Privacy Ruling goes against Verizon - DMCA

[Chadder007]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33972-2003Apr24.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33972-2003Apr24.html

Verizon Corp. must reveal the identities of two high-speed Internet subscribers accused of illegally trading music online, a federal judge ruled today.

U.S. District Court Judge John Bates denied Verizon's request for a stay of his January ruling ordering the company to turn over the name of one of the subscribers to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). Bates said that Verizon has 14 days to convince a federal appeals court to grant a stay of his ruling.

 

[eplebnista]

:disgust:

 

[Spac3d]

Originally posted by: eplebnista
:disgust:

 

[Mr N8]

I have a feeling that they are doing this to scare off the users who are still wondering if they will be caught. That being said, it still is a big step into privacy, which makes me extremely uncomfortable.

 

[Pepsi90919]

i commend verizon for their efforts in trying to combat this.

 

[Fausto]

Originally posted by: Pepsi90919
i commend verizon for their efforts in trying to combat this.

Go you.

 

[astartz]

If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

This is kind of the same thing. Download copyrighted software is illegeal. I am no fan of the music industry but stealing is stealing.

 

[Dedpuhl]

Originally posted by: astartz
If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

This is kind of the same thing. Download copyrighted software is illegeal. I am no fan of the music industry but stealing is stealing.

I don't think it's the same thing.

I'm not going to defend the downloading of MP3s, but I do think the RIAA is approaching this the wrong way...

 

[everman]

Originally posted by: astartz
If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

Actually this would be as if the police arrested anyone who didn't cooperate by telling them everything they know.

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: eplebnista
:disgust:

:Q

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: everman

Originally posted by: astartz
If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

Actually this would be as if the police arrested anyone who didn't cooperate by telling them everything they know.

Actually its like being compelled to testify in a court under subpoena.

But yes, it is also a crime to obstruct or hinder a police investigation by refusing to cooperate with police.

 

[astartz]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: everman

Originally posted by: astartz
If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

Actually this would be as if the police arrested anyone who didn't cooperate by telling them everything they know.

Actually its like being compelled to testify in a court under subpoena.

But yes, it is also a crime to obstruct or hinder a police investigation by refusing to cooperate with police.

Bingo.

If you break the law tuff luck.
If everyone who downloads music started a Political Action Committee they would be able to make major changes to the copyright laws.

 

[bentwookie]

I have a theory that people downloading this stuff wouldn't buy the cd anyway...maybe 10% would if they couldn't download it.

I remember there was a site that let you make your own cds..basically pick the songs then they sent you a cd...I don't remember if they were mp3's or not but that seemed like a solution if they were hq.

 

[Zee]

Originally posted by: guyver01

Originally posted by: eplebnista
:disgust:

:Q

:frown:

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: everman

Originally posted by: astartz
If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

Actually this would be as if the police arrested anyone who didn't cooperate by telling them everything they know.

Actually its like being compelled to testify in a court under subpoena.

But yes, it is also a crime to obstruct or hinder a police investigation by refusing to cooperate with police.

afaik its not a police investigation, its the RIAA practicing vigilante justice

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: Zeero

Originally posted by: guyver01

Originally posted by: eplebnista
:disgust:

:Q

:frown:

 

[tcsenter]

afaik its not a police investigation, its the RIAA practicing vigilante justice

Well that would be partially correct, it isn't like a police investigation, as I already noted once already.

Again, in case you missed it the first time:

"Actually its like being compelled to testify in a court under subpoena."

Or, if you prefer, being compelled to produce documents under a discovery subpoena. Either one is a perfect parallel.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: everman

Originally posted by: astartz
If some one stole a cd from a store and than ran into a office. The police will ask the people in the office where the people went.

Actually this would be as if the police arrested anyone who didn't cooperate by telling them everything they know.

Actually its like being compelled to testify in a court under subpoena.

