Slashdot Log In
University of San Francisco Law Clinic Joins Fight Against RIAA
Posted by
Soulskill
on Fri Feb 29, 2008 05:22 AM
from the bay-area-reinforcements dept.
from the bay-area-reinforcements dept.
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's litigation campaign has met resistance from the academic community before, but now it's been taken to a whole new level: the defense of RIAA victims who are not part of the college community. First the University of Oregon lashed out on behalf of its students, then it was the University of Maine's Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic on behalf of its undergrads. Now, the University of San Francisco School of Law has taken the fight a giant step further. Its Intellectual Property Law Clinic's attorneys-in-training, working under the supervision of law professors, are going to bat against the RIAA by helping outside lawyers to defend their clients, pro bono. They reached out 3000 miles to get involved in Elektra v. Torres and Maverick v. Chowdhury, two cases going on in Brooklyn, NY, against non-college defendants. Two of the law students in the USF's legal program assisted in the research and preparation of briefs in these cases, opposing the RIAA's motion to dismiss the defendants' counterclaims. Thousands of honor students throughout United States law schools, most of them digital natives who actually understand the legal fallacies and technological missteps the RIAA is taking, and who can't wait to expose them, make a pretty good resource for the poor and middle class people trying to defend these cases."
Related Stories
[+]
U.of Oregon Says No to RIAA 241 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The University of Oregon has filed a motion to quash the RIAA's subpoena for information on student identities in what is believed to be the first such motion made by a university with support from the state Attorney General. The motion (pdf) explains that it is impossible to identify the alleged infringers from the information the RIAA has presented: 'Five of the seventeen John Does accessed the content in question from double occupancy dorm rooms at the University. With regard to these Does, the University is able to identify only the room where the content was accessed and whether or not the computer used was a Macintosh or a PC ... The University cannot determine whether the content in question accessed by one occupant as opposed to another, or whether it was accessed instead by a visitor.' The AG's motion further argues (pdf) that "Plaintiffs' subpoena is unduly burdensome and overbroad. It seeks information that the University does not readily possess. In order to attempt to comply with the subpoena, the University would be forced to undertake an investigation to create discovery for Plaintiffs — an obligation not imposed by Rule 45. As the University is unable to identify the alleged infringers with any accuracy, it cannot comply with its federal obligation to notify students potentially affected by the subpoena. One commentator has likened the AG's argument to saying, in effect, that the RIAA's evidence is 'rubbish'."
[+]
U.Maine Law Clinic Is First To Fight RIAA 129 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "'A student law clinic is about to cause a revolution' says p2pnet. For the first time in the history of the RIAA's ex parte litigation campaign against college students, a university law school's legal aid clinic has taken up the fight against the RIAA in defense of the university's students. Student attorneys at the University of Maine School of Law's Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic, under the supervision of law school prof Deirdre M. Smith, have moved to dismiss the RIAA's complaint in a Portland, Maine, case, Arista v. Does 1-27, on behalf of two University of Maine undergrads. Their recently filed reply brief (PDF) points to the US Supreme Court decision in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, and the subsequent California decision following Twombly, Interscope v. Rodriguez, which dismissed the RIAA's 'making available' complaint as mere 'conclusory,' 'boilerplate' 'speculation.'"
[+]
Comparing the RIAA To "The Sopranos" 193 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "According to commentator Therese Polletti at Dow Jones MarketWatch, 'the RIAA's tactics are nearly as bad as the actions of mobsters, real or fictional. The analogy comes up easily and frequently in any discussion of the RIAA's maneuvers.' Among other things she cites the extortionate nature of their 'settlement negotiations' pointed out by Prof. Bob Talbot of the University of San Francisco School of Law IP Law Clinic. His student attorneys are helping private practitioners fight the RIAA, and the the illegality of the RIAA's use of unlicensed investigators. She goes on to cite the fact that the RIAA thinks nothing of jeopardizing a student's college education in order to make their point, as support for the MAFIAA/Mafia analogy."
