RIAA Targets New Colleges, Still Avoids Harvard

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Billboard reports that the RIAA has filed its eighth round of 'early settlement' letters to twenty-two colleges. Continuing its practice of avoiding Harvard, the RIAA's new round does not include any letters to that institution, where certain law professors have counseled resistance to the RIAA and told the RIAA to 'take a hike'. The unlucky institutions on the receiving end of the 403 new letters include Arizona State University (35 pre-litigation settlement letters), Carnegie Mellon University (13), Cornell University (19), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (30), Michigan State University (16), North Dakota State University (17), Purdue University — West Lafayette and Calumet campuses (49), University of California — Santa Barbara (13), University of Connecticut (17), University of Maryland — College Park (23), University of Massachusetts — Amherst and Boston campuses (52), University of Nebraska — Lincoln (13), University of Pennsylvania (31), University of Pittsburgh (14), University of Wisconsin — Eau Claire, Madison, Milwaukee, Stevens Point, Stout and Whitewater campuses (62)."

This only means the RIAA has no case

[mind21_98]

If the RIAA really had a case, they'd talk to kids from Harvard too. And since the Harvard kids were told to say no, the RIAA could sue the Harvard kids to oblivion. This only means one thing: the RIAA letters are extortion, plain and simple.

Re:On way...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because *they* can't directly see you violate copyright, doesn't mean other people can't report you. I'm sure the RIAA/MPAA isn't below hiring a bunch of 'snitches' or setting up 'snitch' lines to report ANti-American behaviour. Respecting copyright is the American way, sharing is communism!

Re:Wait a second...

[HiThere]

Different group of guys. Just because they all have Slashdot accounts doesn't make them the same.

Personally, if it hurt the RIAA I'd be all in favor of distribution of their copyright works. Unfortunately, I don't think it does, it only exposes you to risk (not much, but some). As such I think it's stupid. (OTOH, you'd need to pay me large sums to listen to most of what they release as music. $100/hour might do it, if it weren't too loud...and I could play computer games at the same time. So my opinion of relative worth vs. risk may not be normal.)

Harvrd Legal Counsel

[rbabb]

If Harvard's professors really do have a valid defense that is intimidating the RIAA from suing them, they should do some pro-bono work for the other schools that ARE getting sued! Help out your fellow institutions for the betterment of everyone!

Bullies

[tomz16]

Perfect life lessons in this one...

- Bullies won't go after you if they are afraid that there's a chance of getting their nose bloodied.
- Don't have to run faster than the bear... just faster than the slowest guy running from the bear.

Harvard students are excluded from these notifications, not because of their innocence, but because of the fact that there are literally thousands of easier targets to go after that have no chance of fighting back!

Re:Dangerous move...

[SmackedFly]

And that MIT is located right next to Harvard...

Mickey Mouse...

[headkase]

The day I can use Mickey Mouse in my own work is the day I give a damn about the RIAA's "losses".

Re:Wait a second...

[Arramol]

The problem is that the RIAA has a long history of filing lawsuits based on little or no evidence, which is how they've ended up suing at least a few families that have never owned computers and a dead grandmother who lived a similarly PC-free life. We're up in arms because of their shotgun, witch-hunt style tactics, especially since the cost and difficulty of defending yourself in court over something like this means that many people end up having to pay for crimes they never committed.

Re:This only means the RIAA has no case

[Anonymous Coward]

What's the alternative? That RIAA is prejudiced against Harvard? Not likely. When you have a trademark, you can't make the decisions about who you enforce it against. You have to treat all cases without prejudice and enforce it across the board. Why is it not the case here?

Re:This only means the RIAA has no case

[Frank Battaglia]

For starters, it's different here because Copyright and Trademark law are completely different, with different justifications and goals.

Re:Mickey Mouse...MOD UP PARENT

[Nom du Keyboard]

The day I can use Mickey Mouse in my own work is the day I give a damn about the RIAA's "losses".

This is a very wise, if obscure to many, comment that copyright law has been so skewed towards the big corporations that civil disobedience is more than justified. Study the history of copyrights and you'll understand why the Founders of the USA democracy specified that secure for a limited time was part of the United States Constitution. Unfortunately, Congress (Republicans), the President (Clinton), and most of all, the Supreme Court of the United States have totally let us down on this issue over the last decade. The RIAA is now hard at work to steal back what little of the Public Domain still remains.

