p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA attacks Massachusetts mother, students
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- So-called investigators hired by the Big 4 organised music cartel’s RIAA to, “monitor peer-to-peer systems to gather evidence that can be used in a lawsuit” and have “sent out about 3,000 pre-litigation letters to officials at colleges across the country,” says a story in the Boston Globe.
And in a sentence which reads as though it may have been written by an RIAA hack, “After the colleges notify the students whose Internet addresses were flagged, those students get the chance to call RIAA to negotiate a settlement,” it says.
EMI (Britain), Vivendi Universal (France), Sony BMG (Japan and Germany) and Warner Music (US) have used the mainstream media to escalate copyright infringement, originally a purely civil matter, to the level of major crime.
p2pnet posted recently:
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.
The subjects of the Boston Globe story are seven Maine college students and Marie O’Toole, a Biddeford mother whose teenaged son is said to have downloaded and shared music on the family PC.
With students, send out ‘pre-litigation’ self-incrimination documents created solely with the purpose of extorting amounts upwards $3,000 with the empty promise that by paying up, students are cancelling the danger of appearing in court for alleged copyright infringement.
However, the RIAA gains invaluable personal and private information which may at some later date be used against them.
And with the general population, first go after the parent(s), knowing they have nothing to do with anything, and then go after the real target(s), the children,
Standard RIAA policy in both instances.
The seven, “who have 20 days to respond to the complaint, could not be reached for comment,” the Boston Globe states, continuing that Marie O’Toole said one of her sons downloaded music and wasn’t aware he was breaking the law.
“My husband and I don’t know anything about the computer,” the story has her saying. “I like it to just make cards and stuff.”
But, “I don’t even bother to use it anymore, because I’m scared now, too.”
‘Deceptively marketed’
The story doesn’t say if the son was using Sharman Networks’ discredited Kazaa P2P file sharing application, but the chances are better than even that he was.
It’s the software which is by far the most often cited in RIAA file sharing claims and is itself being sued in a class action.
In the case of Michelle Santangelo, another RIAA victim wrongly accused of being a massive online distributor of copyrighted music, “The Sharman Defendants marketed KaZaA as the P2P service that allowed individuals to share files,” says her lawyer, Jordan Glass, going on:
The Sharman Defendants deceptively marketed the KaZaA Product as allowing ‘free’ downloads.
The Sharman Defendants deceptively marketed the use of the KaZaA Product as legal.
The Sharman Defendants deceptively knew that most users of the KaZaA Product would use the KaZaA Product to catalog and store digital copies of copyrighted sound recordings and films.
The Sharman Defendants encouraged, invited and solicited such conduct from the public, its customers, and users of the KaZaA Product.
Be that as it may, “Apparently, 19 of the original 26 Maine students targeted by the investigation reached agreements with RIAA,” says the Boston Globe.
‘Boilerplate complaint’
In most of the estimated 30,000 RIAA sue ‘em all cases to date , the RIAA has, “relied on a simple procedure, as Ars Technica sums it up, namely:
“… scour P2P networks for shared music, file a John Doe lawsuit to learn the identity of the account-holder responsible for the IP address flagged by the RIAA’s investigative arm, and, if the account-holder doesn’t agree to the RIAA’s settlement terms, file a lawsuit using a boilerplate complaint.”
But in a major blow to the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), a federal judge in California has just refused to grant it a judgment based on just such a complaint, “forcing the RIAA to draw up a new complaint containing specifics,” says Ars Technica, something the Big 4 organisation doesn’t want to get into.
The RIAA scores not by winning cases, something it has yet to do.
Rather, it relies on mainstream media to give the erroneous impression that thousands of people have been successfully sued and that sharing music is a very dangerous proposition.
In fact, the chances of individuals being named in an RIAA subpoena are quite literally akin to them winning a lottery.
Many millions of people in America regularly and routinely share music.
Against that, only an immeasurably small number of them have appeared on RIAA hit lists.
Meanwhile, the Big 4 have yet to give substance to their claims that files shared equal sales lost.
Jon Newton - p2pnet
Also See:
Boston Globe - Recording industry files lawsuits against 8 Mainers, September 8, 2007
p2pnet - RIAA student victimisation campaign, July 21, 2007
most often cited - Kazaa sued in class action, December 7, 2006
Michelle Santangelo - Michelle Santangelo vs the RIAA, July 16, 2007
estimated 30,000 - Ohio U failing students in RIAA attacks, May 25, 2007
Ars Technica - Judge deals blow to RIAA’s boilerplate copyright infringement complaints, September 10, 2007
major blow - Judge slams RIAA ‘boilerplate’, September 10, 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 details. Download here.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
WAIT A MINUTE! I recall a lawsuit against a p2p software company (on of the torrents I think) a few years ago that was appealed, and the appeals court said that software can not be assumed illegal based on the use of it by customers if it has ’substantial non-infringing uses’ [emphasis in court decision]. That means that kazaa can’t be sued for knowing that its users would use it illegally, because there are tons of useful and non-infringing uses for p2p technology. Kazaa merely gives a friendly interface to the underlying technology itself. I hope kazaa fights back against that silly lawsuit and wins. I’m so tired of people placing blame everywhere except on themselves. When did this country become so ignorant? Where did this entitlement mentality come from? Sheesh.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
1st poster
they can not be found guilty for providing the software that allows illegal marketing, however they can be found guilty if they use that to promote their product, or if they do not respond to DMCA requests.
September 10th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
err sorry, “marketing” was wrong word, should be “downloading”.
September 11th, 2007 at 10:23 am
And since they just monitor the new chanel such as Fox news and other vivendic Universale crapy chanel they think that they don’t know! They are too old and stupid to understand that now people rely on internet for news.
And they wonder why nobody by their crap anymore! Talk about a pack of all foggies parasites!