Friday, June 29, 2007

RIAA Opposes Ms. Lindor's Request for Discovery into Agreements Among RIAA Members to Pursue Cases Collectively

In UMG v. Lindor, the RIAA has filed papers opposing Ms. Lindor's request for discovery into the agreements among RIAA members to jointly prosecute and settle cases, relating to her affirmative defense of "copyright misuse":

June 29, 2007, Letter of Richard L. Gabriel, Opposing Defendant's Request for Discovery into Agreements among RIAA members*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

Slashdot
Heise Online (German)
Slyck
Digital Copyright Canada
p2pnet

Digg!

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

RIAA Opposes Boston University Student's Motion to Vacate and to Quash

In the Boston University ex parte "John Doe" case, Arista v. Does 1-21, where a student moved to vacate the ex parte order granting discovery, and to quash the subpoena issued under it, the RIAA has filed its opposition to the motion.

Memorandum of Law in Oppposition*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Lava v. Amurao Docket Entry Corrected; Declaratory Judgment Counterclaim Dismissed; Copyright Misuse Counterclaim Stands

In Lava v. Amurao, where the defendant had interposed two counterclaims -- one for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and one seeking forfeiture of the copyrights due to copyright misuse -- the RIAA had moved to dismiss both counterclaims. The Court at oral argument had indicated that the declaratory judgment claim was unnecessary and would be dismissed, but the copyright misuse counterclaim would stand. However, the minute entry in the Court's docket sheet indicated that both counterclaims would stand.

Today the Court corrected the minute entry, confirming what had been said at oral argument: the declaratory judgment claim is dismissed; the copyright misuse claim is not dismissed.

June 27, 2007, Corrected Minute Entry in Docket Sheet Confirming First Counterclaim is Dismissed, Second Counterclaim is not dismissed*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Monday, June 25, 2007

Tanya Andersen Sues RIAA for Malicious Prosecution in Oregon

Tanya Andersen, the disabled single mother in Oregon who had been defending herself against baseless copyright infringement allgations by the RIAA for almost two years, until the RIAA finally dropped its case against her, has filed a lawsuit for malicious prosecution, Andersen v. Atlantic. Included as defendants, in addition to the record companies, are the RIAA itself, Safenet (which owns MediaSentry), and Settlement Support Center LLC.

Complaint*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

Groklaw
p2pnet.net
Slashdot
Hard OCP
Ars Technica
Wired.com
ZDNet.be (Dutch)
Heise Online (German)
TechDirt
TechSpot
Discourse.net
Technicalities
BlogRunner
Idolator
Wired.com
The Oregonian
Info World
Blame it on Steinski
FindLaw
Slyck
Marketing VOX
vnunet.com
TechnoWireNews


Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Saturday, June 23, 2007

Open Letter to Colleges and Universities, Printable Link.

To all college students, and parents of college students:

Here is a link to an easily printable version of my "Open Letter to Colleges and Universities":

http://info.riaalawsuits.us/openletter.htm

Make sure it gets to your college's administrators and legal counsel, and if your school has an outside Internet Service Provider, to them as well.

Best regards
R.B.

Commentary & discussion on RIAA campaign against colleges:

Info World

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Slashdot   Slashdot It!

Open Letter to Universities Whose Students Have Been Targeted by the RIAA

This is an historic opportunity for you to take steps to make the RIAA's litigation campaign more of a level playing field.

The way things are:

Once the RIAA has obtained whatever "settlement" money it can squeeze from students and parents willing and able to pay the money, and to agree to the other extortionate demands in the RIAA's standard nonnegotiable form 'settlement' agreement, it will bring a "John Doe" proceeding against the others. Contrary to the spirit of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it will do everything it possibly can, in that proceeding, ex parte. It will file the complaint without notice to anyone, and submit the ex parte discovery order application without notice to anyone. Then, once it's gotten an ex parte order signed by the judge, it will give minimal notice to you with minimal notice to your students, of an order which has already been entered.

Typically, "John Doe" will receive only a copy of a subpoena and a copy of the order with a letter from you, and will have just a few days, or at most a couple of weeks, to respond before his or her personal confidential information will be divulged. Meanwhile, if the student were to confer with a lawyer the lawyer doesn't know what to say, because he or she has no copy of the underlying summons and complaint, no copy of the papers upon which the ex parte order is based, and no copy of the judge's rules, all of which a defendant normally does receive in any normal litigation.

