Slashdot Log In
RIAA Says Accused Students Are Settling
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun Mar 25, 2007 08:34 PM
from the cheap-at-half-the-price dept.
from the cheap-at-half-the-price dept.
As we've been reporting, the RIAA has been offering settlements to college students suspected of sharing music online. Reader Weather Storm notes that more than a quarter of the alleged music pirates have accepted the RIAA's offer. Quoting: "...an attorney Ohio University arranged to meet with its students... said $3,000 is the standard settlement offer, though cases have settled for as much as $5,000."
Related Stories
[+]
University of Wisconsin-Madison Bucks RIAA 203 comments
stephencrane informs us of an interesting development at UW Madison. The school, along with many others, has been sent "settlement letters" by the RIAA with instructions to forward them to particular students (or other university community members) that the RIAA believes guilty of illegal filesharing. The letters order the assumed filesharers to identify themselves and to pay for the content they are supposed to have "pirated." The university has sent a blanket letter to all students, reiterating the school's acceptable use policies, but has refused to forward individual letters without a valid subpoena. This lawyer's blog reproduces the letter. The campus newspaper has some coverage on the university's stance.
[+]
College Demands RIAA Pay Up For Wasting Its Time 261 comments
An anonymous reader writes "We've already seen the University of Wisconsin tell the RIAA to go away, but the University of Nebaska has gone one step further: it's asking the RIAA to pay up for wasting its time with the silly demand to push students into paying up. The spokesperson for the University also notes that since they constantly rotate IP addresses and have no need to hang onto that information for very long, they simply cannot help the RIAA. They have no clue who was attached to which IP address at the time the RIAA is complaining about."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
How long should a wallet inspection take? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:As these CRIMINALS should - guilty - pay the pi (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:As these CRIMINALS should - guilty - pay the pi (Score:5, Informative)
This is a civil matter, not a criminal one. No crime has been committed. No one will be found 'guilty' of anything. If they refuse to settle they could be found 'liable' for copyright 'infringement' in court.
Try not to get too emotional about this. It's irrelevant what one thinks is wrong or right. The RIAA cannot go on indefinitely suing the whole world. And file-sharing is not going to go away any more than the Internet. It's likely that as more artists target their audiences directly, online, the less we'll have need for an organization like the RIAA. History and a new economic model will defeat them.
Re:As these CRIMINALS should - guilty - pay the pi (Score:5, Interesting)
There is nothing "criminal" about copyright infringement. Someone can take you to court
and sue you, but there is nothing criminal about that. It certainly isn't considered
"theft" by the laws of this country: never was, never will be.
Secondly, how do you feel about being robbed? Because you were robbed. Something
was taken away from you that is worth an enormous amount of money and it was taken
away from you by the RIAA. When copyrights are extended indefinitely, instead of
entering the public domain as they were originally deemed by law -- what is actually
happening is that the RIAA is stealing from the public for their own interests.
Did you have a say in that? Did you agree to give up what was rightfully yours?
Or was it just taken away from you with the stroke of a pen? Because that, my friend
is theft. Plain and simple.
Copyright infringement is not theft. But taking public property for personal gain
is absolutely theft. Now who is the guiltier party?
hrmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Never mind the pirates (Score:5, Insightful)
If there is ANY chance that you could be guilty, you don't stand a chance no matter how innocent you are.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
RIAA: points and yells "WITCH" multiple times at the top of their lungs
not yet accused of anything defendant: no I'm not
RIAA: yes you are, me
Re:hrmm (Score:5, Insightful)
As I've said before, guilt and innocent have nothing to do with the law. It's all about who can afford the best lawyer. And, unfortunately, in most cases it's a matter of who can afford a lawyer *period*. That is the same reason that only famous and rich people can afford to go to court when someone slanders or libels them or violates their copyrights. Who wants to spend the thousands of dollars or tens of thousands of dollars to take someone to court who has a big, fat, malicious mouth but no money with which to compensate even when you win?
So, when it comes down to it, monetary status dictates that the RIAA is correct and the accused are - indeed - guilty.
Re:hrmm (Score:5, Interesting)
I understand this, and I think that's how most people view it. I was, however, thinking about this the other night, and I think that if they sent me a letter, I'd fight it. I don't steal anything anymore (within the spirit of the law, sometimes not within the letter (I have multiple backups of CDs I've bought, stuff like that)) - I'm a Christian. Although I did, admittingly, have a shady past. However, stealing was the least of my crimes.
