Oz Kazaa case
p2pnet.net News:- As the Kazaa case grinds on towards its first full year, it’s time to reflect on what we’ve learned about the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) and, by implication, it’s first cousin, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America).
In their public relations activities the ARIA and its parent organisation IFPI (International Federation of Phonographic Industry) have associated the activities of p2p companies with terrorism, organised crime, money laundering, child pornography, larceny, customs crimes and other nasties.
These are aggressive claims, but let’s have a closer look at the activities of ARIA’s primary stakeholders in Australia.
In the current Kazaa case we’ve seen testimony from the Business Affairs Directors of Sony Music Australia and Universal Music Australia. They’ve used the services of an American company known as Media Sentry. Tom Mizzone, vp of data services for Media Sentry, has also testified in the Kazaa case. Mizzone said his New York company was asked in March, 2003, to search Kazaa for users located in Australia and download evidence they were swapping copyrighted material.
Up to 600 scanners were turned to the task, and the internet addresses of the users recorded and checked against a database of internet service providers in Australia. Justice Murray Wilcox asked if Media Sentry were spying on people – Mizzone said “We look for people who are sharing or distributing”.
As a result of this activity, if you’re an Australian and have ever downloaded music from the internet, there’s a chance that you’re one of the 300,000 Australians the Australian recording industry has collected information about. They may not know your name – yet – but they know your IP address, they know who your ISP is and they know every song you’ve ever downloaded.
There’s no guarantee they won’t do what their cousins in Europe and the US have done – write to your ISP, demand your address and commence civil proceedings against you. The RIAA have faced some legal difficulties in the US, but remember: Australia doesn’t have the same civil rights tradition as the US.
MIPI manager Michael Speck says ARIA won’t sue individuals for copyright infringement, but he’s not a director of ARIA and he doesn’t sit on the board of any of ARIA’s stakeholders.
What has ARIA or their directors said about this issue? Very little. The RIAA,which is the US equivalent of the ARIA, has treated every unauthorised downloader of sound recordings that it couldf identify as a potential criminal.
Of course, if that view is adopted in Australia, and you get sued, no worries! The Kazaa proceedings are full of friendly lawyers.
Come to court in March, for a resumption in the Kazaa case – I’m sure you’ll be able to find a shiny, happy lawyer who’ll be only too glad help you!
Malik is in the final stages of a PhD in Law at the University of Technology, Sydney, with a specialisation in intellectual property rights enforcement. He’s also an ex-ARIA in-house lawyer and former senior legal officer at the Australian Communications Authority, Canberra.
February 4th, 2005 at 3:17 am
Malik says Australia doesn’t have the same civil rights tradition as the US, yet the copyright police haven’t sued any individuals in Australia for P2P downloading. Seems contradictory. Maybe they are waiting for the right time whatever that may be.
February 11th, 2005 at 7:46 am
Is Malik the only guy who turned up for the kazaa revolution or what!
What Aria, who are not in the case, might do or not do to other people they think are infringing is immaterial to the Kazaa case.
Someone with his academic background might want to explain how Kazaa can win the case from the position they”re now in down there.
February 12th, 2005 at 2:05 pm
This article is as bad as the major media reports! Clearly, the IP numbers of the 300K Australians referenced in this article were obtained by searching kazaa for people SHARING FILES ON KAZAA. If a person was found to be sharing files on kazaa AND had an Australian IP, then they are one of the 300K.
THen this article goes on to conflate downloading with sharing. Again, this is an egregious mistake. The IP numbers were those of SHARERS. Further, the article seems to imply that these IP numbers were obtain somehow from Kazaa administration. But clearly the numbers were obtained from using kazaa to obtain file sharers, whose IP numbers were obtained through independent means.
A very very poorly written article, and I am surprised to find it here. Or maybe I should NOT be surprised….
February 12th, 2005 at 2:07 pm
read my comment below regarding conflating downloading and uploading.
February 16th, 2005 at 2:18 am
The Australian big money companies make no distinction between uploading, downloading or sharing. They wouldn’t have spent the sums of money on Media Sentry unless they intended to use the information to pursue the users. It’s wrong and I’m glad their activities have been revealed to the world. MIPI suggest they are better than ARIA, somehow morally superior becuase they haven’t sued 12 year olds. Their hyprocrisy is clear …