What you should, at a minimum, do for your students.

What you can do is insist that the RIAA stipulate with you that (a) any motion for an order granting discovery of the students' identities will be on notice, both to you and the students, rather than ex parte, (b) that the RIAA must furnish to you, for each "John Doe", a copy of the summons and complaint and exhibits, a full set of the motion papers, and a full set of all other court documents which are required to be served on the defendant when an action is initiated... for you to distribute to the affected students, before -- not after -- the motion is to be heard. A very, very important decision was handed down in New Mexico, in Capitol v. Does 1-16, 07-485 (WJ/LFG), involving the University of New Mexico, where Magistrate Judge Garcia ruled that the motion should be made on notice rather than ex parte.
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=capitol_does1-16_070524OrderDenyExParteApplication.
Judge Garcia ruled that ex parte applications are the exception rather than the rule, that the RIAA's claims of "irreparable harm" require "Coleridgian suspension of disbelief", that "the harm related to disclosure of confidential information in a student or faculty member’s Internet files can be equally harmful", and that the RIAA should meet and confer with the attorneys for the university to devise a procedure for giving notice both to the university and to the affected students and faculty members. Ultimately, Judge Garcia required the RIAA to provide 40 days notice to the affected students and to provide full sets of papers to the university for transmission to each student, to give them time to review the papers with counsel, and to oppose the discovery if they so chose.

In October, 2007, in Greenbaum v. Google, a New York court has reaffirmed the principle that identity information cannot be disclosed absent (a) prior notice to the anonymous person, (b) affording the anonymous person an opportunity to be heard in opposition to the application, and (c) an evidentiary showing of a prima facie case against the anonymous person. Application of this principle to the RIAA cases would defeat all of the RIAA's ex parte discovery applications.

If the RIAA refuses to stipulate to giving prior notice and an opportunity to be heard in opposition to the motion, you should go to Court yourself and get an order requiring them to comply with these fundamentals which are required by due process. Since the only possible claim of an emergency is that you -- the university -- will be destroying the records, you, as the university, can easily dispel that absurd notion.

What you should also do.

In the first place, the very legality of the RIAA's whole statutory theory for getting the ex parte discovery orders is in doubt. In Interscope v. Does 1-7, even though the application was ex parte, it was denied. The Court held that the statute relied upon by the RIAA was applicable only to discovery sought by government agencies. So you should certainly bring that case to the Court's attention; the RIAA lawyers will not.

And in Interscope v. Rodriguez it was held that the complaint used by the RIAA in all these cases fails to state a claim for relief altogether

As a general rule, the courts have held that in order for a claimant to get an order for discovery, from an ISP, of confidential names and addresses of a John Doe in a copyright infringement case, it must make a prima facie evidentiary showing, based on admissible evidence, that it has a case for copyright infringement against each "John Doe". See authorities cited in our memoranda of law:
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=warner_does1-149_memooflaw*
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=warner_does1-149_replymemo*

Since the RIAA has been proceeding ex parte, however, and since they haven't been challenged by the ISP's, judges have usually signed off on the orders even though the applications were supported by conclusory, hearsay, opinion statements of suspect reliability which would never be considered admissible in any court in the United States. (Compare the courts of the Netherlands and Canada, where the ISP's challenged the application for "John Doe" information, and the Courts refused to grant the discovery orders, due to the unreliability of the RIAA's investigative "method").
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/#Foundation_v_UPC_Nederland*
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/#BMG_v_Doe(Canada)*

The lack of reliability of the RIAA's "investigatory" technique is becoming more and more well documented. See, eg. the February 23, 2007, deposition of the RIAA's expert.
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=umg_lindor_070223JacobsonDepositionTranscript*

See also expert witness statement of Prof. Pouwelse and Dr. Sips:
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=foundation_upcnederland_witnessdeclaration*
and amicus curiae brief of the ACLU, Public Citizen, Electronic Frontier Foundation, American Association of Law Libraries, and ACLU Foundation of Oklahoma, in Capitol v. Foster decrying the RIAA's "driftnet" litigation strategy:
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=capitol_foster_amicus

Other possible items of interest to include in your motion papers are (a) the in limine motion in UMG v. Lindor, which points out both that the RIAA has taken the position that MediaSentry will not testify as to the meaning of its "reports", and only the RIAA's "expert" can do that, and that the "expert's" testimony is inadmissible under Fed. R. Evid. 702 and Daubert, and (b) the report submitted to the USPTO in November 2006, and included as exhibit B to the answer in Atlantic v. DeMassi, which shows how most file sharers do not know if they are sharing files, and if so which files they are 'sharing'. http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=atlantic_demassi_070320answercounterclaimsExB

Accordingly, we believe you should oppose the RIAA's application for an order of discovery.

