p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA student victimisation campaign
p2pnet news | RIAA news:- The pleasure of enjoying music has become seriously tainted by the venality of EMI (Britain), Vivendi Universal (France), Sony BMG (Japan and Germany) and Warner Music (US), the members of the Big 4 organised music cartel who together control the corporate music industry.
Aided by so-called trade organisations such as their RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), which is currently terrorising music lovers in the US, they’ve succeeded in using their financial clout and elements of the mainstream media to escalate copyright infringement, originally a purely civil matter, to the level of major crime.
Until fairly recently, their practice was to have about 750 subpoenas aimed every month not only at adults they were accusing of being massive online distributors of copyrighted music, but also very young children.
The Big 4 imply these subpoenas equal successful prosecutions. However, a subpoena is merely an instruction to, “appear at a certain time and place to give testimony upon a certain matter,” as the Wikipedia sums it up.
It is not a court case. It is not a lawsuit. It is not a prosecution, successful or otherwise. It is not a suggestion that someone has been, or will be, found guilty of something.
This particular aspect of the campaign, Part I, was brought to a halt in February, 2006, after around 20,000 people had been subpoenaed, and this year Part II was implemented, following the same basic pattern.
But this time, American students in universities across America are the targets with school staffs used as corporate copyright enforcement cops.
Pay up. Or else …..
Under the new scheme, the RIAA sends out what it calls ‘pre-litigation’ settlement letters. Actually, they’re self-incrimination documents and they’re designed to extort preset amounts of around $3,000 from students with the empty promise that by paying up, they’ll remove the threat of being hauled into court on charges of copyright infringement.
In reality, all the students are doing is providing the RIAA with personal and private information which can conceivably be used against them at some point in the future when the Big 4 agency ramps up to a new level of intimidation.
In the sixth wave of blackmail, the RIAA is targetting 23 universities nationwide with 408 ’settlement’ letters.
“Since launching its deterrence program in February 2007, the RIAA has sent approximately 2,423 pre-litigation settlement letters to universities nationwide,” it boasts without shame. “The letters are in addition to the lawsuits that the RIAA continues to file on a rolling basis against those engaging in music theft via commercial Internet accounts.”
Singled out for special attention this time around are:
State University of New York at Morrisville, Georgia Institute of Technology, Pennsylvania State University, University of Central Arkansas, University of Delaware, Northern Michigan University, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, George Washington University, Ohio State University, New Mexico State University, Eckerd College, University of Minnesota, California State University - Monterey Bay, University of Kansas, University of Missouri - Rolla, University of San Francisco, Case Western Reserve University, Northern Arizona University, San Francisco State University, University of Tulsa, Franklin and Marshall College, Western Kentucky University, and Santa Clara University.
Colleges and universities should be ashamed
“Students on campuses throughout the United States, many of whom are experiencing their first year as members of university communities, are facing unprecedented legal intimidation at the hands of the recording industry,” says Ohio lawyer Joe Hazelbaker.
“It appears that many institutions are simply prepared to wash their hands, refusing even to question the tactics of the industry, let alone providing meaningful legal assistance to their students,” he told p2pnet, going on:
In fact, one university has advised its students that they could use the recording industry’s attorney as ‘an information source’ despite the obvious conflicts. This is true despite the fact that the colleges and universities enabled the network on which the alleged activity took place, knew that the alleged activity could take place, failed to educate incoming students regarding the issues, and neglected to use available technology to prevent the alleged activity.
Many of the students targeted were required to live in university housing because they were deemed not mature enough to live off-campus (ie, many campuses require first and second year students to live on-campus). Yet, they are now apparently mature enough to be left on their own to defend themselves against the recording industry.
These colleges and universities should be ashamed.
The number of students victimised in this way is infinitesimal compared to the millions of people who routinely share music with each other online.
It’s been estimated that approximately sixty one million people in America alone regularly share with each other online.
The RIAA says it’s only managed to send out 2,423 threat letters to students, and yet the mainstream media report this as though significant numbers of people whom they accuse of being illegal file sharers have been identified.
That a subpoena has been sent out doesn’t mean the person on the receiving end will act on it and indeed, increasing numbers of academics in the US are protesting as the labels continue to seriously disrupt classes and lessons by firing these documents at students, and by coercing school staffs into passing on the extortionate ’settlement’ letters to those whom they’re supposed to be teaching, not intimidating.
Harvard and other universities to which the RIAA sent pre-litigation notices, “ought to take strong, direct action” and “tell the RIAA to take a hike,” believe Charles Nesson, William F. Weld professor of law, Harvard Law School, and founder and faculty co-director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society; and John Palfrey, clinical professor of law and executive director, the Berkman Center.
