25-04-2003 15:12									#1
	NAME THE DOWNLOADERS: Privacy Ruling Goes Against Verizon... Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Privacy Ruling Goes Against Verizon Permission to Republish By David McGuire washingtonpost.com Staff Writer Thursday, April 24, 2003; 6:10 PM Verizon Corp. must reveal the identities of two high-speed Internet subscribers accused of illegally trading music online, a federal judge ruled today. U.S. District Court Judge John Bates denied Verizon's request for a stay of his January ruling ordering the company to turn over the name of one of the subscribers to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). Bates said that Verizon has 14 days to convince a federal appeals court to grant a stay of his ruling. If Bates's ruling ultimately stands, it would give the recording industry and copyright owners a powerful weapon to stop the illegal trading of copyrighted files that they say eats away at their revenues. The RIAA, many musicians and other copyright holders have argued that the increase in file-sharing during the past several years has seriously eroded music sales. Verizon had argued that turning over subscribers' names would violate their constitutional right to privacy. The RIAA cited the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act -- or DMCA -- in its legal effort to force Verizon to reveal the names. The DMCA gives movie studios, record companies, software makers and other copyright owners the right to subpoena Internet service providers without getting a judge's approval. Verizon originally argued that it is unfair for the music industry to be allowed to obtain subpoenas without judicial approval, but Bates threw out that argument in a January ruling. Verizon then turned to its argument that the DMCA is unconstitutional. RIAA President Cary Sherman praised the ruling today in a written statement. "If users of pirate peer-to-peer sites don't want to be identified, they should not break the law by illegally distributing music," Sherman said. "Today's decision makes clear that these individuals cannot rely on their ISPs to shield them from accountability." Verizon will appeal the ruling, said Associate General Counsel Sara Deutsch. "The case is not over and we intend to immediately appeal the decision and seek a stay in the U.S. Court of Appeals," she said. "It's virtually unprecedented in U.S. law that someone can use a form to find out your identity without any judicial process."

What do you think? Is the law unconstitutional?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2003Apr24.html

Thanks to Drudge for the link.

	25-04-2003 15:21									#2
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

It seems like RIAA makes the laws for them against the people instead of people making laws against RIAA.

	25-04-2003 15:57									#3
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Looks like this is the touchstone case that will either make or break DMCA.

	25-04-2003 16:13									#4
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The Infinite is impossible and the unattainable is unknown with the DMCA.

www.zombo.com

	25-04-2003 17:44									#5
	Tired of ads?

Like I said, the RIAA must have some motive to push file-sharing back to IRC channels....

	25-04-2003 18:00									#6
	Got spare money?

RIAA just wants to swing it's virtual dick.

	25-04-2003 18:53									#7
	Full PM-box? Change here!

This is bad news. The legal standard set forth in the DCMA for getting subscriber information is much lower than the standard that the police have to follow to search your home; basically a form that can be signed by a court clerk as opposed to a full warrant that must be judicially reviewed. So it doesn't matter if you're breaking the law or not, it doesn't matter if the RIAA (or any other copyright holder) has any evidence or not, if they merely think you might be doing something they don't like, *zip* off to your ISP they go, and according to this latest head-up-his-ass judge, your ISP has no choice but to comply. I could easily see this extended to an order forcing the ISP to shut off your service until RIAA determines your "guilt" or "innocence" in their eyes .

If RIAA can see this through and get the precedent set, that could be the ball game .

	25-04-2003 20:05									#8
	Get a bigger avatar today!

It's not unconstitutional, whether people like it or not. Using the your computer is a private activity, connecting to your own network is a private activity, but connecting to public networks is not.

Even when an activity is private, there is no privilege to violate any law in such activity.

	25-04-2003 21:43									#9
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

i'm praying for some kind of loophole........ come on verizon, don't fail me now