Likewise, if you learn of the RIAA obtaining such an order ex parte, you should move to vacate the order.

Typically, the RIAA joins a number of "John Does" in a single suit, in order to save itself money, even though under the Federal Rules such joinder is clearly improper. See, e.g. In re Cases Filed by Recording Companies, W.D. Texas, Austin Division (2004) http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/RIAA_v_ThePeople/20041117_austin_severance_order.pdf
In fact, the foregoing case specifically enjoined the RIAA to cease and desist from continuing its practice of joinder, an injunction which the RIAA has simply ignored. Opposing the RIAA's deliberate misjoinder of unrelated "John Doe" defendants is another thing you can do to assist your students and their families in achieving a more level playing field.

A third thing you can do is point out to the Court that there is no known cause of action for "making available", which is the basis of the RIAA's suits, in the Copyright Act. See Elektra v. Barker, argued January 26, 2007, and awaiting decision.

In October, 2007, the State Attorney General of Oregon, on behalf of the University of Oregon, moved to quash the RIAA's subpoena on the ground that the RIAA's evidence fails to identify copyright infringers, so that the University -- were it to comply with the subpoena -- would be violating privacy laws by turning over the identity information being sought. The AG's office pointed out that in order to comply with the subpoena without violating privacy laws, it would need to conduct a thorough investigation, including forensic examinations, which it is not required to do under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45.

Sincerely yours,

-Ray Beckerman

For a printer-ready version of this letter:

http://info.riaalawsuits.us/openletter.htm

(Please print out and distribute to appropriate parties.)

Commentary and discussion:

Boing Boing
p2pnet.net
digg
Anandtech
Ithaca Intercom
Slashdot
*-Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation*

Suggestions to College Students Being Targeted by the RIAA.

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE. HOWEVER, I DO ADVISE YOU TO GET LEGAL ADVICE, AND NOT TO TAKE YOUR ADVICE FROM THE RIAA, THE MPAA, YOUR SCHOOL, OR ANYONE ELSE WHO IS NOT YOUR LAWYER.

These are my suggestions to college students being targeted by the RIAA:

1. Join together with other students who are being targeted, pool your financial resources, and hire an attorney who is ready, willing, and able to (a) advise you of your rights and (b) fight the RIAA's "John Doe" cases when they are brought.

2. Bring to your college or university's attention my "Open Letter to Colleges and Universities"

3. Join or start campus charters of Digital Freedom and/or FreeCulture.

4. Remember that the RIAA does not presently have your identity, and that by calling them or visiting their web site you may be giving them your identity.

5. Read and learn about your rights. E.g., review Electronic Frontier Foundation page, RIAA v. the Students: An FAQ for "Pre-Lawsuit" Letter Targets

6. Organize.

7. Organize.

8. Organize.

-R.B.

Link to printable version of these suggesions.

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Slashdot   Slashdot It!

Friday, June 22, 2007

Dawnell Leadbetter Moves for Attorneys Fees

Dawnell Leadbetter, the successful defendant in Interscope v. Leadbetter, has brought a motion for attorneys fees against the record company plaintiffs, Interscope Records, Capitol Records, SONY BMG, Atlantic Recording, BMG Music, and Virgin Records.

The RIAA's case against her had been dismissed in December, on the plaintiffs' own motion, with the Court indicating that it was retaining jurisdiction over the matter "to hear collateral issues like the imposition of costs and fees at a later date after the voluntary dismissal [of] this action."

Defendant's memorandum of law in support of motion for attorneys fees*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

p2pnet.net
Slashdot
Tekel
Digg

Digg!

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

RIAA Asks for More Time to Respond to Counterclaims in UMG v. Del Cid

The RIAA has asked for more time to respond to the counterclaims which have been filed against it in UMG v. Del Cid, a Tampa, Florida, case in which the plaintiff record companies are accused of, among other things, conspiracy and extortion.