They go on:
This Spring, 1,200 pre-litigation letters arrived unannounced at universities across the country. The RIAA promises more will follow. These letters tell the university which students the RIAA plans on suing, identifying the students only by their IP addresses, the ‘license plates’ of Internet connections. Because the RIAA does not know the names behind the IP addresses, the letters ask the universities to deliver the notices to the proper students, rather than relying upon the ordinary legal mechanisms.
Universities should have no part in this extraordinary process.
And on IP addresses, “by itself an IP number on a packet has only suggestive value and is not reliable evidence at all,” says University of Chicago professor Mike O’Donnell.
Jon Newton - p2pnet
Also See:
self-incrimination documents - RIAA college settlement plan, February 28, 2007
meaningful legal assistance - Ohio U failing students in RIAA attacks,May 215, 2007
RIAA - 23 New Schools to Receive Latest Round of RIAA Pre-Lawsuit Letters, July 18, 2007
take a hike - Take a hike, RIAA: US universities, July 11, 2007
not reliable evidence - IP addresses and identities, July 16, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for the download, and here for details. Click here or here to learn how to by-pass censorship in your area.
July 22nd, 2007 at 8:22 pm
Notice how they’re afraid to take on Harvard.
July 23rd, 2007 at 8:18 am
Thank god they aren’t taking on Texas A&M. Lord only knows how much music we are ’sharing’ on that network.
July 23rd, 2007 at 9:43 am
The RIAA is trying to fight a situation which allows anonymous and widespread illegal reproduction and distribution of materials copyrighted by those it represents. Their tactics at trying to identify perpetrators may be unconventional, but in a historical context, so is the means by which the copying is being done. The RIAA is not really doing anything wrong legally or morally here. Somehow people seem to think the existence of technology allowing widespread and almost effortless copyright infringement is proof of the acceptability of those actions, yet this is unequivocally false. Moreover, while I don’t see any reason the universities should be required to help the RIAA in their quest, the idea that they would be morally in the wrong for doing so is absurd. They are being contacted primarily in their capacity as an ISP for their students, just as the RIAA has contacted many other non-university ISPs with similar aims. And just as any other ISP, they are not required to actively try to prevent this activity from taking place, nor are they required to provide legal assistance to their clients when they find themselves in potential legal trouble for doing this.
July 23rd, 2007 at 10:24 am
whom ever wrote the essay is a queer.
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:04 am
One of these days the RIAA trolls will sign on instead of trying to pretend they are just regular posters.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:31 pm
I’m really torn on this issue, as I go to one of the universities on that list and it’s gonna suck if all our file sharing gets shut down. On the other hand, the RIAA is legally justified to do this, so I can’t be too pissed at them. Oh wait, they still pull in 6 digit incomes…huh….
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly. –Thoreau
HD Thoreau to the rescue.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:39 pm
When I was at the University of Delaware, they had just upgrade their connection. Download speeds were so fast.
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:39 pm
What the hell is wrong with the RIAA? They’re targetting kids trying to get an education?
Go after the black markets and the corporate file sharing violations, but leave the college kids alone.
Most of them are just trying to get an education on a very thin budget.
July 23rd, 2007 at 4:13 pm
the RIAA trolls are already here planting comments that will be used to target A&M and UD. Lovely tactics….
July 23rd, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Copyright and patent laws only benefit the mega corporations (read cartels for RIAA clients). They do little for civilization except stifle innovation and generate huge incomes for law firms.
July 23rd, 2007 at 4:14 pm
Upset,
They wouldn’t dare take on the corps. It’s easier to target poor college students who cannot afford legal representation. That’s what makes this a campaign of victimization.
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:11 pm
There’s a very simple answer to all this, but it’s a very tough pill to swallow. Every time you purchase a CD from a large record label, remember you are helping to pay for their next round of lawsuits. STOP buying their music. STOP supporting their bands. Begin to purchasing the wares of the independent artists that are on smaller labels that don’t sue everything with a pulse.
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:12 pm
Er - remove the excess ‘to’.
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Yeah, they’re staying the hell out of College Station, even the RIAA has standards.
July 23rd, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Recording Industry griped about audiocassettes years ago and how they were gonna destroy the industry; They also said selling used CDs was gonna break the industry too (hasn’t happened)and today they are richer than they ever were…I say borrow the music you listen to…how many of those songs are you still listening to 5-10 years later…not many. I have CDs I haven’t cracked open in several years. And I can’t feel guilty about downloading because I replaced many of my records with audiocassettes, and many of my audiocassettes with CDs. Recording execs are greedy-they should be fostering good relations with consumers. I get my music many ways but there’s no way I am going to purchase everything I listen to just because I want to listen to it a few extra times. Artists should do like Prince did in UK and basically give his album away with a magazine purchase and he is gonna give a free copy to concertgoers also, better exposure for him. Most artists supposedly make the majority of their $$$ from concerts anyway.