[+]
Massive Increase in RIAA Copyright Notices 179 comments
According to Wired, universities in the US are experiencing a "20-fold increase" in the number of takedown notices from the RIAA in the last ten days. Indiana University reports 80 notices a day, but they say their traffic hasn't increased significantly over the same time period. It will be interesting to see if the affected schools join the legal battle against the RIAA, or cave under the increased pressure.
"University of California at Berkeley's chief information officer Shel Waggener confirmed he'd heard of the spikes and suggested there was a political purpose driving them. 'Public universities are in a unique position since the industry puts pressure on us through state legislatures to try to impose what are widely considered to be draconian content monitoring measures and turn us into tech police forces in support of a specific industry,' Waggener said. The RIAA is also backing legislation in states such as Illinois and Tennessee that would require schools that get a certain number of notices to begin installing deep packet monitoring equipment on their internet and intranets, according to Luker."
[+]
News: New Hampshire Law Students Take On RIAA 148 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "We have recently learned that another law school legal aid clinic has joined the fight against the RIAA. Student attorneys from the Consumer and Commercial Law Clinic
of the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, New Hampshire, working under law school faculty supervision, are representing
a lady targeted by the RIAA in UMG Recording v. Roy in New Hampshire. The case is scheduled for trial next Fall. That makes at least 4 law schools providing anti-RIAA defense services: University of Maine,
University of San Francisco, Franklin Pierce, and, most recently, Harvard. Hopefully many
more will follow. One commentator theorizes that this news 'will ... [encourage] professors and students at other law schools to take on hitherto defenseless people being pilloried by the corporate music industry.'"
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.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Get your own blog! (Score:5, Funny)
Come on, NewYorkCountryLawyer, Slashdot isn't your personal outlet! Get your own blog.
Maybe something like http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Just saying...
Re:Get your own blog! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Get your own blog! (Score:4, Insightful)
If you care about Your Rights Online, I think both his stories and his comments are to the point and well written and at least HIAL. If you don't care about your rights online, you can choose not to see that section in your preferences.
NewYorkCountryLawyer, keep up the good work!
Parent
Re:Get your own blog! (Score:5, Informative)
Wow you missed the sarcasm and the joke.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] IS run by Ray Beckerman. I'm a big fan of his, and his contributions to Slashdot. That post my subtle way of directing people to another source of information.
Parent
Are they just lazy? (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess what I'm asking is, are they just lazy or just stupid?
Answer: (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Are they just lazy? (Score:5, Insightful)
They represent the Big Four music producers, and are only answerable to them
That is the problem - They have no Copyright (of their own) to defend, they have no customers to care about....
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That is the problem - They have no Copyright (of their own) to defend, they have no customers to care about....
The big four that they represent own the copyrights. The Corporate Owned Congress made musical recordings "works for hire" granting copyright to the record company, not the people who actualkly perform the music.
As Lynard Skynard said,
Want you to sign the contract
Want you to sign today
Gonna make lots of money
Workin' fo
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Also to be convicted of selling or distributing copywritten material, you typically have to a) charge for it and b) prove that you actually distributed it. But the RIAA is trying to say just "making it available" is the same. This isn't supported in case law (yet...).
I just can't wait until someone hits them with something like RICO.
Why Software Should Not Have Owners (Score:3, Interesting)
Digital information technology contributes to the world by making it easier to copy and modify information. Computers promise to make this easier for all of us.
Not everyone wants it to be easier. The system of copyright gives software programs "owners", most of whom aim to withhold software's potential benefit from the rest of the public. They would like to be the only ones who can copy and modify the software that we use.
The copyright system grew up with printing-
Quote of the moment (Score:5, Insightful)
Would be great if this is the children that have been sued bankrupt for musicdownloads that finally (in time) sues the MAFIAA out of business. But being pesimi... erh, I mean, realistic, I'm not going to hold my breath...
Cautionary Note (Score:4, Funny)
When you find a new super weapon and decide to use it to help the people, it almost always backfires.
We are cheering the fact that MORE lawyers are being created.
What will happen when they finish with the RIAA?
"It won't stop at anything, and it will never stop hunting you until you are dead."
Best practical project ever. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actual cases with a lot of what every defence lawyer is looking for: Suspense, Lying, Cheating, Inexpert Witnesses, Corporate Greed, Perjury, Farfetched application of laws...