Motion for Extension of Time*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Thursday, June 21, 2007

RIAA Designates Dr. Doug Jacobson as Expert Witness in Texas case, Atlantic v. Boggs

In Atlantic v. Boggs, the RIAA has designated Dr. Doug Jacobson -- the same expert witness that is the subject of an in limine exclusion motion in UMG v. Lindor -- as its expert witness.

It is very unusual -- indeed it is probably a violation of the Court's rules -- to file such a document with the Court, which is what the RIAA did in this instance.

June 21, 2007, Expert Witness Designation by Plaintiffs*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Court Schedules Evidentiary Hearing in Capitol v. Foster

In Capitol v. Foster, where Judge Lee West has granted the defendant's motion for attorneys fees, and the RIAA has objected to the reasonableness of Ms. Foster's attorneys fees, the Court has granted the RIAA's request for an evidentiary hearing:

June 20, 2007, Order, Granting RIAA Request for Evidentiary Hearing*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Deadlines postponed in Arista v. LimeWire

The deadlines for conclusion of pretrial discovery and for the making of dispositive motions (i.e. motions for summary judgment) have been extended in Arista v. LimeWire. Under the new case management order, Summary judgment motions are scheduled to be fully briefed by March 18, 2008.

Case Management Order Entered June 18, 2007*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

RIAA Ex Parte Discovery Application Against University of New Mexico Denied!!!

The RIAA's ex parte motion to compel the University of New Mexico to disclose the identities of its students has been denied, in the District Court of New Mexico, by Magistrate Judge Lorenzo F. Garcia, in Capitol v. Does 1-16.

The Judge ruled that there was no reason for the motion to be ex parte, reasoning as follows:

Plaintiffs contend that unless the Court allows ex parte immediate discovery, they will be irreparably harmed. While the Court does not dispute that infringement of a copyright results in harm, it requires a Coleridgian “suspension of disbelief” to accept that the harm is irreparable, especially when monetary damages can cure any alleged violation. On the other hand, the harm related to disclosure of confidential information in a student or faculty member’s Internet files can be equally harmful.

As the Plaintiffs do not presently know the identity of the Defendants, there is no reasonable way to ensure that those prospective Defendants are given notice or even an opportunity to respond in opposition to the request for disclosure. Rather, Plaintiffs seek to obtain information directly from the University of New Mexico. Plaintiffs propose that the University will be able to notify subscribers that a subpoena was served. However, the Court needs to ensure that subscribers actually receive notification and are given a reasonable opportunity to intervene in order to stop the disclosure of sensitive information.

In any event, the Court[...] sees no need to act on an ex parte application. Rather, it would appear appropriate that Plaintiffs and the University of New Mexico confer on an appropriate process to ensure that, if a subpoena is served, the University not turn over information until it has given notice to individual subscribers that a subpoena has been issued and allow those subscribers to intervene in this proceeding to protect disclosure of sensitive information. Moreover, ex parte proceedings should be the exception, not the rule. Accordingly, the Court declines to grant Plaintiffs’ request for ex parte application.

Further, the federal rules prohibit discovery until the parties have met and conferred, formulated an appropriate discovery plan, and made arrangements for disclosure of information. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26. Here, of course, the individual subscribers are unknown, have not been sued and cannot “meet and confer” with Plaintiffs. However, the University of New Mexico, the entity from which discovery is sought, has a right to be heard on this matter.

Accordingly, the Court directs Plaintiffs to contact University counsel, apprise the University that it is seeking discovery from the University, and attempt to agree on a fair and reasonable process that would allow Plaintiffs to identify limited information about the subscribers. If Plaintiffs and the University can agree on a process that includes prior notification to subscribers and a reasonable period of time to intervene or object, a proposed consent order should be submitted. If Plaintiffs and the University cannot agree, the Court will conduct a status conference with Plaintiffs’ counsel and University counsel on the appropriate manner to initiate discovery and provide notice to affected individuals. Once Plaintiffs’ counsel confers with the University of New Mexico legal division, Plaintiffs’ counsel is to notify the Court concerning the status of their agreements, if any.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery [Doc. 4] is DENIED.


