SBC Fights RIAA Over DMCA Subpoenas 455
NaDrew writes "SFGate.com is running an AP article about Pac Bell's Internet arm suing music industry over file-sharer IDs. 'The suit also called to question some sections of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the federal law the RIAA contends supports its latest legal actions. A spokesman for SBC said the RIAA's use of the DMCA in its legal quest for online song-sharers butts up against the privacy rights of SBC's customers.
"The action taken by SBC Internet Services is intended to protect the privacy of our customers," said SBC spokesman Larry Meyer.'" So SBC, like Verizon, is concerned about the cost/hassle of complying with all the subpoenas it has been receiving.
Re:I'm a little consfused here . (Score:5, Informative)
AFAIK - check your contract with your ISP.
At least someone is fighting (Score:5, Informative)
1)Charge less per album
-> more people prepared to buy albums to see if they like it
2)Pay the artists more
-> more artists -> more choice -> better music
Re:Just the big ISPs? (Score:2, Informative)
Hmm!~ (Score:2, Informative)
None other than: Dave Matthews Band
Promoted by Napster, allowed to be freely downloaded (with permission) by Napster users and now is suing the people who made it what it is today. Hows that for a thank you?
Re:I'm a little consfused here . (Score:5, Informative)
It may be that you indemnify your ISP against actions taken against it by third parties due to acts using your connection. That is not the same as taking some sort of "legal responsibility" for acts using your ISP.
A contract *only* affects your rights vis-a-vis the other parties to the contract. It *cannot* affect your rights vis-a-vis third parties. This is a fundamental principle of contract law.
Re:postive light? (Score:2, Informative)
Universities have begun throttling thier ports because they don't make money off of you using thier network. Furthermore, most Universities offer you access with much greater upload and download capacity than your standard DSL/Cable modem. The killer app for broadband is p2p, and the universities don't care because they're not in the business of selling broadband. These companies, however, are.
Download caps and excess charges are partially deterrents and partially moneymakers. Much like speeding tickets.
Re:What chance do they have of winning this? (Score:5, Informative)
SBC Revenue for 2002: 34B+- change
RIAA reports total retail value of shipped CDs in 2002: 12B+-
That gives SBC a much bigger chance. And you noones going to say that SBC doesn't have lobbyists. :)
And suppose that SBC does win (or some other company for that matter) and even that particular portion of the DMCA (subpoenas w/o judges) gets killed. Yes, RIAA will reissue following proper procedure. But that's much more expensive, much more time consuming, and much more frowned upon (CA has a litigous company law, and TX just don't put up w/ that sh.t.). The RIAA's 75/day stat I heard somewhere would probably drop to something like 75/mo. In the end, RIAA loses, the DMCA loses, and Kazaa will continue. -lv
Re:postive light? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Um...wife no, children yes! (Score:5, Informative)
Some U.S. states (actually except NH and NY appaerntly) have changed this by statute. Illinois is one... parents there are liable for intentional torts only, and the limit of liability is $1000. The average over all states is $4100 maximum liability.
Of course, these aren't torts exactly, so I'm not sure whether DMCA-type violations would be caught under these "paerntal responsibility" laws.
RIAA Radar improved (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Illegal search & seizure (Score:1, Informative)
Re:What about (Score:5, Informative)
That's not the issue here. The issue being fought by SBC is that the RIAA currently has the power to force them to turn over the identity of users for a given IP address without a court mandate.
Right now the RIAA can send a list of IP's and times those IP's where logged to a ISP and force the ISP to reveal the contact information for the user who owned that IP at that particular point in time. They can do all of this without any intervention from the courts.
SBC is fighting that... so the case that you reference has no relevance at all.
Re:Um...wife no, children yes! (Score:1, Informative)
Re:People can we step back a second. (Score:1, Informative)
Allow me to point out that you have a hazy view of "theft" that, while you believe it to be adequate or appropriate, is irrelevant. The context here is a legal one. In that context, the topic is not "theft" but "copyright infringement" and is subject to a body of law different from "theft." I'll also point out all those usenet posters committing acts of "theft of property/right to make money," have made as much money as I have from this anonymous post to Slashdot.
RIAA Members (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp [riaa.com]
Re:postive light? (Score:3, Informative)