This would be great. You could probably make a TV series out of it even!
(Okay okay.. Some of this is tongue in cheeck, but the basic premise is obvious: This is great material for law students to study and participate in. They get a real life example of how screwed up and convoluted cases can get)
And maybe, just maybe this'll breed a generation of lawyers not hellbent on making Escheresque pictures out of the law.
Double Standards (Score:3, Interesting)
Honestly speaking RIAA and MPAA are not loosing anything near what they claim.
What happens now? (Score:4, Insightful)
How it ends does not matter so much (Score:4, Interesting)
It is, in some way, perhaps the beginnings of the fight against the corporate control of America. It is definitely a fight against IP and copyright run amok, as well as shady lawyer tactics. It's not clear cut when looking at only one case but if you look at the situation on the whole, the RIAA still needs to get some wins in court somewhere. Add to this what is happening to MS and others in the EU with regard to their business practices a picture begins to form about the general state of play in courtrooms around the globe. In Russia schools are moving to F/OSS because of legal action. The EU lobbed a 1.3Billion Dollar fine against MS. US law students are fighting against the **AA. Of course that is only a few of the cases. The big picture is that the fight against software IP, extended copyright laws, and bad corporate tactics is taking shape one case at a time.
Parent
Law Clinic? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:you are going to lose (Score:5, Interesting)
It doesn't expire. The DMCA is unConstitutional on its face. The RIAA are trying to enforce an illegal law. Enforced by a corrupt judicial system.
Parent
Re:you are going to lose (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually it's about the methods the RIAA is using. It's very important to do everything possible to prevent this sort of thing being seen as okay, or even normal, "so long as they're catching the bad guys". Just like it's not generally considered okay for the police to break the law in order to make an arrest, no matter how bad the guy they're arresting is, because it sets precedents of "acceptable behaviour" that are ultimately far more detrimental to society than the acts of even lots of individual bad guys.
Same deal here. If the RIAA can use these sorts of tactics with impunity, then so can everyone else with enough money. Even though some - indeed, probably almost all - of the people being sued did infringe on someone's copyrights, the harm they did pales in comparison to the harm these kind of abuses of the law would do to society if they became (even more) widespread.
It's not just the RIAA, but the fact that it's hard to show actual harm or even deprivation of income from copyright infringement seems to make this a more morally appealing battlefront than others.
Parent
Re:good for the proto-lawyers! (Score:4, Interesting)
Which "sacred human rights" you're talking about that the government is violating (which I presume to mean "is violating unconstitutionally")?
The constitution, albeit a fine document, is not the be-all and end-all of human rights; not least because it is somewhat limited in the people to whom it applies. While I will freely admit that the US gov. has a positively sparkling human rights record compared to some, I note that the country is still not party to, for example, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights [wikipedia.org] among others.
Apologies for being somewhat OT here, but the difference between human rights law in general and the US constitution is an important one and I think it important not to blur the difference.
Parent
Re:good for the proto-lawyers! (Score:4, Insightful)
That's a good thing, since none of the items listed in that covenant are actual human rights. There's a simple litmus test for whether a proposed "right" is reasonable: can you exercise the "right" in the absence of other human beings to exploit? In this case the answer is clearly "no"; their so-called "rights" cannot be exercised except by making one or more other people worse off than they would be otherwise.
Parent
Re:good for the proto-lawyers! (Score:5, Informative)
Apologies for being somewhat OT here, but the difference between human rights law in general and the US constitution is an important one and I think it important not to blur the difference.
Parent
Re:Future scaping? (Score:5, Insightful)
Back in the seventies, we young people all smoked pot. Now that my genertation's rich people have taken over from the last generation's rich people, is it legal? Hell no, the assshats running things all deny ever having touched the stuff. Well, one famous asshat former doper claims he tried it once but never inhaled, as if he were talking to a nation of idiots. Well maybe he was.
But at any rate, I think when you in your twenties now are my age, your generation's rich people that become lawmakers are no more going to restore copyright to reasonable terms and legalize noncommercial copying than my generation's rich people that became lawmakers legalized the marijuana that nearly every single one of them broke the law smoking in the seventies.
Parent