May 24, 2007, Order, Denying Ex Parte Discovery Motion*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

p2pnet.net
Ars Technica
p2pnet.net
TechDirt
Slyck
Geek News Central
TechMeme
HardOCP
Michael Geist
Slashdot
Heise Online (German)
Wikinomics
Chronicle of Higher Education (Wired Campus)
Gulli (German)
New Mexico Daily Lobo
Punto Informatico (Italian)
Slashdot (Story on multiple cases)
TheStreet.com


Slashdot   Slashdot It!

Digg!

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Monday, June 18, 2007

Counterclaims Dismissed in Binghamton, NY, case, Interscope v. Kimmel

In an upstate New York case, in federal court in Binghamton, Interstate v. Kimmel, the Judge has granted the RIAA's motion to dismiss the defendant's counterclaims for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and for copyright misuse:

June 18, 2007, Decision, Granting Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims*

Defendant is represented by Richard A. Altman of Manhattan. Similar motions had been made to dismiss virtually identical counterclaims in two other cases handled by Mr. Altman, Atlantic v. Shutovsky, in which the motion was denied, and Lava v. Amurao, in which the motion was denied as to the copyright misuse counterclaim, and in which the Court's order denied the motion as to the declaratory judgment claim but at oral argument the Judge had indicated he was granting the motion as to that claim.

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Sunday, June 17, 2007

A story about a story: RIAA coward threatens author for linking to story about UMG v. Del Cid

A fascinating 'story within a story', or more appropriately 'story about a story', is unfolding. (Hats off to regular reader and commenter "Alter_Fritz" who originally tipped us off to this madness.)

On June 4th we reported about the counterclaims filed by the defendant in a Florida case, UMG v. DelCid, for

1. Trespass

2. Computer Fraud and Abuse (18 USC 1030)

3. Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices (Fla. Stat. 501.201)

4. Civil Extortion (CA Penal Code 519 & 523)

5. Civil Conspiracy involving (a) use of private investigators without license in violation of Fla. Stat. Chapter 493; (b) unauthorized access to a protected computer system, in interstate commerce, for the purpose of obtaining information in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (a)(2)(C); (c) extortion in violation of Ca. Penal Code §§ 519 and 523; and (d) knowingly collecting an unlawful consumer debt, and using abus[ive] means to do so, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692a et seq. and Fla. Stat. § 559.72 et seq.

Thereafter, Download Squad published an article about the filing, which was referred to by a blog, New Music Strategies.

What followed next was pretty amazing. A record company executive who sits on the board of the UK version of the RIAA got into an email exchange with the author of New Music Strategies, threatening to report him to the university by which he is employed if he did not delete the link to the Download Squad article. The author, in turn, published the entire email exchange on his blog, generating a lot of comments.

Here's the original Download Squad article and some of the interesting reading material that has ensued:

Download Squad
New Music Strategies (Email exchange concerning threats by RIAA official concerning a report on Download Squad's coverage of this story)
p2pnet.net (Article about RIAA threats against New Music Strategies author for publishing link to Download Squad's coverage)
Download Squad Response to Birch
Digg.com story on Download Squad response
Punto Informatico (Italian)



Commentary & discussion:

Slashdot



Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Shelly Palmer Interviews Ray Beckerman about RIAA Lawsuits

Shelly Palmer interviews Ray Beckerman for Podcast. June 11, 2007, Santa Monica, California, outside DCIA P2P Media Summit LA.

http://www.shellypalmerpodcasts.com/?p=52

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Motion to Vacate Boston University Subpoena Filed in Arista v. Does 1-21

In Arista v. Does 1-21, the Boston case brought by the RIAA to obtain the identities of 21 Boston University students, a motion to vacate the ex parte discovery order, and the subpoena issued pursuant to that order, has been made by one of the students.

The student is represented by Raymond Sayeg of the Boston office of multi-state law firm, Denner Pellegrino.

Linares Declaration Submitted by RIAA in support of ex parte discovery order motion*
Consolidation order*
Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Vacate Ex Parte Discovery Order and Subpoena*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

Slashdot
p2pnet.net
Punto Informatico (Italian)
Ars Technica
ZeroPaid


Digg!

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Transcript of Lava v. Amurao Oral Argument Now Available

The transcript of the May 18, 2007, oral argument, before Hon. Charles L. Brieant, in Lava v. Amurao, is now available online. The judge indicated he was denying the RIAA's motion to dismiss the copyright misuse counterclaim but was granting the motion as to the counterclaim for a declaratory judgment.

