RIAA ‘making available’ ruling cited in Duke case
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- The Atlantic v Brennan ruling by Connecticut district judge Janet Bond Arterton (right) that the RIAA’s infamous ‘making available‘ claim, upon which hinge all Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG P2P file sharing cases, is invalid is already echoing loudly down the corridors of American universities.
Arterton decided the corporate music industry plaintiffs must prove "actual distribution of copies" and couldn’t merely rely on the fact there are song files "available" on the defendant’s computer.
Now her decision may have implications for cases currently pending against students at Duke and other universities, says Duke University’s The Chronicle.
Last Friday, in a motion to dismiss the Big 4’s RIAA charges against Christopher Vines, an Indiana University sophomore, Atlantic v Brennan was cited, says the story, going on >>>
Freshman Pat Light, who received a warning letter from the RIAA via the Office of Information Technology, said the decision would serve as a useful counterweight to the RIAA’s legal muscle.
I think most of [the RIAA's] legal practices up to this point have been dubious at best," Light said. "It’s a good precedent as far as putting the RIAA in their place."
The RIAA is, predictably, refusing to accept the Atlantic v Brennan ruling, claiming every court that’s ruled on the issue, "has held that making copyrighted materials available constitutes infringement," says the story, also pointing out the RIAA motion alleges Arterton misinterpreted Perfect 10 v Amazon, a prior copyright infringement case.
The Chronicle has Erwin Chemerinsky, Alston and Bird professor of law and professor of political science, wonders if the Arterton decision will in fact help students with pending infringement cases.
"Certainly this will give them a precedent to be able to argue that they can’t be held liable," he’s quoted as saying, but, "Whether other courts will follow, it’s too soon to know."
Adds the story:
"A student who settled with the RIAA, who asked not to be named, said the lawsuits threatened against many students claimed up to $300,000 in damages. He said that settlements, generally ranging from $3,000 to $5,000, were tempting for many students threatened with litigation.
"The student added that he was frustrated with the University’s response, noting that when other universities have refused to divulge students’ names, the RIAA has backed off."
Stay tuned.
Also See:
making available – Judge nails RIAA ‘making available’ claim, February 25, 2008
The Chronicle – Conn. case may affect RIAA suits, March 4, 2008
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.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:05 am
THOROGHLY UNAVOIDABLE
Simple “makng available” of a work with copyrights is thoroughly unavoidable. Just take into account these few examples:
- Lending a computer to someone. Any computer is full of copyrighted works. The someone who boroows the coputer can easily copy anything.
- Placing a magazine near a photocopier. Surely someone will see something of interest and proceed to make a copy.
- Lensing or routing a newsletter as is done in most offices. Surely someone will see something of interest and proceed to make a copy.
- Placing an mp3 file on a web page. Surely many will download it and copy it to friends. Some of these will be found in my web page and surely many people copy the even though we specifically do not authorize copying. We cannot, however ignore human nature, so copying is expected because we make the files available.
As I said, “makng available” of a work with copyrights is thoroughly unavoidable and any published work is made available at the moment the work is published and distributed on any medium.
What I woder is why this playing of games in the legal business.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:58 am
You don’t negotiate with terrorists. This hold for these RIAA/MPAA parasites.