But yes, it is also a crime to obstruct or hinder a police investigation by refusing to cooperate with police.

but it's not a police issue, the RIAA gets the names of the users then takes them to civil court.
This is a big step backwards, IMO. Private companies(RIAA) shouldn't have the right to any of my data that i don't want them to have. regardless or not if i DL mp3 or not. The RIAA is only fueling the fire of online PIRACY because everyone that dl's stuff is going to give the RIAA the finger, thus compeling them to DL more and more content.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

afaik its not a police investigation, its the RIAA practicing vigilante justice

Well that would be partially correct, it isn't like a police investigation, as I already noted once already.

Again, in case you missed it the first time:

"Actually its like being compelled to testify in a court under subpoena."

Or, if you prefer, being compelled to produce documents under a discovery subpoena. Either one is a perfect parallel.

oh, right, i thought with the police comment in your second line you were continuing with the criminal investigation line. my bad

 

[LongCoolMother]

:|

looks like we're going to have to start using transparent proxies. and anonymous emails.

 

[astartz]

but it's not a police issue, the RIAA gets the names of the users then takes them to civil court.
This is a big step backwards, IMO. Private companies(RIAA) shouldn't have the right to any of my data that i don't want them to have. regardless or not if i DL mp3 or not. The RIAA is only fueling the fire of online PIRACY because everyone that dl's stuff is going to give the RIAA the finger, thus compeling them to DL more and more content.

So if you steal from a company they should not find out who you are? What is I shoplifted a CD from Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart is going to find out who I am.


astartz

 

[spyordie007]

I agree with parts of this and I disagree with others, for example if there was someone who was using their home internet connection to host child pornography I would expect the FBI to be able to get a subpoena in order to prosocute.

"It's virtually unprecedented in U.S. law that someone can use a form to find out your identity without any judicial process."

I dont like that the DMCA is supposed to allow a private organization (the RIAA) to pry into another companies business (in the case Verizon) without following normal legal channels.

-Spy

 

[brxndxn]

There's a lot of us here that don't believe that downloading mp3s is stealing. The RIAA never actually made the mp3.. So what exactly am I stealing from them?

There's also a lot of music artists, like Offspring, that support downloading of their songs.

Just because a music company says something is illegal does not make it illegal. If anything, I believe the RIAA is doing illegal activity by continuous price fixing, unfair contracts with artists, monopolizing (oligopolizing to be more exact) music, and buying out politicians as part of their money-making strategy.

Sorry, but I don't think the RIAA gets to have any control over what I do with something after I buy it. They don't get to dictate laws.

Also, screw them. No consumer should ever put up with a company that continuously insults their biggest customers. Their biggest money-making demographic is also the biggest piracy demographic.

I salute Verizon. More companies should fight for privacy like they are. The DMCA is downright unjust and wrong. The DMCA was bought by the RIAA and MPAA. It only screws the consumer; it never can help them. I only hope that Verizon can fight this all the way to the Supreme Court and help to get the DMCA ripped out of US Law.

To me, the RIAA is just an outdated business model. They have failed to adapt. They have offended all of their customers.. artists and consumers. They have corrupted the US lawmaking process. They deserve to be phased out.

Music was meant to be free. I'd rather be able to just donate to an artist. Why should a consumer ever finance those fighting against him by buying from them?

 

[LongCoolMother]

yea!! even tech n9ne says his albums are free to download. everyone go here and rea this!!

http://www.therealtechn9ne.com/asp2/fti.asp

 

[Bleep]

Music was meant to be free. I'd rather be able to just donate to an artist. Why should a consumer ever finance those fighting against him by buying from them

You will have to make up your mind here, is or is not Music a product, if it is not a product just what is it? It is a fruit of someones labor and effort. First you say you just want to donate to the artist that makes the artist unable to put a value on his/her work, have you ever sent anything to any artist or group that you have downloaded in MP3 format to compensate them for there product?

As to those that compare downloading music comparing it to stealing from Wallmart, it is not comparable because when you steal from Wallmart you have stolen a tangeble object and once you have stolen it they no longer have it. When you steal music by downloading it the owner of the music still has the music. They cannot be compared in this way.

Bleep