A subsequent court order indicated that the Judge Briant was denying the motion as to both counterclaims, so there is an inconsistency between the argument and the order. We do not know at this time whether the order was mistaken, or whether the Judge changed his mind subsequent to the oral argument.

The RIAA has filed its reply to the copyright misuse counterclaim.

Transcript of May 18, 2007, Oral Argument*
Plaintiffs' Reply to Second Counterclaim*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Rate the Judge (RobingRoom.com)

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Monday, June 04, 2007

RIAA Drops its Case Against Tanya Andersen

The RIAA has finally dropped its longstanding case against disabled single mother Tanya Andersen in Oregon, Atlantic v. Andersen

The dismissal relates merely to the RIAA's claims against Ms. Andersen, and does not relate to her (a) claim for attorneys fees or (b) counterclaims against the RIAA.

Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice*

Ms. Andersen is represented by Lory Lybeck of Mercer Island, Washington.

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

Ars Technica
p2pnet.net
Slashdot
Heise Online (German)
Spiegel Online (German)
webwereld (Dutch)
Punto Informatico (Italian)
CBC News
p2pnet.net
MacWorld


Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

New Tactic by RIAA: Trying to Force "Mass Settlement Conferences" Before Magistrate Levy

In a new tactic, the RIAA has attempted to "herd" three (3) unrelated cases to a joint settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy in Elektra v. Schwartz, Maverick v. Chowdhury, and Elektra v. Torres, all in Brooklyn, New York.

June 1, 2007, Letter of Richard Guida ("Joint" Settlement Conference Request)*
June 3, 2007, Letter of Ray Beckerman (Opposing "Joint" Settlement Conference Request)(Elektra v. Schwartz)*
June 3, 2007, Letter of Ray Beckerman (Opposing "Joint" Settlement Conference Request)(Maverick v. Chowdhury)*
June 3, 2007, Letter of Ray Beckerman (Opposing "Joint" Settlement Conference Request)(Elektra v. Torres)*
June 4, 2007, Letter of Richard Guida (Withdrawing Request for "Joint" Settlement Conference)(Elektra v. Schwartz)*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

RIAA Accused of Extortion and Conspiracy in Tampa, Florida, case, UMG v. Del Cid

In a new Tampa, Florida, case, UMG v. Del Cid, the defendant has filed the following five (5) counterclaims against the RIAA, under Florida, federal, and California law:

1. Trespass

2. Computer Fraud and Abuse (18 USC 1030)

3. Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices (Fla. Stat. 501.201)

4. Civil Extortion (CA Penal Code 519 & 523)

5. Civil Conspiracy involving (a) use of private investigators without license in violation of Fla. Stat. Chapter 493; (b) unauthorized access to a protected computer system, in interstate commerce, for the purpose of obtaining information in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (a)(2)(C); (c) extortion in violation of Ca. Penal Code §§ 519 and 523; and (d) knowingly collecting an unlawful consumer debt, and using abus[ive] means to do so, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692a et seq. and Fla. Stat. § 559.72 et seq.

Answer and Counterclaims*

Ms. Del Cid is represented by Michael Wasylik of Ricardo & Wasylik, in Tampa, Florida.

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

p2pnet.net
boing boing
The Consumerist
Ars Technica
Tech Spot
Hard OCP
gizmodo
Slashdot
Download Squad
Tampa Tribune
New Music Strategies (Email exchange concerning threats by RIAA official concerning a report on Download Squad's coverage of this story)
p2pnet.net (Article about RIAA threats against New Music Strategies author for publishing link to Download Squad's coverage)
Download Squad Response to Birch
Digg.com story on Download Squad response
TMCNet
Phoenix Labs



Slashdot   Slashdot It!

Digg!

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs

Sunday, June 03, 2007

RIAA Files Extra Papers in Lava v. Amurao "Denying" EFF's Attacks

In a very unusual filing, the RIAA has filed an additional document in Lava v. Amurao, several weeks after its motion to dismiss had already been decided, denying the Electronic Frontier Foundation's attacks upon it as "baseless":

Plaintiff's Opposition to EFF's Amicus Brief*

Another oddity is that, although the Court's order denies the motion in its entirety, this "Opposition" document states that the motion was denied only in part. Apparently they are making this contention based upon Judge Brieant's having stated at oral argument that he was inclined to grant the motion as to the Declaratory Judgment counterclaim.

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs