Wednesday, April 25, 2007

RIAA Goes Into Court "Ex Parte" in Denver, Colorado, Tries to Get Ruling that it Doesn't Need Court Order to Get Subscriber Info from ISP's

We have just learned that the RIAA made an ex parte application to a district court in Denver, Colorado -- where the RIAA's lawyers are located -- asking the Judge to rule that no court order is needed in order for an ISP to turn over confidential subscriber information to the RIAA.

An ex parte application is an application made where no other parties are given notice that the application is being made.

The magistrate judge declined to rule on that issue, but issued the ex parte order the RIAA was asking for.

The name of the case is Arista v. Does 1-9, Civil Action No. 07-cv-00628-EWN-MEH, District Court of Colorado.

Order dated April 4, 2007*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:



Keywords: digital copyright online download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs


Scott said...

Denver is Qwest's home also. I hope they have the business sense to put up a vigorous fight. After all, consumers in all of their markets have other options for phone and internet service.

Alter_Fritz said...

OK we know already that NewYork is not Denver ;-)

but is law in Denver also not the same as law in Texas where judges said this rounding up of unrelated doe defendants is against the FRCP!

I thought the F in FRCP stands for Federal?

Incompetence of this denver judge?
Plays he golf with "RIAA-Richard"?

Or is this rounding up more then 1 person all totally legitimate under your laws and I just again confuse something?

Jadeic said...

My gast is flabbered! What cunning stunts the RIAA have...

On a point of ignorance - is it possible that there is a time line in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by which, if the RIAA allow a judicious period to pass before serving this order on Qwest, it may be unable to 'move to quash the subpoena if it deems
appropriate' as it surely must?

Igor said...

"Any information disclosed to Plaintiffs in response to the subpoena may be
used by the Plaintiffs solely for the purpose of protecting Plaintiffs’ rights
under the Copyright Act, as set forth in the Complaint"

Does the Settlement Support Center qualify as protecting plaintiff's rights? Can't one make an argument that by not filing the law suit and going straight to the center they are violating that since the center does nothing to protect their rights but only to extort money.

I may not have articulated this clearly, but for the lawyers out there (and Ray) is there something to what I'm saying?

AMD FanBoi said...

Looks like joined Does again to me. Can't someone hit this judge with a cluestick about improper joinder that already has precedent in another court?

StephenH said...

I wish they would have followed the orders of Priority Records v Does 1-7, which delays the ISP supeona of info 21 days and allow the persons to have a chance to quash if they want to contest.

Scott said...

amd_fanboi: I remember that too, was info on the improper joinder precedent posted in this blog earlier? A link to it might be helpful to Qwest's lawyers. If I have some time to screw around at work today I'll search for it and post a link, assuming Ray will let me. The RIAA has to stop blowing off court orders.

raybeckerman said...

Fonovisa v. Does 1-41 (Austin, TX)

raybeckerman said...

Qwest wasn't even served with the papers. It was an ex parte application.

I do hope they make a motion to vacate the ex parte order, but know nothing about Qwest's leadership.

For all I know it might be affiliated with one of the RIAA cartel members.

Scott said...

Qwest allies with the RIAA? Anything is possible, but I think it would be stupid for Qwest to be carrying the RIAA's water. They're not the most robust of the old "baby Bells"; and there are competitors in almost every market for every service they offer. Subjecting their subscribers to gratuitous abuse by providing the RIAA with tenuous "evidence" won't go over well in the Rocky Mountain region, whose residents have a mean anti-authoritarian streak. The corrosive ripple effect on its corporate image would be big enough so that Qwest, if it were prudent, would have to weigh the negative impact of passive cooperation.

But that's a big "if." Judging from their analyst ratings, Wall Street does not have a high opinion of Qwest management.