I would have to get the money from somewhere, or I would represent myself. I know, anyone representing themselves has a fool for their council... But, I would fight it for a few reasons. I don't like being called a criminal; especially by cowards. I don't think you should take the credit or the blame for something you didn't do unless it is for the good of the greater. Furthermore, I think that I could, strictly on technical grounds, defend myself quite well. I'm confident in my skills (Software development major), and I could probably rip apart any 'expert' who would allow themselves to be hired by the RIAA. They would probably beat me into the ground on the political front, although, I think that I could use my technical ability and the hacker (not cracker!)community as a great platform. I could easily show that I have no motive; I use Ruckus [ruckus.com] and have all the free music I'd like. Lastly, I have a rack of all the original CD's I've bought, (except one which I lost years ago, although I have the album in MP3 - spirit of the law, not letter) as well as my email reciepts for the music I've bought on iTunes.
I just don't think they could really establish me as a pirate. It would take a lot to try to make up that pattern of behavior. That, and, if I got a letter, it would be a wrongful accusation since I don't pirate to begin with.
But mostly, I just couldn't live with myself if I backed down to a bully. Granted, I'd most likely lose, but I'd still know that I showed more spine than a good percentage of the populace. I guess it boils down to it being a personal issue. I guess it would be worth it for me to lose everything I have (broke college student: all I really own is old hardware that I keep fixing to get by) simply to send the RIAA the message that not everyone is spineless, and not everyone is a criminal. What do you do when confronted by bullies? Drop the biggest one as fast as possible and hope the rest leave. As the quote goes, "nothing asserts authority so much as silence".
I understand those who buckle simply because they really do have something to lose; sometimes what you stand for has to take a back seat to providing for your family. The idealist would say no, but we can all be extorted when the right pressure point is found. I happen to be in a position where I can't afford $3K, I don't really have any possessions; for me giving in would be a 'loss', whereas fighting and losing in court would be more akin to a 'tie'.
I guess it's a matter of heart in a head-on collision with the reality of the world we live in. I'm sure I'd fold if they could find the right button to push; but it's very unlikely at this point in time.
Re:hrmm (Score:5, Funny)
Live a life on the seas and shoot cannonballs into the RIAA's headquarters?
Re:hrmm (Score:5, Insightful)
There, fixed that for you. We have to remember to target more of our hatred at the record companies themselves, rather than the RIAA, otherwise the record companies get off scot free.
Screaming Failure! (Score:5, Interesting)
What choice do they have but to settle really?
75% decided not to settle. I'd say fighting is the overwhelming popular choice.
College Students are Vulnerable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and the solution to the problem of having too much time
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:College Students are Vulnerable (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't seem to understand that those who are good at writing music are not necessarily good at performing it. If you make performance the sole basis for revenue, you immediately lose the majority of interesting songwriters (random radio tripe "songwriters" are not affected, since they can be employed on a salaried basis by managers).
Do you know who wrote Elvis' songs? Do you know who wrote the music for "My Way"? Ever heard Lee Hazlewood (by any standards an awesome songwriter) sing? According to you, society would have been better off if all those people had been flipping burgers rather than devoting their time to writing songs. Sorry, but I don't buy it.
WTF? Welcome to 1984 (Score:4, Insightful)
FTFA:
"Reasonable data retention policies are essential," he said. "Lawsuits for music theft are just one example, but there are a host of other crimes regularly perpetrated on computer networks.
"As services providers, one would think universities would understand the need to retain these records."
This only goes to highlight what I believe is the governments complicity in the **AA litigation activities.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And this is a surprise because... (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Find a lawyer to defend you; worry about the final verdict; worry about legal fees; worry about what your friends think; worry about possible ramifications from your school administration/student government...ad nauseum...
2) Pony up the money, which, upon consideration, is probably less than the credit card debt you've managed to rack up.
Honestly, I'm not sure I can blame them for their choice.
Re: (Score:3)
There ya go, fixed that for ya.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, Trollie. Wanna be taken seriously? Log the fuck in.
Ok, AC-reprimand completed. Now on to the topic.
Just so you know, copyright isn't property. It doesn't hold the same set of laws as copyright does. So, ah, yeah. Stop t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Every choice you make, and the actions entailed in carrying it out, has consequences. If you find that you are unable to stomach the consequences, perhaps you chose poorly, eh? In the mea
I have a question (Score:5, Interesting)
Protection Money (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortunately, the RIAA is operating under the guise of lawfulness, and has its hands in the lawmaking process. Hopefully the efforts they are going through to kill their market will cause change for the better.
