The pending motions in Lava v. Amurao, relating to such issues as (a) the defendant's right to take a deposition of Matthew Oppenheim and (b) MediaSentry's criminality in procuring the RIAA's "evidence", will be argued on Friday, April 11th, at 11:00 A.M., in the Federal Courthouse in White Plains, New York, at 300 Quarropas Street, before Judge Charles L. Brieant, in Courtroom 275.
The proceedings are open to the public.
Commentary & discussion:
Keywords: digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property
1 comment:
If MediaSentry is ever deposed, one should require them to disclose ALL IP addresses they've used in their investigations and any other work for the RIAA.
They will probably fight this on the basis that if you knew which IP addresses they were using, they could easily be blocked. Also, they might not want to admit that they've been using IP addresses that they're not entitled to use as an attempt to evade block lists. This might even be illegal activity on their part. (Note: the Media Defender e-mail leak, which is not MS but operates in a similar manner, admits to using unallocated IP addresses in this manner, which is completely illegal of them to have done so.)
Do not let them evade, not answer, pretend that the data is lost, or that it doesn't matter. The rationale for needing this answer is that logs may exist that show which IP addresses ever connected to the defendant's computer. If such logs do exist, and the IP addresses that MediaSentry is forced to disclose under great pain and whining aren't in those logs, it would be a powerful argument that MediaSentry never identified the computer in question.
This whole manner of this form of investigation is like Making Sausage. The more you dig into it, the more distasteful it reveals itself to be.
XK-E
Post a Comment