 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| The main issue The suit questions the validity of using the DMCA to reveal file trader identities, and suggests the "overly broad" subpoenas should have been issued from a California district court, and not the District of Columbia.
I've always thought that something funky was up with the RIAA going through one court for all their subpoena needs. ("Your one-stop subpoena shop!")
I'm not lawyer, but I would think that this would mean that you would have to defend your case (should you decide to do so) in that district. Of course, you would have to travel to get there (unless you live in D.C.) and most likely take time off of work. This just adds to the burden of getting a fair trial. So the RIAA wins doubly by using a single court: They don't have to file in multiple districts and the defendants are much more likely to settle.
Now, if the SBC wins and the RIAA is forced to file in the appropriate district, then defendants will at least have a slight bit more of a fighting chance. Plus, the RIAA would have to take the time to file in districts throughout the US instead of one place. This would be more likely to get a subpoena where they have plenty of evidence, not just wherever they think someone might have been sharing songs. And if the RIAA was forced to go to a judge with actual evidence and not to a court clerk with accusations, then all the better.
Don't misunderstand me, I think that sharing files that you don't own the copyright to (or that you haven't been given permission to distribute) is wrong and should be punished. However, I don't think suing people for $10,000 a song is an appropriate level of punishment.
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
 | 
pianotech
Pianotech
Premium
join:2002-12-30
New Castle, PA
| Re: The main issue said by Jason Levine:
Don't misunderstand me, I think that sharing files that you don't own the copyright to (or that you haven't been given permission to distribute) is wrong and should be punished. However, I don't think suing people for $10,000 a song is an appropriate level of punishment.
I agree. And by the same token, I think that if the RIAA and record labels opened up their catalogs and made everything available in a convenient, non-restrictive DMR format, charged a reasonable fee (.50/download for singles, $5 for whole CD, for example), and stopped treating all fans as potential criminals, they could make illegal file sharing go away tomorrow.
*edit* fixed a bad quote tag
--
Music for a rainy day...
[text was edited by author 2003-07-31 15:36:57] | |
|
bigbeartech
Goo?
join:2001-09-23
Saint Louis, MO
| Said what? "Pac Bell/SBC is the only service provider to challenge the subpoenas since Verizon lost their legal battle earlier this year to protect file traders' personal identities."
»www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/s···suit#top
Sorry, broadbandreports.com fails again...
Why dont you get your story straight before you post? | |
|
devrandom
I got a pot, full of random stuff here
Premium
join:2003-06-28
| They knew this was coming I think that the RIAA knew what was going to happen sooner or later..
They're just operating on the elasticity of certain clauses I think. Thats what SBC is trying to get at. I hope they win.
Because, suing grandma and grandpa isn't going to help record sales any more better.
It'll just make more people crazy and question the legitimacy of lawmakers' intentions.
And for those interested, MIT also took a stand like SBC and said that the RIAA filed their subponeas incorrectly. | |
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Oh please... Any other day, SBC would leave its customers out to dry. The company is just trying to cover its own ass. | |
|
gnucleus7
Number 3 Forever
join:2002-06-06
NASCAR
|  Stand together or swing together
I personally think the stance of both Verizon and SBC is right on. If more of the heavyweights like AOL and MSN would join in, the RIAA would realize that the battle IS lost. You can shut down one P2P program after another but you will never stop file sharing!. There are too many ways to trade files ( FTP,MIRC and Newsgroups), for these morons to stop. But then, some people NEVER learn.............
--
antec case,asus a7v333,xp2200,Win 2K (going dual boot with mandrake 9),gig crucial pc2700 DDR,ti4600,hp9100,DVD,SB audigy platinum,60gigHD./Soyo,Asus k7,900 Tbird,256 pc133,Mandrake MNF,/Server,Asus Mb,1gig tbird.768 ram. (Netware file server)./ SFTP box. | |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| What's the Catch? I want to know what's in it for SBC. They aren't doing this out of the kindness & generosity of their hearts.
