigations and effectively opened the subpoena floodgates.

ISPs, schools and file-swappers themselves are scrambling to figure out just how much legal space they have to contest the stream of requests, which is testing new areas of law.

MIT reported it filed a motion in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts asking how it should proceed in light of the subpoenas and requirements of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act. The school was careful to indicate in its statement that the refusal does not represent MIT taking any position in the war between the RIAA and users of peer-to-peer file-sharing sites such as Kazaa.

Boston College also said it was acting on procedural grounds.

"The subpoenas issued by the RIAA were issued from the wrong court under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and did not provide us with adequate time to notify the students," Boston College spokesman Jack Dunn said. "We are opposing the subpoenas, not in an effort to protect students from the consequences of copyright infringement, but rather to establish the proper procedures to be followed in the future."

An RIAA spokesman would not elaborate how the group would react to the two school's refusal to provide student information, but he said the RIAA would continue to issue similar subpoenas when merited as it continues to gather evidence against people. He said the RIAA expects lawsuits to begin being filed in Washington by late August or early September.

"No one should be surprised by any of this, as we've given fair warning that we would be collecting information on individuals who continued to distribute copyrighted materials," the RIAA spokesman said.

Privacy expert Peter Gregory, principal in Seattle-based HartGregory Group, said it remains to be seen how the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act might stand up in court against a subpoena, should the universities fight to keep the identities of their students hidden. According to Gregory, the current privacy-friendly atmosphere in the United States might favour the schools in the short term, but he warned at some point educational institutions will likely be forced to claim greater responsibility for the manner in which their computer networks are used.

"For a number of years, universities have been reluctant to keep a closer eye on how their networks are used in the name of allowing education and experimentation without censorship," Gregory said. "Sooner or later someone is going to push hard to make the schools more accountable, and if there is evidence that a university had knowledge of illegal activity, you will potentially see them held liable."

The stream of subpoenas flowing from the RIAA's legal team over the past few weeks has put unaccustomed pressure on the court system and on the ISP's legal teams responding to the requests.

According to the federal circuit court, which is serving as a clearinghouse for all the RIAA subpoenas, regardless of the location of the target, 871 had been filed by the close of last week. The office is expecting about 300 more per week for the next six months, based on information given to it by the recording industry group.

The association has said it is not favouring particular service providers, but to date the numbers received vary substantially between service providers. As of Monday, EarthLink said it had received 14 subpoenas -- including 10 in a single day late last week -- while Verizon alone had received close to 150.

For the most part, traditional ISPs said they believe they are bound by the federal appeals court decision in April, which denied Verizon's initial attempt to block an RIAA subpoena on constitutional grounds. However, they are still looking for room to manoeuvre within the framework laid down by the court, and are opening the possibility for their subscribers to challenge the subpoenas.

Many of the big ISPs, including Verizon, America Online and EarthLink, said their policy upon receiving civil subpoenas is to notify subscribers involved immediately, and give them the opportunity to try to quash or contest the subpoenas.

That takes time, however -- and that's part of the tension ongoing with the RIAA subpoenas.

In the procedure established for traditional civil cases such as defamation, an ISP has 14 days to respond to a subpoena for subscriber information. During that two-week period, many service providers communicate with the targeted subscriber, allowing them time to find an attorney and fight the request, if necessary.

The RIAA subpoenas are a different beast, however. Unlike ordinary subpoenas, they are not associated with a specific legal case, since no case has been filed. No time frame for the ISP's response was set down either by Congress or by the judge in the Verizon case. In their initial requests, the RIAA asked for the information in just six days, although the group subsequently extended that.

"I would argue that is not sufficient time," said Sarah Deutsch, vice president for Verizon. "There has to be time for (a person) to find counsel and defend themselves."

The RIAA has disputed this view, saying that this round of subpoenas is simply a request for information from ISPs, which service providers are legally mandated to comply with, and that there is no reason for the subscribers to get involved at all.

Civil libertarians, however, are eager for a chance to help file-swappers or ISPs targeted by the RIAA subpoenas fight them.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has set up the Subpoena Defense Alliance to help targets of the RIAA dragnet find legal counsel quickly.

Fred von Lohmann, an EFF attorney who has worked on several file-swapping lawsuits, said that his group would be happy to help an ISP subscriber who feels he or she has been wrongly targeted by an RIAA's subpoena try to contest the information summons. In several cases, the recording group has sent warning letters to people who were offering entirely innocent songs online, he noted.