Let's do this (Score:5, Interesting)
May I see the price list? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe the RIAA should advertise their pricing scheme to the students, give them some flexibility in their settlements.
"Now see, you can settle for the average $3,000, but if you wish to upgrade to our premium settlement plan of $5,000, we'll also throw in a one-month litigation immunity from our friends at the MPAA. Think of the savings!"
iTunes (Score:5, Interesting)
Then she asked about Kazaa. I suggested Morpheus because you can download your music into a folder other than her shared folder, and explained the RIAA lawsuits and how the music industry had the world's sleaziest people.
They had been bar owners and had had dealings with ASCAP, who wanted money from both them AND the kareoke people. They wanted money even after they got rid of the bar!
Amyway, it turns out that they were using iTunes at her school; she thought iTunes and Kazaa were the same! Most normal people (not you or me, obviously) have no clue about any of this shit.
They know all about how our government is for sale to the RIAA, though, having been bar owners before.
Don't these damned college kids vote? Look, if you don't vote, get off my lawn you damned kids!
Re:iTunes (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure. But who are we supposed to vote for?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Today I was in a bar and a middle aged couple I know were asking me about their computer.
1977 pickup line: So, what's your sign?
2007 pickup line: So, you have an Apple or Dell?
1977 closing time: So, you wanna come back to my place?
2007 closing
It's time for the Anti-RIAA (Score:3, Interesting)
Rachet? (Score:3, Insightful)
And actually the bad part is not (only) the organization who tries to extort the money this way I think the real problem is the judicial system that doesn't give poor people a fighting chance.
So ya see, Jimmy.... (Score:5, Interesting)
You are breaking the law, Jimmy. It's a sad thing, when a man breaks the law: can't get a job, gets kicked out of school, hell, what if he has to go to jail? A man could go away for a long, long time, couldn't he? But maybe, if you work with us, we can make sure that you don't get convicted of breaking any law, eh Jimmy?
Create a situation in which the illegal alternative is preferable to the legal alternative. Sue those that break the law. Convince them to settle, using the rest as "examples," to get other people to fear you.
Why hasn't anyone used RICO and extortion laws against the RIAA? Am I the only one that sees this? Yeah, these guys are breaking a law: but the RIAA is running a racket here, and is exhtorting and blackmailing these kids. So send em to court, get the law changed to something sane, and sue the pants off the RIAA under RICO, or something similar.
Re:So ya see, Jimmy.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ok but here's the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
So the problem is that I am stuck having to prove my innocence, and that I have to pay a lawyer far more than $5,000 to do it.
THAT is what is wrong with this. We don't know that these people ever broke the law. All we know is that a company who gets paid when they find someone, like BayTSP produced a screenshot from a program that claims ot be a list of files that are allegedly from some IP. I can poke a bunch of holes in the chain of evidence right there:
--How do we know the company isn't lying? They get paid to find these people, it'd be in their interest to make it up if they can't find someone.
--How do we know the information from the P2P program is accurate? These are not vetted, approved forensic tools and some of them are known to make mistakes.
--How do we know the songs in the list are what they claim to be? P2P networks are full of fake material, how do we know these are real?
--How do we know that this is the correct IP address? What if the P2P program or something else reported the wrong one?
--How do we know the ISP gave us the correct person behind it? What if a hacker hand altered the records to cover their tracks? What if an employee at the ISP did?
--How do we know that it was a computer owned by the owner of the connection that did it? What if someone hopped on their wireless network?
--How do we know that the computer that did it wasn't hacked? There are over a million botted computers out there, how do we know this wasn't one of them?
This kind of thing would likely not even make it past pretrial in a criminal case, but in a civil case, you have to pay to defend yourself.
Then, of course, there's also the issue of the whole 8th amendment thing, you know "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." Specifically the "excessive fines" part. They ask for statutory amounts vastly exceeding any real harm caused. You can't tell me that downloading a single tracks causes tens of thousands of dollars of harm and yet that is the kind of amount they ask for, and they are allowed to because of a statute they pushed for. Seems damn unconstitutional to me.
So yes, it IS extortion. They don't care if you are innocent or guilty, they force you to pay because it is too costly to defend yourself, and you risk losing too much. It may be wrapped up in some legislation, it is still extortion.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Students say RIAA accusations unsettling. (Score:4, Insightful)
What a choice - give us all yer money now, or we'll grind you into poverty for the next x years of your life.
