p2pnet - rss feed: Did the RIAA ‘invent’ a John Doe?
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- “Could this be an indication that the RIAA’s unlicensed investigator, MediaSentry, doesn’t know what it’s doing? Perish the thought.”
That’s Recording Industry vs The People’s Ray Beckerman.
In the RIAA’s John Doe case against 38 North Carolina State University students, judge W. Earl Britt dismissed all the Does except for Number 2, ruling there was no basis for joining a whole slew of different John Does in one lawsuit.
But, it turns out, it looks as though John Doe #2 doesn’t exist, says Beckerman, quoting Technician Online, which says >>>
In the first public fight against the Recording Industry Association of America since the group first started passing out lawsuits two years ago, eight students won a motion to quash on Feb. 27, as a judge ruled to drop the lawsuits.
And on Monday, Greensboro attorney Stephen Robertson filed a second motion to quash with four new students against the RIAA in hopes that the judge will drop their lawsuits.
The judge ruling with the students is a positive sign for future cases, according to Pam Gerace, director of Student Legal Services.
The reason the judge ruled against the RIAA, Gerace said, was because the RIAA had filed the lawsuits in bunches, not individually. The judge dropped all of the 34 lawsuits given out in August except for one, noting that lawsuit as one individual lawsuit.
But that lawsuit, labeled Doe No. 2, cannot be found by the ResNet. Typically, the University is able to locate each anonymous downloader by his or her IP addresses. In the case of Doe No. 2 though, the IP address could not be linked to a certain individual.
The RIAA now has 20 days to re-file the 33 lawsuits that were dropped.
Meanwhile, Greensboro attorney Stephen Robertson has filed another motion to quash for four new students in the hope that they, too, will have their cases dismissed, says another Technician Online post, continuing >>>
[The]RIAA started filing copyright infringement lawsuits in September 2003, and individuals at our University have been targeted at a higher rate than most other institutions across the country. These recently dismissed cases were handed out about two years ago. February’s ruling marked the first public fight against the RIAA in that period. Student Legal Services officials predict that upcoming motions to dismiss these kinds of lawsuits will move along much more quickly given the judges ruling.
Although this is a refreshing victory, as a part of this difficult struggle, students should not view this case as a free ticket.
While the bulling tactics of the RIAA are not acceptable, that does not, by any means, justify the piracy of copyrighted music. New solutions need to be developed that don’t place constituents from either side of this dilemma at an unfair disadvantage. The quality of the music should be protected above all else.
For now, defendants in RIAA lawsuits should continue to resist the trade group’s unfair pressure and use whatever resources they can to fight for dismissal. The only way the RIAA will stop its unfair tirade is if it loses enough cases. If a plethora of motions to quash are successfully passed, the RIAA will be forced to reassess its tactics. Establishing an environment where the RIAA cannot successfully use lawsuits to scare music downloaders is the first step toward improving the system.
Students need to work with the University to develop alternatives to illegal music downloads. If we expect the RIAA to act reasonably, we need to meet them in the middle. In lieu of maintaining unjust practices on both sides of the issue, all involved parties need to come together and establish a compromise.”
Note to the Technician Online:
There’s zero chance of Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG or their RIAA acting reasonably because they quite literally couldn’t care less.
They’ll keep throwing ’settlement’ demands and subpoenas at their customers in the mistaken belief that, ultimately they’ll A) cow them into becoming good little corporate consumers, and B), gain exclusive control of how, and by whom, music, including their cookie-cutter ‘product,’ is distributed online.
They’re unable to grasp the fact the battle was lost before it even began.
Mainstream media reports that a viable corporate online music market exists are derived solely from inaccurate and unreliable Big 4 statements.
The truth is: by far the vast bulk of online music lovers do as they’ve done since Day One: they use the free P2P networks and independent sites developed by innovative entrepreneurs and musicians for downloads.
P2P and file sharing are here to stay.
PS - We’re collecting data on where in the world MediaSentry has been properly licensed. Or not, as it’s increasingly appearing.
[NOTE - p2pnet is running a special reader’s survey. It only takes 20-30 seconds and it’d be a huge help if you’d fill it in. Please click here. Cheers! And thanks … Jon]
Also See:
Recording Industry vs The People - North Carolina State University “John Doe #2″ doesn’t exist, MediaSentry report apparently false, reports Technician Online, March 12, 2008
Technician Online - Students win first battle with RIAA, March 12, 2008
Technician Online - Resist the RIAA, work for new solution, March 13, 2008
properly licensed - Is RIAA MediaSentry legal where YOU are?, March 12, 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 13th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Several points:
1. the RIAA *will* refile those other 37 individually, you mark my words
2. downloading a song file is NOT illegal, no matter how many times the RIAA says it is, nor how many times the id10t media parrots their words…the illegality must be proven in a court because it is the USE of the song file that determines the illegality or not (parody, review, etc)
3. do not become complacent with these recent judge rulings. The tide can and has turned very rapidly in other cases that have been high-fived, so you must keep the intensity at full bore all the time
4. in this particular case, note that the inability to determine the proper “owner” of the IP address in question has not stopped other courts from ruling against *any person* the school assigns as that particular owner. For instance, a common-use computer in a dorm hallway is going to be assigned to the RA most likely, so that RA will be the “owner” for RIAA purposes even if they were not the logged-in person at the time of the alleged infringing action
Just because the IP address can not be reliably assigned to a particular person by the school, this has not stopped the RIAA in any previous court appearances. So, a big *grats* goes out to those students, but the battle ain’t over yet…
March 14th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
“If we expect the RIAA to act reasonably, we need to meet them in the middle.”
Don’t bother! They are like El Kada. There is no “middle” with these kinds of people.
The RIAA is a bunch of parasites and terrorists. You don’t negociate with terrorists you kill them.
The current and crappy music industry, the one that gives us Britney Slut, madonaCrap, must die.
So step one: We kill them.
Then I am sure that once the place is free of worm we can find something cool for everyone.
March 15th, 2008 at 2:36 am
Whahahahahaha! Jon Doe number 2 does not exist! They fabricate evidences and they are stupid at it!
Whahahahahahaha! Now the perjury charges! What a pack of loser! Welcome to loserville!
March 16th, 2008 at 1:45 am
Dont forget Hannah Montana… Ugh.