SBC Refuses To Name File-Sharing Users 373
securitas writes "The New York Times reports that Internet provider SBC Communications has refused to identify computer users accused by the RIAA of file-sharing copyrighted material. SBC is the largest high-speed DSL provider with over 3 million subscribers. It continues to refuse a response to the 300 subpoenas served by the RIAA despite a ruling against Verizon earlier this year. 'We are going to challenge every single one of these that they file until we are told that our position is wrong as a matter of law,' said James D. Ellis, general counsel for SBC. He continues, '...We've got a long heritage in which we have always taken a harsh and hard rule on protecting the privacy of our customers' information.' Mirrors in Tuscaloosa and Lakeland."
privacy value (Score:5, Funny)
Sigh. (Score:4, Funny)
I mean, it's great, and it's sure to work, but the switch is so close to my light switch.
nice (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Bravo (Score:5, Funny)
Perhaps, for once, a company actually does have its customers' rights in mind?
Or just maybe the CEO of SBC has 3,000 illegal MP3s on his hard drive?
Re:Title is misleading (Score:3, Funny)
Holy crap, really? Jesus, who've I been paying $50 a month for the last two years to, then?
And then, just who the HELL IS GIVING ME INTERNET ACCESS?!?!?!?! ARRRGGGHHHHH!!!!!!
:: crawls into the fetal position and shivers.... ::
OH MY GOD, THEY EVEN HAVE THEIR LOGO ON MY BILL!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!
Yay SBC (Score:4, Funny)
file trader, scientist;
searching for a way to download the hidden copyrighted files that all you little liars know you have.
Then an accidental overdose of typical SBC service alters his body chemistry.
And now, when David Banner hears any news about SBC,
whether it has to do with their patent abuse, layoffs and overseas outsourcing, or the general degradation in service quality that occurs whenever SBC takes over an outfit,
a startling metamorphosis occurs.
The Creature is driven by rage,
and wanted for sharing a file he didn't upload.
David Banner is believed to be dead,
and he must let the world think that he is dead because those bastards can sue you for $100,000 per copyright violation,
until he can find a way to control the raging spirit that dwells within him...
But now David's eyebrows are merely raised in suspicion.
What is SBC's motive in acting in the interests of their customers?
What's in it for them? What are they up to?
The Creature does not understand.
Wow! (Score:1, Funny)
Reading a positive story about SBC on Slashdot is like reading a "SCO does something right" story on Slashdot!
Bravo! I'm not complaining, but wow...
As for SBC: just be careful. First you do one good deed, then another, and pretty soon your customers will trust you again. You don't want that! And always remember the SBC motto "our customers are the enemy!"
Hehe (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Jesus, I'm conflicted. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:What!?!?!?!!! (Score:3, Funny)
Me fail English? That's unpossible!
Fun with RIAA (Score:4, Funny)
When RIAA tries to invoke their subpoena power, SBC responds with DMCA protection -- accusing RIAA of using a subpoena as a "circumvention method" to avoid paying the true market value for SBC's "intellectual property". The fact that it's mostly junk and wildly overpriced is a mere coincidence. After all, it's worth whatever SBC says it is, right? SBC could reasonably claim that they are doing precisely what RIAA does.
Re:SBC's ad is even better (Score:1, Funny)
Re:SBC's ad is even better (Score:1, Funny)
Week defense? A defense that is 7 days long?
'Our dog ate it' (Score:1, Funny)
It's a "win-win" for them.