RIAA files 532 music-sharing lawsuits

#1 21st January 2004, 10:16 PM

RIAA Sues Song-Swapping Suspects

TAKEN FROM YAHOO NEWS.....
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...5281_2004jan21

The recording industry today reignited its legal campaign against online piracy, filing four lawsuits that target 532 people accused of illegally swapping copyrighted music on the Internet.

The Recording Industry Association of America (news - web sites)'s (RIAA) legal salvo is the first since a federal appeals court ruling last month restricted the group's ability to track down the identities of suspected file sharers.

Three of the lawsuits were filed in federal court in New York City, while the fourth was filed in the Washington, D.C., federal court.

"The message to illegal file sharers should be as clear as ever we can and will continue to file lawsuits," said RIAA President Cary Sherman in a telephone conference with reporters today.

The lawsuits were filed after a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled on Dec. 19 that the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (news - web sites) does not grant the RIAA special subpoena power to obtain the names of several Verizon Internet customers believed to be trading files online.

Ahead of that ruling, the RIAA used the subpoenas -- which it obtained without a judge's order -- to demand that several major Internet service providers reveal the identities of thousands of suspected file sharers. Information provided by some companies led to copyright infringement lawsuits against 382 people last year and 233 private settlements.

The average settlement amount has been $3,000, even though copyright holders can seek as much as $150,000 per song.

The lawsuits filed today make good on the RIAA's promise last month to continue going after suspected music pirates despite a loss in the Verizon case. Unlike the lawsuits it filed last fall against individual Internet users, the RIAA filed a handful of "John Doe" lawsuits targeting 532 unique "Internet protocol" numbers of Internet customers believed to be sharing music online. The RIAA plans to subpoena respective Internet service providers to obtain the names of people using those IP numbers.

"People should not be confused. Some people think the Verizon case means that you can go ahead and get back on a service and trade files," said Mitch Glazier, the RIAA's senior vice president for government relations. "We're not going to just sit and do no enforcement while the courts are figuring out the Verizon case."

The RIAA will continue to pursue out-of-court settlements, but the average amount could rise because filing anonymous lawsuits costs the association more than its previous subpoena process, Sherman said.

The John Doe lawsuits are less controversial in the eyes of some of the RIAA's adversaries. Verizon Associate General Counsel Sarah Deutsch last week encouraged the RIAA to file the lawsuits, saying that they provide defendants with more privacy protection than was offered by the looser administrative subpoena process that the appeals court panel ruled inappropriate in December.

Greg Bildson, chief operating officer of LimeWire, a New York-based file-sharing company, said the John Doe lawsuits are preferable to the glut of subpoenas issued before the Verizon ruling.

"I think it's good that the courts have properly restrained the power of the [copyright law] in this regard. Unmasking users with the hint of a copyrighted file being shared is extreme," Bildson said. "They're at least getting closer to being appropriate, but they're still abusing the music enthusiasts with these lawsuits, which in the long run can't be good for business. They need to work toward a positive solution."

LimeWire is among a handful of file-sharing firms that have called on the RIAA and Congress to create a licensing scheme to legalize the trading of copyrighted files.

The RIAA has argued in the past that the subpoena power it asserted under the 1998 copyright law were in the best interests of defendants -- since it gave the RIAA the opportunity to approach alleged Internet music pirates privately about a settlement. In its ruling last month, the appeals court said that Verizon and other Internet providers cannot be held responsible for material that passes through their networks.

Meanwhile, studies produce mixed commentary on whether the file-sharing ranks are growing or shrinking.

A recent study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project found that the number of American Internet users who said they downloaded music online fell from 29 percent in the spring of 2003 (before the RIAA campaign began) to 14 percent in November and December.

But that does not mean that the numbers are on the wane, said Eric Garland, chief executive of Big Champagne, an Atlanta-based company that tracks activity on the peer-to-peer networks that people use to trade files.

"What's a great finding from the Pew study is that downloading music has joined the ranks of social taboos," said Garland. "What it means is not that they're not doing these things, but they've wised up and they're not talking about doing these things."

The number of American households downloading digital music went up 14 percent between September and November 2003, according to a report released earlier this month by the NPD Group in Port Washington, N.Y. The findings were based on NPD's MusicWatch service which monitors the computers of 40,000 online "panelists."

**Corybobory** · #2 21st January 2004, 10:22 PM

I wonder how they decide who to sue? Maybe the ones with the most files first?

sxesven · #3 21st January 2004, 11:15 PM

I think so. It's probably people that share a lot of files from 'important' artists that are on major labels that get sued first.

Aldonia · #4 22nd January 2004, 12:13 AM

Boo. I hate the RIAA. -_-

tl1029530921 · #5 22nd January 2004, 12:14 AM

GO AWAY U STUPID PPL.

oh well...im safe with Ayu^^....except i just DLed Hilary Duff @.@

#6 22nd January 2004, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tl1029530921
GO AWAY U STUPID PPL.

oh well...im safe with Ayu^^....except i just DLed Hilary Duff @.@

OMG! *undercover agent* U ARE NOW FINED $$15,000 we know where you live. resistence is futile. u will die now! MUAHAHA

Set_0ne · #7 22nd January 2004, 10:45 AM

I learnt that the RIAA sues people who are hosting LARGE amounts of files/mp3's because they are the ones who are doing the most damage. But for an (under) average user who doesn't download too much and doesn't host any of their mp3's will get away with it because to the RIAA they aren't a threat.