Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Your Rights Online

RIAA Apologizes for Incorrect Infringement Notice 525

theradixhunter writes "News.com is reporting that the RIAA has apologized to the Pennsylvania State University for sending a threatening letter making an incorrect allegations of copyright violations. It appears that the automated system that the RIAA uses picked the term "Usher" and the extenstion ".mp3" on an FTP site hosting the work of Professor Emeritus Peter Usher and falsely assumed that the files were songs by the musician Usher. The university accepted the apology saying "that this was an honest mistake by the recording industry" and Spokesman Tysen Kendig said Penn State "remains committed to working closely with the RIAA"."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIAA Apologizes for Incorrect Infringement Notice

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @12:24AM (#5942303)
    David Miller is actually a gaming auctioneer from Perth, not part of ARIA. He runs "Progress Amusements". They have the Tales from the Crypt pinball at the next auction! oooh!
  • Get this: The department has on its faculty a professor emeritus named Peter Usher whose work on radio-selected quasars the FTP site hosted. The site also had a copy of an a capella song performed by astronomers about the Swift gamma ray satellite, which Penn State helped to design.

    That kind of search could only be termed "shotgun".
  • by n08ody ( 162000 ) <jonusprime@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @12:32AM (#5942343)
    did you know the riaa isn't a government
    administration?
  • by heXXXen ( 566121 ) <cliff@pchopper.POLLOCKcom minus painter> on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @12:36AM (#5942359)
    the range of ip adresses that the RIAA owns [arin.net]

    just block them on your firewall
  • by SpyderPSU ( 582418 ) on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @12:45AM (#5942408)
    I'm an undergrad here at Penn State. Over the past few months they have been cracking down on copyrighted materials. They emailed the following letter to every student in the University:

    I have a serious message for you about making illegal copies of copyrighted material. While you may be tempted not to read this email, I suggest that you do so in order to better understand just what the risks and penalties are for violating the law.

    In recent years, high-speed computer networks and personal computers have made it easy to copy computer programs, movies, and recordings. Most of this material is copyrighted, which means the right to make copies is restricted. Making copies of any copyrighted material without the right to do so is against both state and federal law and University policy. Most people who make illegal copies know it is wrong, but are unaware of how severe the penalties can be.

    The US Copyright Law (Title 17 of the US Code) has very serious penalties for violations. These include significant fines for each copy. If you copy more than $1,000 worth of material, there are criminal penalties that include substantial fines of up to $250,000 and up to 10 years prison time for flagrant cases of infringement.

    The software, record, and movie industries are stepping up their enforcement of copyright laws. They are using computer technology to detect those who run servers or simply download something they have no right to possess. The likelihood of being caught is growing every day, and prosecutions will become more frequent.

    You may have downloaded copyrighted materials and not been caught, so you think you're safe from prosecution. I urge you to think again. Two students in Oregon were caught and prosecuted under the criminal statutes. One received a suspended two-year sentence, the other spent time in jail. A student in North Carolina spent 41 months in prison for copyright infringement. Messing up your future is a steep price to pay for music or a video.

    What happens at Penn State if you are caught? By statute, the University must immediately block your network access when we receive notification that a particular computer has been involved in a violation of the law. You may also be taken to court by the copyright holder or charged in the federal courts with a crime. That is not all that can happen. You should know that falsely certifying either that you have the right to material or have removed it can result in federal perjury charges as well as copyright infringement.

    What else does Penn State do? When we receive a complaint, student offenders are referred to the Office of Judicial Affairs and employees to the Office of Human Resources. Why? Because it is illegal and against University policy to infringe on someone's copyright. A student can be expelled and an employee terminated under University policy.

    The bottom line is that there is a potentially high price to pay for an illegally copied computer program, movie, or recording. Stealing is stealing and against the law, regardless of how you try to justify it.

    Thank you for your cooperation.

    Rodney A. Erickson March 31, 2003


    After the letter was sent 220 students were served notices from the Judicial Affairs Office. You can read more about it in the school newspaper. school newspaper. [psu.edu] In the article it says, "Rodack said it can take only one complaint against a student before dorm Internet connection is shut down and he or she is investigated."

    Has anyone else seen the same pattern at their school? Is this par for the course?

    Can this post get any longer?
  • by sigh71 ( 240237 ) on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @01:10AM (#5942516)
    if you are in the windows world there is an app out there called peer guardian that blocks all riaa/mpaa etc type ips from connecting to your machine...

    i think it gets its banned ip's from here

    http://www.simply-click.org/uploadertest/pg2.asp
  • by WaxParadigm ( 311909 ) on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @01:50AM (#5942659)
    There is human intervention, with EVERY letter - this time some employee just didn't follow the procedure. It's probably cause they're paid by the letter or some shit (like the stop light cameras that are run by companies who get a piece of each ticket) which only motivates them to do as little checking as possible to get their numbers up.
  • by Otto ( 17870 ) on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @02:28AM (#5942752) Homepage Journal
    For those who want to use PeerGuardian, here's how:

    1. Download PG from here: http://methlabs.org/pg/
    2. Install it.
    3. Edit "C:\Program Files\PeerGuardian\Guarding.P2P" in a text editor.
    4. Go to http://www.simply-click.org/uploadertest/pg2_plain text.asp for the plaintext list of ranges to block.
    5. Copy and Paste it into the Guarding.P2P file. It must have no empty lines at the beginning of the file, and must have at least one blank line at the end of the file.
    You may want to leave off the last few lines from that webpage, this is a submission type of thing, and new submissions are added to the bottom of the list. Delete the bad lines from morons and such at the end. They get onto the list every so often.
    6. Startup PG and make sure it reads in the block list correctly.

    Congratulations, you're now blocking all TCP connections with over 50 million IP addresses, most of which are probably "the bad guys". I don't generally steal music or offer up music, I just don't like these people and so I block them on principle.

    Also, PeerGuardian supports a pgdat:// type of link, so as new addresses are changed, you can click the links on http://www.simply-click.org/uploadertest/pg2.asp to add them to PeerGuardian directly instead of manually editing the blockfile.
  • Re:So... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @02:56AM (#5942821)
    Short answer: no.

    Longer answer: if you leave your front door standing wide open, the cops can come right in without a search warrant. The criteria for whether a warrant is necessary is whether the owner of the property took reasonable precautions to restrict access. If you put up an anonymous FTP site, you haven't taken reasonable precautions. Same thing if you throw up an FTP site that only accepts the username and password "mp3." Or if you put the username and password on your home page or in some other publicly accessible place.

    As for your analogy, that's wrong, too. A search warrant can specify which parts of a residence or other location can be searched, and it can specify what's being searched for. But if it only limits the scope without limiting access, then you most certainly CAN be busted if the cops find drugs under your sink. Evidence of a crime uncovered during a lawfully executed search is absolutely admissible.

    Then, you said, "If the FTP banner contains text indicating that the site is to be used for only certain purposes and that using the site indicates agreement to the terms, wouldnt this be illegal search and seizure?" The answer to this question is no.
  • by aboyce ( 444334 ) on Tuesday May 13, 2003 @10:35AM (#5944614)
    From the network admin mailing list at Penn State:

    "<i>...I was also led to believe that I am the first on-campus complaint where the RIAA allegations were not legitimate. We have a professor Peter Usher, and an mp3 file in another directory that was done a cappella by our employees and extols the capabilities of the Swift Gamma Ray Burst satellite that is scheduled to go into orbit later this year. Nothing else that would even come close to infringement.</i>"

Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz

Working...