Yeah - I'm sure I'd be ready to sell out quick for a few grand - beats the hell out of working for the RIAA for the next twenty years of my life!
And the infringed upon artists are getting...... (Score:3, Insightful)
RIAA and "Ihr Kampf" (Score:3, Insightful)
"Who is the most vulnerable and liable for pirating software, music, etc?"
The manager replies, "Well...college students of course."
And they both have a good laugh.
Truth be told it's not funny, it's real. Here is where the RIAA have separated themselves from the norm
of all those who are strongly opposed to the idea of Internet freedoms, most prevalently piracy. However this
is the worst mistake the RIAA has made, the reason is that college students are their number one customer. The
greed and capitalist values have consumed the RIAA past any rational thought process. Essentially the RIAA has
cut off the hand that feeds them. The sad part is that college students are at the mercy of it all. They can't
afford a lawyer let alone pay their rent. I think we fail to recognize who really are the pirates.
Class Action jackpot (Score:3, Informative)
Give them time to sue a few thousands more, and sooner or later some lawyers will realize the bloody fortune they will make by suing RIAA for what they've been doing. And when they start doing so... Well, not only those lawsuits will stop, but those execs will be the ones doing some paying up... and it's not going to be thousands but millions.
Re:Where have all the ethics gone? Long time passi (Score:4, Insightful)
copyright infringement is not "stealing".
If you'd actually take a moment to educate yourself on the long history of artistry and creativity and the comparatively short history of copyright, you'd understand how the recording industry has twisted the law to its own evil purposes. Using bribes to have legislation passed which fences off huge swathes of our common culture from us, so they can charge admission. Copyright is supposed to be a limited time monopoly of copying, not a perpetual right of complete control.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
1. The people involved knew not to do it.
2. The stuff copied was recent release Top 40 type material that has no connection our common culture or public commons.
3.
Re:Where have all the ethics gone? Long time passi (Score:4, Insightful)
1. They knew it was against the law; but it is the law that is in question
2. There is a good chance of that. Would your opinion change if they were downloading Mozart?
3. Again, it is the laws themselves that are in question. If downloading a file is effectively free, then why should they pay for it?
4. If the laws were unchanged since the 1800s, it would be high time for a change. Copyright laws were written to prevent unauthorized commercial copying. Technology has made it possible for individuals to copy works for non-commercial purposes. The law should keep pace with technology.
1. Fair enough. But if you violate a questionable law, don't be surprised when you get hauled (unliterally) to account.
2. Depends vastly. It was a modern performance or arrangement, performed recently, no. My opinion would not be changed. If, for example, it was a reproduction of an antinue performance, than yes, my opinion would be vastly different. If I play a Mozart piece and record it as my own arrangement than I should have control over my versions distribution. I would be an artistic leach, but still, it would my peroggative.
3. The main is reason is because your action is anti-American in the most true sense. The purpose of copyright is to promote the creative arts. That is in our national interest. Making it so that the creative artists are unable to make decisions about the use of their own work creates a disincentive to pursue the creative arts, which is damaging to the country long-term.
4. Your point #4 is factually incorrect. The purpose of copyright being built-into the constitution is that the promotion of the creative arts is in the national interest. Copyright promotes the creative arts. The technology to make non-commerical copies has been around for a lot longer than you think. Regardless, however, the entire purpose of copyright is to allow people pursuing the creative arts to maintain a lifestyle that allows them to continue this pursuit. Elimination of the ability to charge for "non-commerical" copies, or to depend on the good-will of customers puts artists back into the caste they used to be in - able to subsist only via the graces of the the elite and wealthy.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's where they are NOW. What do you think a record company is if not a means for the elite and wealthy to select which artists get pro
Re:Where have all the ethics gone? Long time passi (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If that's the case, go after the real stuff - stuff that philosophers discuss, not the stuff that's illegal only because of special interest lobbying.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You haven't seen the settlement agreement.. You don't get to keep the music. You also don't get to say anything truthfully in your opinion regarding the RIAA. I saw a link to a settlement agreemen
But, are they really guilty? (Score:5, Interesting)
The only reason the college kids are paying up is because they can't afford to defend themselves. It is a lot like the protection racket used by organized crime and gangs today. Pay us or we'll really hurt you.
There was a deposition on Groklaw [groklaw.net] that pretty much sums up the fact that the RIAA identification techniques probably wouldn't stand a chance in court. There is a LOT of Doubt about the accuracy of the RIAA tactics. More than reasonable too.