Maine law students and RIAA: II
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- If I was going to do a Wouldn’t it be cool …? list for 2008, this would be at the top:
Wouldn’t it be cool if Mitch Bainwol, Cary Sherman, Jonathan Lamy and all the others who work for the RIAA figured out there are decent ways of earning a living, leaving the Big 4 labels, Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG, to stew in their own juice?
Never happen and meanwhile, these and other RIAA spin doctors are raking it in as they come up with new ways to pillory the people who ultimately pay their salaries.
In 2003 they launched their bizarre sue ‘em all marketing campaign with the Big 4′s own customers as targets, this year switching their attention to students in universities and colleges across America.
It works like this: the RIAA has already successfully turned scores of US schools into de facto sales and enforcement divisions with administrators and teachers as staff, paid for by federal and state allocations and parent fees.
Having gotten school authorities used to the idea that corporate entities, answerable only to their shareholders, have a right to an upfront and functional place in America’s educational system, they’ve moved the campaign up a large notch, sending specious extortion letters to universities, demanding they threaten students on the RIAA’s behalf.
And many of the schools are, disgracefully, falling over themselves to cooperate, completely ignoring their students’ welfare and well-being.
Thus, at the end of 2007, some four thousand (and rising) young men and women at US schools are worrying about RIAA threats and harassment instead of concentrating on their studies. And no one Bush administration gives a damn. Instead, they’re actively encouraging and helping the Big 4 with the likes of congressman Hollywood Howard Berman infamously leading the way.
‘The RIAA’s frivolous steps of coercion’
But not all the universities are caving in and the latest school to decide it exists to benefit its students, not the Big 4 labels, is the University of Maine, the first senior US teaching institution to the assign law students to actively help other students persecuted by the RIAA.
Hannah Ames and Lisa Chmelecki, studying at the University of Maine School of Law’s Cumberland clinic, are now officially representing two Maine students, supervised by U of M associate professor Deirdre Smith.
On December 3, well before the news broke, second-year English major Kyle Kernan (right) posted on The Main Campus.
Under the headline University should not succumb to RIAA’s strong-arm tactics, he wrote >>>
Four months ago, I received an e-mail on FirstClass from a lawyer who represented the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The letter implicated my IP address here at the University of Maine in copyright infringement and said that the user of this address had to pay a $3,000 settlement or await the RIAA to bring the case to federal court, where he or she would be asked to settle for an amount of $250,000.
They did not know my name; they just had an IP address. The first e-mail I received was not even a direct subpoena, but a threatening letter that was directed through the IT Department and then to me. The letter from the RIAA came as an attachment on the e-mail from an IT representative who wrote me a message riddled with ambiguity.
The IT member, representing the University of Maine, presented me with no clear explanation as to the validity of this letter; they simply wrote to me, “view this message with extreme acknowledgment and consideration.” The IT Department, I thought, found this e-mail to be a scam, and my family and friends thought the same as well. If I was being sued due to downloading music, wouldn’t I be given a hard copy through the mail about it, and addressed to my name? Wouldn’t I even be given a warning?
A few weeks ago I received another letter notifying me that the university had to give the RIAA my name and information and the settlement had now reached $4,000. These are just a few examples of the RIAA’s frivolous steps of coercion.
Dean of Students Robert Dana had notified me that the RIAA could sue the university if they did not release the names. However, based upon my research, the RIAA has never sued a university.
The RIAA is also monopolizing their efforts by obtaining the most amount of money possible by pooling these John Does together in one subpoena. This is illegal based upon the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 20. The University of Maine should account for this rule and throw out the RIAA’s subpoena on students until they come after their IP addresses individually.
I was accused of having two IP addresses. I’m aware now that one of these addresses could have been from a wireless router. This means that I will be responsible for whatever songs these individuals download through the wireless connection I am linked to.
I am an avid music fan. I’ve spent probably $500 on CDs, and have purchased many albums based upon artists’ songs I downloaded on LimeWire. This is even more upsetting because many bands elect to put their music on YouTube or MySpace for people to listen to for free. How is LimeWire any different?
There are many ways to make an example out of someone, but what the RIAA is doing is unjust. College students’ futures could be in jeopardy from this. Some are forced to file bankruptcy – all because they decided to download Kanye’s slammin’ new jam. Shame on you. If the music is distributed by a downloader, charges could go up to the million-dollar range in damages.
