The Recording Industry Association of America is a rotten group that has descended to increasingly dirty tactics and politicking in order to get its way regarding copyright and how it's wielded. Recently, a woman they were suing for alleged copyright infringement (the definition of which they're very liberal with) filed a counterclaim against them because they'd used illegal means to dig up information on her--investigative groups who weren't licensed to operate in the state of Texas, where she lives. She claims the RIAA knew very well that this group wasn't licensed, and considering how they dropped the case against her like a hot potato, she may very well have been right.
The RIAA gets an alarmingly free hand with doing things that probably aren't legal, because frankly they have a great deal of pull in Congress and they've been freely manipulating the legal system in order to get their way. They've been pressing a number of alarming bills through Congress, some of which have passed and others of which have been defeated--there's a lot of technological lobbying going on on Capitol Hill lately. Their sibling associations in other countries are trying to throw similar fits, but most other nations aren't interested in listening...and Norway threw out a case after warning them that trying to pursue such an avenue again would not only be unwelcome, but might very well be deemed unconstitutional.
See, here's how the RIAA operates. There's a legal term known as 'ex parte.' What it translates to is a plaintiff filing a case against someone without the defendant having any representation in court. Traditionally, it is an extremely rare method--of course, since our legal system generally depends on both parties having their say. But in certain cases--most often, when they're not sure of the defendant's actual identity--it's not really feasible for the defendant to have representation at the time the case is brought, so the plaintiff is allowed to go ahead and file, and the defendant can get in on the action later.
The RIAA brings an ex parte case against 'unidentified persons' using a given service provider: say, AOL out in Denver. Then, having a legally recognized case, they proceed to use that as leverage to gain access to confidential data, such as forcing AOL in Denver to turn over its records on its customers. The RIAA then uses that data to identify persons they wish to bring charges against, drops the ex parte case, and files individually against any of those people they think they can nail for copyright infringement. The problem is, the RIAA is an organization, and they might be carrying this out in, say, Atlanta, while the defendants out in Denver don't even have a clue what's going on till they get the notice of legal action, at which point they're stuck trying to find away to dig up legal defense in a city halfway across the country...and for charges the RIAA in some cases more or less makes up on the spot, because they keep trying to push the limits of what they can get declared as a copyright infringement. For example, while last year, their lawyers stated in court that ripping mp3s for personal use (though not for trade) was legal, now they're saying that ripping mp3s in some cases may not be.
You might say, "Well, but those people are probably doing something illegal," but this is playing the system. It's taking advantage of people--parents of 14 year old kids have found themselves suddenly besieged with $500,000 lawsuits--and worse, it's violating the privacy of private citizens, many of whom aren't doing anything wrong.
And now the RIAA is very unhappy indeed, because the state Attorney General of Oregon has apparently had enough, and has declared that he wants immediate discovery of the RIAA's investigative tactics since the RIAA tried to push its luck with the University of Oregon. This particular Attorney General doesn't seem to be best pleased with the methods the RIAA uses, and feels that if there's no one in court to represent the ex parte defendants, then it's the legal system's job. The RIAA, in turn, is requesting that the resulting document be thrown out of the case against the university students and not even read by the judge. Makes you wonder what they're up to, doesn't it?
No comments:
Post a Comment