Saturday, April 19, 2008

Subpoena response by University of Arizona in LaFace v. Does 1-14 casts doubt on RIAA methods

In LaFace v. Does 1-14, the University of Arizona has responded to the RIAA's subpoena, but its response describes in detail why the subpoena response cannot be relied upon to identify any alleged infringer.

[Ed. note. If the RIAA relies upon that response in order to sue the individuals named in it, that would appear to be a flagrant Rule 11 violation. -R.B.]

University of Arizona subpoena response*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

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


Scott said...

"If the RIAA relies upon that response in order to sue the individuals named in it, that would appear to be a flagrant Rule 11 violation."

But of the dozens of cases tracked in RIVTP, we have not yet seen any attorney sanctioned for Rule 11 violations. The courts always give the offending attorney the benefit of the doubt. Apparently such violations don't amount to a warm bucket of spit to the courts.

On the other hand, the technical issues raised in the subpoena response are HUGE and should be very useful in responding to the "detected a user" nonsense that the RIAA is trying to peddle.

Anonymous said...

Since the RIAA has yet to be severely sanctioned EVEN ONCE under Rule 11, I doubt this will slow them down for even a moment.

It might strengthen the arguments against them that they don't have probably cause to file the individual cases afterwards, but that only works against the people who actually choose to fight - which is a disappointingly small number. Every everybody threatened put up even token resistance, the RIAA litigation machine would be overwhelmed.

Ray, maybe you could provide a service by putting up boilerplate or prototype pro se responses for defendants to consider using at small initial cost to them. In some cases the RIAA has cut and run from seemingly little initial resistance.

And if you can't do it for some reason, perhaps someone else can.


raybeckerman said...

Dear anonymous DM. Are you trying to get me in trouble, or what?

Reluctant Raconteur said...

I don't see why the caveats by UA will make any difference to the RIAA pursuing cases against these students. The RIAA has never hesitated in bringing suits based on the most peripheral evidence. The names just give them an entry point to track down people. Got to name names. The House Committee on Un-American Activities is the blueprint for their operations.