It's possible for lawyers to shield their identity of their client in court while fighting a subpoena for identifying information, von Lohmann said.

The skirmishing beginning as a result of the stream of subpoenas still marks the early stages of this legal fight. Many, if not all, of the subpoena requests, which will ultimately number in the thousands, will result in lawsuits aimed at people accused of trading copyrighted files online, raising the stakes yet again.

"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" - Aleister Crowley 1875-1947

Edited by - Asmodeus on Jul 23 2003

Asmodeus
Lord of Lust

az-mo-day-us
6338 Posts
10/01
Posted - Jul 24 2003 : 4:38PM
Music-Sharing Subpoenas Targeting Parents
By Ted Bridis, AP Technology Writer

WASHINGTON - Parents, roommates — even grandparents — are being targeted in the music industry's new campaign to track computer users who share songs over the Internet, bringing the threat of expensive lawsuits to more than college kids.

"Within five minutes, if I can get hold of her, this will come to an end," said Gordon Pate of Dana Point, Calif., when told by The Associated Press that a federal subpeona had been issued over his daughter's music downloads. The subpoena required the family's Internet provider to hand over Pate's name and address to lawyers for the recording industry.

Pate, 67, confirmed that his 23-year-old daughter, Leah Pate, had installed file-sharing software using an account cited on the subpoena. But he said his daughter would stop immediately and the family didn't know using such software could result in a stern warning, expensive lawsuit or even criminal prosecution.

"There's no way either us or our daughter would do anything we knew to be illegal," Pate said, promising to remove the software quickly. "I don't think anybody knew this was illegal, just a way to get some music."

The president of the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade group for the largest music labels, warned that lawyers will pursue downloaders regardless of personal circumstances because it would deter other Interrs.

"The idea really is not to be selective, to let people know that if they're offering a substantial number of files for others to copy, they are at risk," Cary Sherman said. "It doesn't matter who they are."

Over the coming months this may be the Internet's equivalent of shock and awe, the stunning discovery by music fans across America that copyright lawyers can pierce the presumed anonymity of file-sharing, even for computer users hiding behind clever nicknames such as "hottdude0587" or "bluemonkey13."

In Charleston, W.Va., college student Amy Boggs said she quickly deleted more than 1,400 music files on her computer after the AP told her she was the target of another subpoena. Boggs said she sometimes downloaded dozens of songs on any given day, including ones by Fleetwood Mac, Blondie, Incubus and Busta Rhymes.

Since Boggs used her roommates' Internet account, the roommates' name and address was being turned over to music industry lawyers.

"This scares me so bad I never want to download anything again," said Boggs, who turned 22 on Thursday. "I never thought this would happen. There are millions of people out there doing this."

In homes where parents or grandparents may not closely monitor the family's Inter, news could be especially surprising. A defendant's liability can depend on their age and whether anyone else knew about the music downloads.

Bob Barnes, a 50-year-old grandfather in Fresno, Calif., and the target of another subpeona, acknowledged sharing "several hundred" music files. He said he used the Internet to download hard-to-find recordings of European artists because he was unsatisfied with modern American artists and grew tired of buying CDs without the chance to listen to them first.

"If you don't like it, you can't take it back," said Barnes, who runs a small video production company with his wife from their three-bedroom home. "You have all your little blonde, blue-eyed clones. There's no originality."

Citing on its subpoenas the numeric Internet addresses of music downloaders, the RIAA has said it can only track users by comparing those addresses against subscriber records held by Internet providers. But the AP used those addresses and other details culled from subpoenas and was able to identify and locate some Interrs who are among the music industry's earliest targets.

Pate was wavering whether to call the RIAA to negotiate a settlement. "Should I call a lawyer?" he wondered.

The RIAA's president wasn't sure what advice to offer because he never imagined downloaders could be identified by name until Internet providers turned over subscriber records.

"It's not a scenario we had truthfully envisaged," Sherman said. "If somebody wants to settle before a lawsuit is filed it would be fine to call us, but it's really not clear how we're going to perceive this."

The RIAA has issued at least 911 subpoenas so far, according to court records. Lawyers have said they expect to file at least several hundred lawsuits within eight weeks, and copyright laws allow for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song.