July 24th, 2007 at 4:25 am
Students have a plethora of options for sharing music files with their friends. One of the best solutions is GigaTribe, which lets friends download directly from the “shared folders” on each others pc’s. As all exchanges are encrypted, no one can track what it is exactly that you’re uploading/downloading between each other. More info and the free download at: http://www.gigatribe.com
July 24th, 2007 at 6:39 am
The RIAA is the biggest reason I’ve stopped buying music cd’s. I just listen to the radio or the cd’s I currently have. Besides, with 10,000 channels on cable, who needs cd’s
I will admit that I buy some music direct from the authors or independents not connected with the RIAA.
July 24th, 2007 at 6:49 am
This is terrible business practice. Most college kids have little or no money. Someday they will have much more money. That means that someday they will buy CDs or digital music.
Nothing like alienating your future client base! Indy music never had a better ally.
July 24th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
I read somewhere that the RIAA is now the most ‘hated’ corporation in America. Considering the rise of gas prices, thats astounding they were able to steal that spot. They aren’t necessarily trying to get all the people who fileshare put in jail or bankrupt from paying all the ridiculous fines and court fees involved. They are using a scare tactic to try to prevent people from using file sharing.
I used to buy CD’s, but with all the crap that the RIAA is throwing around, I refuse to anymore. I would much rather just listen to HD radio, bands that are independent of the RIAA, or just purchase my MP3’s from a website such as allofmp3.com where only the artist is given money from my purchase. The recording industry is a multi-billion dollar industry for doing what? Allowing musicians to use their studios? Sure, there is promoting involved, but if they weren’t there, the promoting would be the internet and radio. 90% of new music I find nowadays is via the internet, through sites that have absolutely nothing to do with the RIAA (most of which the RIAA does not approve of). I’ll be damned if my hard earned coin goes to those greedy corporate bullies. They can buy as many politicians as they want, I still won’t support them or the politicians they bought to help their political agenda.
July 25th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
Anyone who believes musicians don’t deserve to earn money for the work they do has never been a recording engineer. That shit is hard work, regardless of the style or choice of music. Record companies deserve to make money, and P2P is not equivalent to tape, VHS, or even CD copying-
with tape & VHS you got massive degradation, and with all three, it took time- P2P is easy, and useless. It devalues music in the minds of consumers, and the statistics on the drop in CD sales relative to the lack of increase in online sales proves it. If you download music without paying for it, you’re no better than the RIAA- just another criminal. Don’t try to defend yourselves. Allofmp3.com does not pay anybody but themselves, and certainly not the artists. Get a grip.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
My school is on the map! (not sure that’s a good thing, but i’ve graduated so best of luck to them) Western Kentucky University
July 27th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
The drop in CD sales relative to the lack of increase in online sales in and of itself ‘proves’ nothing. The two are linked, certainly, but not necessarily in a cause-effect relationship. Even a casual perusal of the RIAA’s own statistics, attempting to cite this supposed relationship, totally ignores as contributing factors three items with as strong, if not stronger causality relationship to declining CD sales:
* The overall economic downturn happening at the same time, impacting overall discretionary spending,
* The significant growth in houselold penetration of both DVD players (stand-alone and computer peripheral) and gaming consoles,
* The directly resultant significant increases in discretionary spending on DVD and game media,
* Increasing use by Wal-Mart of CDs as a loss leader to lure shoppers into the store to shop for higher margin items,
* The resultant margin pressure on standalone music retailers, many of whom are no longer in business as they couldn’t compete on price with Wal-Mart.
No dispute with your take on the legality of illegal downloading. The artists of all stripes that contribute to the media we enjoy should be better paid than they currently are for their work in writing, performing, and engineering the media we enjoy.
Sadly, the RIAA loves to equate any act of infringement (real or contrived - such as their recent DCMA take down notice to Yahoo for the 27 second home video of a young child ‘performing’ a copyrighted song) as a lost sale. Were that the case, based on the number of RIAA suits (or attempted self-incrimination trolls), the recording industry would be one of the largest growing industries in the economy.
However, due to the RIAA’s inability to recognize and capitalize on the change in the listening habits, the Recording Industry is an increasing marginal player, while at the same time the Music Industry continues to reflect healthy growth.