Monday, August 18, 2008

University of Michgan student files followup letter pointing out inconsistencies in MediaSentry's "defenses"

That pesky University of Michigan "John Doe" student, known only as "Case number 162983070", who filed a complaint against MediaSentry with Michigan's Department of Labor and Economic Growth, has now filed a followup letter responding to MediaSentry's March 17th response to the DLEG investigation, pointing out some of its inconsistencies and misstatements.

Case number 162983070, August 14, 2008, followup letter

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 portable music player


Scott said...

IANAL, so I am wondering: What is the definitional difference between "misstatements" and lies? Is it intent?

Justin Olbrantz (Quantam) said...

Just finished reading it. Smells like ownage.

Anonymous said...

Media Sentry doesn't identify computers. They identify IP addresses. They may claim they identify computers, but they don't any more than they identify individuals.

An Investigator is not an Expert Witness, no matter how much Media Sentry wishes to confuse those two issues. Perhaps they believe that it is their program that does the actual investigating, and they are only Expert Witnesses to explain what it does afterwards.

Is the RIAA who hired Media Sentry "an attorney"? Common sense would say no. They're an industry organization.

Also are any attorneys working for the RIAA licensed to practice in the state in question here? If they are, it's not evident.

It seems unlikely that the state law regarding licensing of private investigators would make such a broad exception that an out-of-state attorney could turn anybody into one simply by hiring them to do work for them.

Examining Media Sentry's credentials "at trial" is a farce. There shouldn't be any trial in the first place based on any "investigation" from the unlicensed, untested, unproven, unverified, and un-American Media Sentry.


Igor said...

I agree with justin, though proof reading it wouldn't have hurt. A few places with glaring typos and one place where he cuts and pastes the same thing twice rather than different safenet argument.