Santa Cruz University Fights Back at RIAA
Written by Ben Jones on October 09, 2008The RIAA sends out pre-settlement letters and lawsuits to all manner of students accused of file-sharing across the US. Some schools, as we’ve covered in our Tackling College Piracy series, have capitulated. Others, like University of California Santa Cruz, have fought back.
The RIAA has sent a number of John Doe lawsuits to court targeting a wide range of universities and individuals. over 17,000 have been confirmed, but some estimate the real number to be around 30,000. While most lawsuits are set to random, everyday people, a significant percentage have been specifically targeting college students.
It’s no secret that universities are an easier target than commercial ISPs. To universities, Internet connections are a bonus, not their main income source. They also have a wide range of topics to deal with, not just Internet related issues. So, for a few thousand students, there may only be one or two people dealing with copyright infringement, as part of their duties. They may even be unaware of the law, often being IT people drafted to do legal work.
Some universities are fighting back, however, from University of Wisconsin schools refusing to pass on ‘pre litigation letters’ to its students, and now, interestingly, University Of California – Santa Cruz (UCSC) has put a spanner in the procedural works of the RIAA litigation machine. As explained best in the article published a few months ago by RIAA ‘nemesis’ Ray Beckerman, the John Doe lawsuits are often just a legal ploy to get names and addresses, prior to starting a new campaign, and pre-litigation settlement.
However, UCSC has successfully argued that under the law – specifically the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) – there are restrictions on the conditions for releasing student’s personal details, even in cases where there is a court subpoena. In this case (UMG Recordings v Doe), the court has ruled that the subpoena must have a ‘reply by’ date that is long enough to allow the university to notify the target of the subpoena, and their parents. This can give them the chance to get legal advice which can put them in a stronger position with the RIAA than getting a letter/demand out of the blue.
Of course this is not the first time the RIAA has had such a set back. In 2004 a similar case on the other side of the country, found that the University of Pennsylvania should send a notice to the accused John Doe targets, and give them the chance to quash the motion. If such a motion is not filed within 21 days, the identity is revealed, but if one is filed, the identity is kept hidden until it is dealt with. It would appear, though, that this is only applicable to the ‘Eastern District of Pennsylvania’ and not to the country as a whole.
It is not clear why the courts around the US do not give as much consideration to the accused as to the accuser in these cases, or why they don’t find it necessary to require a defendant to be notified about a case they are a defendant in. UCSC had to fight for what should be considered ‘bare minimum’. In a system where winning generally means having more evidence in your favor, excluding one side from participation means it will always go against them – is that really what the law is about?
Previously: DDoS Attacks Force Norbits to go Offline
Next: Court Deems Pirate Bay Block to be Illegal
27 Responses
FIGHT THE POWAH!!!!
Good for them. I’m glad that some school’s actually care about their students. These letters are extortion plain and simple. If you want us to get in contact with the accused students then we’re happy to do it, just don’t expect us to hand out their personal information. All schools should be this way with their students. Oh and Fuck the RIAA.
Power to the people!
Finally, someone seems to have grown a pair…
Bullies need to be confronted, and the bastards from the RIAA are no different except that… they are scumbags as well as bullies.
http://www.eZee.se
RIAA tactics are shameful.
btw where does torrent freak find the pictures! “mp3 police RIAA” lol
Just me, or does this cause massive file sharing? (a) the more who do it, the less chance of getting caught; and (b) get all you can while you can because it could dry up any moment.
I live there!
Why doesnt everyone jjust STOP buying ANYTHING that funds the stupid RIAA. Hit them where it HURTS, the pocket book. STOP buyins stupid CDs, stop renting stupid movies and STOOP paying satellite subscriptions and listening to radio! let them dry up!
Jiff
http://www.privacy.de.tc
i don’t do eny of that ;)
fuck yea, BANANA SLUGS FO LYFE!
Yay! I was wondering when someone was going to pull out FERPA and stick it up the MAFIAA’s ass.
slugs rule! this whole file sharing is a mess.
slugs rule!
this whole file sharing thing is a mess. they should be preventing the infastructure first
row row!
fight da powah!
fuck america.
Yay go slugs. Loving my alma mater hating the man. Of course its funny that they care about their students now. When I was there I watched the Chancellor order policemen to beat about 30 students with clubs. authority is pretty sweet…
It is quite well known that courts in the U.S. bend to lobby groups easily. Hopefully, however, there will such rulings as this.
Roze
http://www.28chan.org/ <- Anonymous bulletin board for disclosing news without risk
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH ;)
Unfortunately, the article isn’t accurate. There was no appearance at all by the university. No “fighting back”. It was a routine granting of an ex parte order. The judge just wrote a little decision spelling out that the subpoena had to give the university enough time to notify the students before it handed over their names and addresses.
Nothing on nothing, I’m sorry to report.
@17
I agree with the substance of your comment, but if the cited article is accurate I’d have to disagree in one particular. While UCSC may not have done much, it appears that the argument for time to notify was theirs (although the judge agreed). The way your comment is worded makes it sound as though the judge came up with the idea by himself.
FIGHT THE POWAH!!!!!!!!
Go Banana Slugs!
“RIAA tactics are shameful.”
————————————–
taking things that don’t belong to you is shameful.
@17: Roze, actually it isn’t the courts that bend to lobby groups but rather the government: they make the laws, the courts just argue the application of the laws.
In effect it amounts to the same end but it is an important distinction.
Just me, or does this cause massive file sharing? (a) the more who do it, the less chance of getting caught; and (b) get all you can while you can because it could dry up any moment.
http://www.torrentfly.org
filesharing forever fuck RIAA fags
This reminds me of the drug war that will never be won. Companies/government blah blah good luck controlling people that you have no intent on ever caring about or helping in any way. The people will eventually kill you ;0 It has happened before and with our shitty economy and government it is only a matter of time.
Go police yourself, I’m sure you are lacking in some area of your life.
abayinnnnn deluuu maniaccccc blogggg
8 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.