At the very minimum, DRM should be legally required to expire on the day that the copyright for the work it's protecting expires!

Re:So I am on the list.

[Nom du Keyboard]

My university is on the list. What slash /.ers want to give advice for what I can do about it?

Go to Ray's blog and read up on the legal motions filed by students at other universities to challenge the RIAA's misuse of the law and true lack of evidence. And them file similar motions for any students sued at this university.

Re:This only means the RIAA has no case

[fishbowl]

>When you have a trademark, you can't make the decisions about who you enforce it against.

Of course you can. You're confusing doctrines related to defenses, with obligations.
There's not a word in the law that supports your exaggerated view on trademark enforcement.

Re:This only means the RIAA has no case

[budgenator]

Maybe potential law students would be wise to consider which school's the RIAA consider's easy pickings and which ones are untouchable when sending out applications.

Re:Bullies

[DavidShor]

Does anyone?

The RIAA is terrified of people with real money

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a reason that the jails and prisons of America are filled mostly with black and other ethnic minorities. White and affluent minorities have access to the best legal care that money can buy, for both civil and criminal matters. The RIAA knows this, and they're probably running scared, knowing that most of the Harvard students have access to good lawyers who can dash off a quick legal F you letter to the RIAA.

  There are certain legal surnames that terrify greedy pigs, shysters and publicity hounds. Can you imagine the RIAA filing one of their bogus lawsuits against a child or grandchild of someone like Johnnie Cochran? He would have been on the six o'clock news, burning the legal summons with a match, telling the RIAA to stick their phony lawsuit.

Re:Mickey Mouse...MOD UP PARENT

[Chandon Seldon]

I'm sure the computers 70 years in the future will have no problem dealing with whatever "DRM" we put on our stuff now. Granted eventually Moore's Law will end and that principal will no longer be true.

The evidence strongly implies that Moore's law will end long before it becomes feasible to crack AES (and therefore AACS) by brute force. DRM is a social problem that should be dealt with - ignoring the problem because you think that it will magically get fixed in the future would be a very bad decision.

Re:Perfect picks.

[safXmal]

Don't worry. The university will start protecting you the moment a son or daughter of a big donor shows up on the list. That shouldn't take too long before it happens.

side bar

[Jahz]

I've seen numerous high rated posts on to this article with comments about how universities are failing to protect their students from the RIAA. As a general statement, I disagree with that assessment. Read before replying... As a recent grad from a major university in Boston, I can attest that universities are not charged with protecting or providing legal assistance for their students. In fact, pretty much any news story that I see about a student or group of students breaking the law includes expulsion of the students involved. The exception is that minor drug and alcohol offenses are treated as addictions and resolved with some form of mandatory counseling. Sometimes students are expelled for being arrested off campus (nearby)! Universities largely take a cut-and-run approach to problem students. So, the way they are acting with the RIAA is NOT a surprise at all.

When a college passes a RIAA extortion letter to a student that they believe is the intended recipient, the college has done nothing wrong. In fact, I think it would be a liability to not pass the information along. I know that I would never want my university to act as a legal threat filter on my behalf because in the end, it isn't the university being held responsible, its me! The bottom line is that everybody who receives a threatening letter - be it legal or other - should consult with a lawyer and respond appropriately.

Many of the posts did recognize the *real* problem with some of these institutions: unethical cooperation with RIAA. Providing *any* information about a student, whether that information be an IP address, mailing address or name should be illegal. I know that recent laws have made it impossible for even my parents to access my student records and GPA without my express permission (which I have given :-) ). It should be the same for every other bit of personal information I have on record with my university. Every school that receives a bunch of these letters should have their legal counsel reply with another letter stating something like:

"This school acts as a neutral internet service provider. The intended recipients/users have been notified. It is up to them to respond individually. If you require any additional information, please obtain a court-ordered subpoena."

So for now, the real problem seems to be that many schools lack a fair and effective internet/data privacy policy.

Re:This only means the RIAA has no case

[BakaHoushi]

Or, to sum up your post a little better, the RIAA only goes after people who can't fight back.
The RIAA likes to take candy from babies, but avoids the ones with guard dogs.