--
A good scapegoat is almost as good as a solution.»www.digitalconsumer.org | |
|
|
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Re: What's the Catch? It's a CYA move. Any other day they'd let their customers swing in the wind. | |
|
| 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Privacy protection like before most likely. Customers don't stay with ISP's who don't protect their rights and the Bells know it. Of course there might be something slightly more to it than that. Perhaps SBC doesn't like the fact the RIAA is acting technically above the law and ursurping SBC's own confidence in their industry. In other words SBC might feel the need to show they can outdo the RIAA. So now the countersuits can have a sort of "I'm bigger than you" one-upsmanship among the corporate giants.
Also I read an interesting article about how people from the South tend to respond to any besmirchment as an official challenge. Could be SBC is saying, "You sir have insulted my honor! I challenge you to a duel."
--
Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com | |
|
| |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA | Re: What's the Catch? I'm sorry. Eddie boy and his company have no honor. | |
|
| haylo756
join:2002-11-08
Kansas City, MO
clubs: | Whatever the motive, the end result is good for the average online user. How about finding something else to whine about for a change? | |
|
| |
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| Re: What's the Catch? said by haylo756  :
Whatever the motive, the end result is good for the average online user. How about finding something else to whine about for a change?
I'm glad that some people on this board are so gullible to believe in an absolutely free lunch with no strings attached.
--
A good scapegoat is almost as good as a solution.»www.digitalconsumer.org | |
|
| | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: What's the Catch? Nothing to do with a free lunch. It just so happens the motives of SBC, or PBIS more specifically, also serve our needs as well as theirs. They are doing what they are doing for whatever reason they perceive, but that doesn't mean we aren't benefitting from it. How is SBC going to turn this into a way to screw us?
--
Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com | |
|
| | | |
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| Re: What's the Catch? said by SRFireside :
How is SBC going to turn this into a way to screw us?
I really could not say with any degree of certainty; I don't have an MBA that teaches how to do that. Pose that question to Ken Lay or better yet, to the CEO of SBC itself.
--
A good scapegoat is almost as good as a solution.»www.digitalconsumer.org | |
|
| | | | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: What's the Catch? Heh heh.... I couldn't do that without slamming him about all the crap I have seen SBC do to ISP's I have worked for as well as every other horror story I know about. I guess I'm just saying not every single action they do will always have a negative effect on the customer or competitor. There will be times when they do stuff that happens to further our ends as well as theirs.
Also keep in mind Pacific Bell Internet Service is actually the one who filed the lawsuit. Though they are a subsidiary of SBC I'm sure the decision came from the ISP's management and not the corporate head. SBC likely supports the action because it makes them look good to the public.
--
Love Science Fiction? www.spacestationzoom.com | |
|
| wwildbh
join:2000-10-25
Harrisburg, PA
| How would all of you feel if YOUR customers were being targeted by some *&*&6 company because of the services that you're providing. I personally would be protecting MY customers. To have some ridiculous organization (RIAA) trying to tell me that I WILL turn over MY customers just because little Jenny downloaded her favorite Britney Spear's
song...Ahhh, NO. I think it has a-lot more to do with pride then what everybody is thinking. | |
|
|
MarlinFF
Dsl Rocks
join:2003-05-24
Los Angeles, CA | Woot Go PacBell!!  | |
|
Varangian
join:2002-12-08
Collinsville, IL | The enemy of MY enemy is my friend
We can deal with san antonio later | |
|
kaned
Premium
join:2003-07-31
Port Saint Lucie, FL
| Makes me wonder Good for Bell. Although, I wonder what the underlying reason is for their pushback. No way is it for the customers' sake.
On a personal note: I'm not one to file share, but if I were, I'd stop if the RIAA would sink some money into getting rid of kiddie-porn. But -- that's a different story. | |
|
BBMAC
@attbi.com | I like SBC that much more now :) That is great news  It's nice to see a big corporation do something about the RIAA. I hope SBC wins | |
|
|
|
|