The AP tracked targets of subpoenas to neighborhoods in Boston; Chicago; St. Louis; San Francisco; New York and Ann Arbor, Mich.

Outside legal experts urged the music industry to carefully select targets for its earliest lawsuits. Several lawyers said they were doubtful the RIAA ultimately will choose to sue computer users like the Pate family.

"If they end up picking on individuals who are perceived to be grandmothers or junior high students who have only downloaded in isolated incidents, they run the risk of a backlash," said Christopher Caldwell, a lawyer in Los Angeles who works with major studios and the Motion Picture Association of America.

The recording industry said Pate's daughter was offering songs by Billy Idol, Missy Elliot, Duran Duran, Def Leppard and other artists. Pate said that he never personally downloaded music and that he so zealously respects copyrights that he doesn't videotape movies off cable television channels.

Barnes, who used the Napster service until the music industry shut it down, said he rarely uses file-sharing software these days unless his grandson visits. The RIAA found songs on his computer by Marvin Gaye, Savage Garden, Berlin, the Eagles, Dire Straits and others.

Barnes expressed some concern about a possible lawsuit but was confident that "more likely they will probably come out with a cease and desist order" to stop him sharing music files on the Internet.

"I think they're trying to scare people," Barnes said.

___

On the Net:

Recording Industry Association of America: www.riaa.org

Subpoena Defense: www.subpoenadefense.org


"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" - Aleister Crowley 1875-1947

Asmodeus
Lord of Lust

az-mo-day-us
6338 Posts
10/01
Posted - Aug 12 2003 : 4:39AM
RIAA Suffers a Setback in Piracy Battle
By Scarlet Pruitt, IDG News Service

The U.S. recording industry received a setback in its nationwide campaign to quash music piracy on the Internet Friday when a federal judge ruled that two universities did not have to comply with subpoenas requesting that they hand over the identities of students who could be illegally sharing music online.

Both the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston College won their requests to reject subpoenas issued by the Recording Industry Association of America over jurisdictional issues, according the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The universities argued that the subpoenas, which were filed in Washington D.C., did not apply to them in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts U.S. District Court Judge Joseph Tauro's ruling in the universities' favor could prove an obstacle for the RIAA's piracy offensive, given that the group has reportedly filed some 2,000 subpoenas through the Washington D.C. court, according to the EFF.

The ruling could mean that the group will have to file subpoenas in courts across the country where it believes infringement is occurring, a much longer and more complicated process, the EFF said.

EFF Staff Attorney Wendy Seltzer cheered the decision Friday, saying in a release that the ruling "confirms that due process applies to Interr privacy nationwide." The EFF has been battling the RIAA campaign, saying that the group's efforts compromise the privacy of individual users.

The San Francisco-based privacy group isn't alone in its rejection of the RIAA's latest campaign. Pacific Bell Internet Services, a subsidiary of SBC Communications, has filed a suit in California alleging that the RIAA's subpoenas are a threat to subscribers' privacy and a burden on ISPs.

What's more, Senator Norm Coleman (R-Minnesota) has also publicly spoken out against the group, calling the subpoenas a "shotgun" approach to piracy.

The RIAA's spraying of administrative subpoenas is just the latest strategy in a battle against Internet piracy that stems from the early days of Napster. And while the group's efforts to go after individual users have sparked some controversy and backlash, its campaign against piracy on the legal front has been mostly successful.

The group managed to knock Napster offline last year and has since won rulings in cases against Madster--formerly called Aimster--and other peer-to-peer file trading networks.

Having had success in cases against P-to-P networks, the industry has now focused on going after individual users with the aid of ISPs. Although Friday's ruling could slow down the subpoena process, that does not mean that ISPs won't eventually be ordered to comply.

Verizon Internet Services, for instance, lost its bid in June to protect the names of customers accused of illegal file trading.

The recording industry is using as its defense part of the 1998 U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which allows copyright holders to subpoena ISPs for the names of people they believe are using their copyrighted material without permission.

The EFF is campaigning for ISPs to notify users when their information is being sought. The group has also created an online database where users can check to see if their identifies have been subpoenaed by the RIAA. The database is at EFF.org

The RIAA was not immediately available Monday morning to comment on the ruling.


"Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" - Aleister Crowley 1875-1947

All Forums > Tech Talk > Tech Talk Forum Page 63Colleges delay unmasking music file-swappers

Previous topic: PDA
Next topic: DVD Backups



Jump To: