RIAA blames universities for lawsuits
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA has come up with another tactic in their attacks on American university students.
It’s now blaming the schools themselves.
The Big 4 enforcement unit is after 16 Philadelphia students, completely ignoring mounting universal outrage against the ongoing harassment.
The labels’ RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) accuses them of being illicit online distributors of copyrighted music, pretending it merely wants to “educate” them to the dangers of copyright infringement, seriously interfering with, and interrupting, their normal studies.
Now the RIAA is going after Drexel University network users, says the university’s student newspaper, the Triangle Online.
Failed to forward a pre-litigation letter …
An RIAA ‘press release’ says “unsettled cases” were, “either because the university failed to forward a pre-litigation letter to the student or because the record industry’s initial settlement offer of a discounted settlement was ignored”.
As p2pnet posted, until fairly recently, the Big 4’s 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,” going on:
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 Triangle story continues:
The RIAA has so far identified each individual through his or her Internet Protocol (IP) address, and the “John Doe” lawsuits allow RIAA members to subpoena the University for the names that correspond to the IP addresses.
RIAA representatives will then contact each individual directly to settle the claims for a greater sum than requested during the pre-litigation process. However, if an individual does not want to settle, RIAA members will re-file the original complaint and proceed with the case using the individual’s name instead of his or her IP address.
Since 2005, the RIAA has filed approximately 36 lawsuits against individuals who engage in illegal file sharing of copyrighted materials, according to The Triangle’s March 16 article.
However, as has been made repeatedly clear, an IP address isn’t enough to identify anyone and more and more universities are refusing to cave in to the RIAA’s demands.
It recently tried, and failed, to threaten Oklahoma State University, the University of New Mexico and Boston University into handing over names and other information.
‘We are neither the agent of the RIAA or any students …’
It’s also trying to intimidate the University of Oregon in the same way, accusing it of being responsible for the lawsuits by failing to pass on so-called settlement letters.
The RIAA sent letters in early June to the university, “identifying certain IP addresses within the University network as having violated copyright law by illegally downloading music through file sharing networks (also called peer-to-peer networks) such as LimeWire,” says the says the Oregon Daily Emerald.
The RIAA was demanding that UO, “identify the users with those IP addresses and to forward the letters to the users,” says the story. But the school refused to cooperate.
“It’s our policy not to send those letters along because we are neither the agent of the RIAA or any students,” the story has the university’s general counsel, Randy Geller, saying, also pointing out as far as he was aware, no students have actually been sued.
He also said UO won’t assume any fault for failing to send the letters to users.
“We don’t believe we have any liability in this at all,” the Oregon Daily Emerald quotes him as saying.
OU students targeted by the RIAA can get free advice from ASUO Legal Services at (541) 346-4273.
Also See:
Triangle Online – RIAA to sue 16 Drexel Students, August 10, 2007
posted – RIAA student victimisation campaign, July 21, 2007
tried, and failed – RIAA expert’s expertise questioned, August 9, 2007
Oregon Daily Emerald – RIAA sues 17 UO network users for downloads, August 10, 2007
settlement letters – RIAA college settlement plan, February 28, 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.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
20,000 sub only 4000 settle (RIAA number and this is probably a lie 1500-2000 is more likely) only 36 lawsuits that the RIAA are all going to lose: What’s hapen to the 15964? Do not settle with these parasites! Tell them that you are not guilty and that they can go a fuck themselves. Obviously they are very good at that. Any pennies you give them will be use to persecute and extort other people. It is the duty of any citizen to resist them! Do not give any Peny to the 4 majors bag of shit that they have the stomach to call corporations and nor to their dogs such as the RIAA.
August 10th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
The lawsuit attempts were already a given. Not only does the settlement letters the RIAA gives out no guarentee that it will end there once they have milked the victim for their descretionary funding and borrowing abilities, it is an open invitation to admit guilt, lowering the standard the RIAA must meet for proof.
The RIAA, as it has demonstrated in the past, is constantly looking for ways to get someone else to do their dirtywork for them and get the other party to pay at least part of the cost of doing so, if it can’t get them to bear the total cost. It’s always a slimey scam when having to deal with them in any manner. Given that they are at beck and call of their masters the major labels, it is the cartels that give them their marching orders. So it is the cartels themselves that should recieve the ire of the public for the actions of the RIAA.
The cartels already know and have known all along that they can’t defeat piracy. The scope is too great and too large even for them, to police on a worldwide scope. Their hope and if you will examine the puff peices carefully is to give the impression that everyone is under the eyeball.
With the passing of unregulated and unsupervised spying by The Patriot act and other acts rammed through under the guise of the watchword terrorism, in addition to their own lobbying efforts, I would be very suprised if there is not some central place where the cartels of media entertainment have gathered to spy out whom is doing what, with which materials, and on what sort of sites. In speculation, this seems most likely, because in essence they have been given the green flag that any corporation can spy at will without fear of reprecussions.
The Republican party has seen to it that all comers with enough money can pretty much buy what considerations they wish. The best laws money can buy should be the motto of the US at present.
August 10th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
http://www.mcgill.ca/cio/e-policies/copyright/
These will not only forward letters, they will disclose you without fight!