COURT: RIAA CAN'T HAVE NAMES OF DOWNLOADERS

Drudge Report ^

[rit]

Federal appeals court on Friday rejected efforts by recording industry to compel nation's Internet providers to identify subscribers accused of illegally distributing music online.

[longtermmemmory]

I have a major problem with a mere clerk of courts employee issuing a search warrant without individual review by a Judge.

The RIAA was trying to mass produce search warrents and have them apply across jurisdictions. They consideration and respect for due process was inversly proportional to their over inflated self importance.

[steve-b]

And they claim music sales are down.

I guess the RIAA hasn't heard about this "recession" thing.

[bird4four4]

Did anyone notice the FreeRepublic Disclaimer?

All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works

I think Jim Robs exemption will override your implicit copyright. But I'm no lawyer.

[steve-b]

An astute analysis. The RIAA is like a shopkeeper who decides to deal with the shoplifting problem by hiring goons to forcibly strip-search people at random, break into houses around town to look for stolen goods, etc -- and then wonders why he doesn't get many customers any more, and why regular law-abiding people are no longer willing to come forward with anything they do happen to know about the shoplifters.

[AntiGuv]

I think Jim Robs exemption will override your implicit copyright. But I'm no lawyer.

Not under John Robertson's apparent interpretation.. ;^)

[steve-b]

I've read too that the RIAA already makes money off CDRs.

Yes and no. They get a cut on "audio" CDRs (the kind you need for stereo-component CD recorders), but not on standard CDRs (the kind that work in computer CDRs, but not in stereo-component units). They've been trying to cut themselves in on the latter, however....

[AntiGuv]

It was in a context that would have made my meaning implicit, I think.

Your meaning was anything but implicit within context because the person to whom you were replying was discussing authorized downloads.

[steve-b]

You cannot photocopy an entire book in the library and take it home.

Sure you can. It's just more trouble than it's worth (it's easier to buy a copy of the book).

[John Robertson]

All downloaders of unauthorized copyright-protected material are lawbreakers.

er..., I meant, All unauthorized downloaders of copyright-protected material are lawbreakers.

[John Robertson]

Sorry, I'm not aware of that snafu of mine, but thanks for clearing it up. But overall, my position has been made clear on this issue, I trust.

May I offer a thought? A few people here are picking and parsing at everything I type because they have a fundamental disagreement with the big argument, that over music downloads. Catching me in a typo or misstatement is really not the issue. We disagree. I see it as theft, that's that. Many of you don't. You're not going to change my mind, and it's pretty obvious I'm not going to change yours.

Why don't we leave it at agreeing to disagree, and wish one and all a Merry Christmas?

[EPD]

"Signed up today to tell us this RIAA boy?"

Yes I did. And don't call me RIAA boy. I can't stand the RIAA either, but what I can't stand even more are thieves who justify their crime. God gave us liberty, but not the liberty to steal. You must be the kinda person that also steals cable and the gas you pumped in your car today, huh? As a person who loves free enterprise, I have some advice for you, please help our economy and PAY for what you use.

Oh, just because I signed up today doesn't negate the fact that I visit FR every day for the scoops—and have for around a year now.

[moehoward]

Well said.

Bully tactics from RIAA and MPAA are nothing new. It's just the first time the public is directly being targeted.

In the past, it was music wholesalers/retailers and manufacturers of audio/video components that were enemy.

Pushing around your customer base is business as usual for this arrogant bunch.

[longtermmemmory]

Copyright is a limited right. There is no intelectual property under common law. It had to be created. It is a narrow right with a limit in time and a limit in scope.

Case in point: a teacher or lecturer can copy articles for purposes of classroom distribution without payment. Some Law professors do that each semester to compile the handouts of their classes.

The media is also covered by such "fair use". FR is equal to any media outlet. The only reason there is a excerpt rule for some outlets is because there was a settlement before a court rulling.

[longtermmemmory]

The RIAA is now going after people who sing in Karioki bars. really.

[AntiGuv]

Well, for the two of us in particular, we need not have had any acrimony in our discussion. My only dispute was with the impression that downloading itself was inherently criminal, as opposed to the pirating of copyrighted works.

Now, as for the broader issue at hand, I am somewhere between the various extremes. I consider the implications of P2P file-sharing highly problematic, in particular because the time will soon arrive when digital media can be reproduced and transmitted with minimal effort and without any degradation of quality.

However, I simultaneously believe that there's no reasonable measures which will prevent such use of the medium and I'm also unsure whether it's even desirable to do so. In short, I think that a solution must be arrived at but I don't agree with either the RIAA's tactics or objective.

The free market and the legal system will evolve to resolve these novel issues which arose just a few years ago. That resolution should not and need not include police state methodology IMHO.

[John Robertson]

"Case in point: a teacher or lecturer can copy articles for purposes of classroom distribution without payment."

That's not my understanding of copyright law. My understanding is the exact opposite--you may not have to pay, but you must have permission. Every high school and college in the land has strict standards for re-using material--because so many of them have lost copyright infringement suits in the past. And they lost in many cases for exactly the situation you cite: use in the classroom.

[AntiGuv]

Oh, and I do wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

[John Robertson]

"That resolution should not and need not include police state methodology IMHO."

Better said than I would have said it, and I'm good. We're in basic agreement on the main and ancillary issues, and thanks for keeping it civil (even if I perhaps didn't... though I can't remember who I've insulted here today).

[jjm2111]

"I can't stand the RIAA either, but what I can't stand even more are thieves who justify their crime."

If you dislike the RIAA so much why are you buying their lines? According to them:

1. Recording music from the radio and sharing it (w/out commercial benefit) is fair use.
2. Downloading music from the web and sharing (w/out commerical benefit) is theft.

Reducto ad absurdum?