In the book “A Civil Action,” a true-life story, families sued W.R. Grace for causing their children to die from leukemia and other illnesses because the company had knowingly polluted the town’s water supply by dumping toxic chemicals in local ponds and sewers. Each family was given less than $500,000 dollars for the settlement, after small-firm lawyer Jan Schlichtmann had lost everything. How do the deaths of children compare with downloading music illegally in a civil court room?
There is something undeniably wrong with our justice system. Companies like the RIAA are affluent enough to hire the most expensive lawyers, which gives them enough freedom to brush past our due process rights. I cannot stand for the RIAA breaking our rights and calling for outrageous sums of money from college students, and universities should not either.
‘Restrict the RIAA’s access to data on students ‘
Six days later, The Main Campus ran another story, this time slugged GSS seeks to limit RIAA access to data.
It said the General Student Senate (GSS) approved a resolution saying it’ll help protect students from harassment.
With that in mind, it passed two resolutions: one making amendments to the constitution; and, the other reforming the Student Government (UMSG) election process.
Says the story >>>
The resolution, proposed by Vice President of Student Entertainment Derek Mitchell, will change the method in which the Information Technology Center stores student’s online history. This would restrict the RIAA’s access to data on students using the campus internet.
The RIAA has been pursuing financial settlements with students they allege are guilty of illegally sharing copyrighted materials, usually through file-sharing services like LimeWire.
The senate resolution calls for a change in the university’s data management structure – the manner that the IT Center distributes internet addresses – requesting an alteration in how often a student’s IP address is renewed.
The University of Maine’s current policy supplies students with a single address for an entire academic year, making it possible for the RIAA to subpoena records of student’s online actions, including Web sites visited and files downloaded. Under the new resolution, a student will receive a new IP address periodically throughout the year. Because no records of the IP addresses would be kept, there would be limited information available in the case of a subpoena, which senators said would help to protect students from RIAA prosecution.
“The RIAA’s underhanded tactics have cost students across the country thousands and thousands – potentially millions – of dollars. UMaine needs to act to prevent this from happening to our fellow students,” Mitchell said.
Mitchell described the policies that other institution’s have developed to protect students such as regulations that help to impede the RIAA’s persistent monitoring.
Hopefully, other US universities will follow Maine’s examplae.
For now, stay tuned.
Jon Newton – p2pnet
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.
December 29th, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Wouldnât it be cool if Mitch Bainwol, Cary Sherman, Jonathan Lamy and all the others who work for the RIAA/MPAA and the majors parasites of the entertainement industry sudenly die?
YES!
December 29th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
“I cannot stand for the RIAA breaking our rights and calling for outrageous sums of money from college students”
Neither us and this is going to become a huge pb for the RIAA/MPAA and their members.
December 30th, 2007 at 2:14 am
Will suggested lawsuit be going after the current user of a dynamic ip address, or one of the hundreds of users who came before?
At this rate US troops will probably be recalled from iraq to serve the riaa and mpaa at a school near you, at least until the next presidential election.
December 30th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
Those of you who say “I’ll do whatever I want with my own damn music.” reveal a breadth of willful ignorance and a contempt for society that richly deserves to be punished. I have no sympathy for lawbreakers.
âRIAA spin doctors are raking it in as they come up with new ways to pillory the people who ultimately pay their salaries.â
Patently untrue, this is a blatant lie and you know this. The industry, government and law enforcement are teaming up to stop people from taking without paying for a product that is for sale. You understand this distinction perfectly well. Real music fans have always put their money where their mouth is. Illegal copyright infringers are not âcustomersâ and by not paying anything for the files they illegally take, they are paying NO ONE. Not the RIAA, not the musicians either. You know this.
âAnd many of the schools are, disgracefully, falling over themselves to cooperate, completely ignoring their studentsâ welfare and well-being.â
Would the schools better serve their students by shielding their illegal activities? And where is that line drawn? Do our schools now decide what laws should be enforced? Is that education’s job now? The schools know the laws and they are working within them as well they should. If students nationwide were taking something other than music or movie files that were properly for sale but were being taken without paying, would the colleges be right to defend that behavior too? If you disagree, where is the line where “Taking product for sale but without paying” must finally be stopped?
The law will be properly enforced until it is changed and well sorted out governments donât fold to law breakers. Your argument is with reality. One day perhaps your rights may be infringed and weâll see at that time if you care about your own personal losses or not. In the meantime, government has little option until the laws are changed. Iâve always said that the illegal p2p pirate community doesnât care as long as it is someone else being harmed and not them. Your collective voice is squandering any authority it may have had through disingenuous posts like these. We have a legal system here. Learn to work within it or take your chances. When you spout BS like this it’s no wonder Congress no longer listens.
December 30th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
I don’t look for this to be a continuing problem forever. The major labels are earning such a black name for themselves that in the future it will be looked at as a potential lawsuit to buy, listen, or use their music. Instead those that still listen to music will instead chose Creative Commons backed music that doesn’t have such a potential down the road. Not only will they get a great deal in price but also they will no have to worry about this sort of bs.
I say let the majors keep it up. They are driving themselves out of the market as fast as they can. I for one welcome the cratering of a music industry as we now know it.
Since Sam I Am is evidently tied to this model, it is my hope he follows the vortex, right into the drain.
December 30th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
“it is my hope he follows the vortex, right into the drain.”
He doesn’t have to. He’s already in it, the poor misguided soul.
December 30th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
From Sam:
“The law will be properly enforced until it is changed and well sorted out governments donât fold to law breakers.”
Yeah, tell that to the illegal aliens that are here right now. The government will not boot them out, and there are at least twice as many downloaders as there are illegals. The copyright law is stupid and silly. I have no duty to respect it, and I encourage everyone else to ignore the silly law.
Why on earth should the federal government waste resources chasing down people who are violating a copyright law? If I recall correctly, a copyright costs $25. Why should the government waste all sorts of money chasing down teenagers who are copying music and violating a $25 license? Why should the government waste resources just to protect HELLywood’s dumb ass? HELLywood hates America, why should America bother to protect HELLywood’s monopoly?
Why don’t we lower the term of the copyright to five years? What do you think of that one Sam? Solves lots of problems doesn’t it?
December 31st, 2007 at 3:27 am
Actually, the misdeeds perpetrated by the copyright commissars is beginning to reach the mainstream new in an unbiased manner. I just saw a couple of articles that were linked to by Worldnet Daily and are posted below:
Love, others to follow Radiohead’s no-label lead?
http://www.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUSN2737460020071231?feedType=RSS&feedName=internetNews&rpc=22&sp=true
Download uproar
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html
Some of the well-known artists that are dumping the cartels are listed below:
PRINCE
TRENT REZNOR/NINE INCH NAILS
COURTNEY LOVE
DAFT PUNK
. . . AND YOU WILL KNOW US BY THE TRAIL OF DEAD
CHUCK D/PUBLIC ENEMY
SUFJAN STEVENS
PEARL JAM
UNDERWORLD
DEPECHE MODE
The lamescream media are being forced to report events simply because if they don’t and people find out, they will go to other news sources such as those that are found online. The recording industry will die a slow death, but at least it is dying.
December 31st, 2007 at 12:20 pm
civil unrest/disobedience (law braking) is acceptable Sam I Am. If not perhaps you should go speak with some of the black foke in the USA who broke the law by sitting in white sections or refusing to give up there seat to white people on the bus?
Was it right to punish them? after all they achieved equal rights for black people.
January 2nd, 2008 at 1:54 pm
@SAM – once again you show your ignorance. Let me repeat this tiresome mantra in the hope that you will read and understand it: DOWNLOADING MUSIC FILES IS NOT IN AND OF ITSELF A CRIME!!!
How much more plain can it be stated? Now, perhaps the USE of those files after they are downloaded MAY break a shrink-wrap license somewhere, but the ACT of downloading DOES NOT break any laws. And that is the rub: the low-hanging fruit is being targetted because they are unable to afford adequate legal representation, and specific judges are being targetted for these civil claims because they are known to be ignorant of technology issues. This sets up the general public for a feeding frenzy by the RIAA/MPAA which is what has been going on for years now. It is WAY PAST time to stop this madness!
If the RIAA is (disengenuously) claiming that the downloaders are the only ones they can find or go after, they are lying. It’s the UPloaders that they need to be focusing on, and only if the uploaders are WILLFULLY ignoring a known shrink-wrap license agreement (remember, there is a safety clause for “unknowing infringement”. In America we are supposed to be innocent until PROVEN guilty, but the RIAA is bypassing that “proof” requirement by using extortion techniques, and our unknowledgeable judges are unwitting partners to this travesty.
I think the mainstream media needs to report this even more, in order to make it an issue to even more people; the RIAA/MPAA hide in the shadows of anonymity, only by exposing their underhanded tactics to the general public will anything get changed.