Friday, April 17, 2009

SUNY Albany student moves to extend stay in 2nd Circuit Appeal in Arista v. Does 1-16

In Arist Records v. Does 1-16, a case against students at the State University of New York in Albany, John Doe #3 has moved to extend the stay previously granted by the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit.

Defendant's motion to extend stay

Keywords: lawyer 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


Anonymous said...

With First Amendment issues of anonymity, wouldn’t it be a good idea to demand to see the data gathered by MediaSentry prior to it being gleaned by the RIAA, and the investigative methods in question before any information about any of the Does is released by the University? Shouldn’t the courts demand a higher standard than simply a declaration from a third party (RIAA) about an investigation conducted by another third party (MeidaSentry) that is no longer in the services of the plaintiffs? An investigation conducted by a company that has had its credibility brought into question on several occasions, and who claims to use proprietary software during it’s secrete investigation? With the RIAA ‘s tendency to stretch the truth, it may not be a bad idea to demand that all the evidence that was gathered be produced, prior to the release of the student’s names, rather than producing a simple exhibit “A”. It has been my belief that the investigations go far beyond the shared folders, and may also seep into the depths of the computer hard drives in question. Oh, BTW, the Plaintiffs in LaFace v Does 1-5 claimed that they gathered information from "Cyberspace", while in Sony v. Tenenbaum, , MediaSentry's Declaration of Elizabeth Hardwich claim to access the computer hard drive. Does the First Amendment provide any protection when the Plaintiffs Boilerplate is essentially the same, but their stories contradict each other?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous #1:

Many people believe the courts should make the RIAA step up to the legal plate properly, and some courts have done very encouraging things, such as the judge in Jammie Thomas's case who threw out the case when he found out his jury instructions were faulty.

As for the First Amendment, I can't see how it's a big help here. There are, generally speaking, rules and consequences for saying contrary things in two different courts, but those rules aren't First Amendment rules.