RIAA to halt lawsuits, cozy up to ISPs instead

[Sam Fisher]

At last, the music industry admits what we've known for years: That filing music-swapping lawsuits against teenagers, little old ladies, and corpses is a fool's errand (not to mention an expensive headache for the defendants). But don't worry—the RIAA has something new up its sleeves.The new strategy (as reported by the Wall Street Journal): If the music industry finds out that you're swapping music files online, it'll send an e-mail to your ISP (agreements have already hashed out agreements with "some" unnamed service providers, apparently), which will in turn forward the message to you—probably with a little "P.S." asking you to stop. [Update: CNET has a copy of the RIAA's form letter to ISPs.]

If you don't stop, well ... your service provider probably won't sue you, but it might slow down your broadband connection, or cut off your service altogether.

So, why has the RIAA changed the play? Well, maybe it's been looking at reports like this one from the NPD Group, which shows that U.S. CD sales continue to slide, while the number of tunes shared via P2P sites continues to increase, despite all the litigation.

And then there's the disastrous headlines, as the RIAA relentlessly tracked down and sued tens of thousands of alleged music pirates. Among them: Kids, octogenarians, and a few dead people.

Reaction to the news? Mixed. Engadget's headline reads (in part): "RIAA finds its soul," with the story noting that while the RIAA reserves the right to go after "heavy uploaders or repeat offenders ... it appears that single mothers are in the clear."

All Things Digital has a darker outlook, speculating that ISPs—which "care about the cost of moving lots of data around … [and] want to make money by selling, renting, or just offering up Hollywood's movies and TV shows to subscribers"—might be more than content to "cut off file-sharers … [or] simply [charge] heavy file-sharers a lot of money."

And here's another possibility, courtesy of yours truly: Say your ISP catches you sharing tunes via P2P. No problem—download away! But when you get your next cable bill, you'll find the itemized songs added to your monthly charge, kind of like an iTunes bill.

Call it the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" strategy.

P.S. Make no mistake—just because the RIAA has stopped filing new music-swapping lawsuits doesn't mean that it's dropped the existing ones, according to the Journal. Quite the contrary.

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/patterson/31678

 

[Sam Fisher]

VIA EMAIL
*ISP*
*Date*


Sir or Madam:

I am contacting you on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America, Inc. (RIAA) and its member music companies. The RIAA is a trade association whose member companies create, manufacture, and distribute approximately ninety (90) percent of all legitimate music sold in the United States.

We believe a user on your network is offering an infringing sound recording for download through a peer to peer application. We have attached below the details of the infringing activity.

We have a good faith belief that this activity is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. We are asking for your immediate assistance in stopping this illegal activity. Specifically, we respectfully request that you remove or disable access to the unauthorized music.

We believe it is in everyone's interest for music consumers to be better educated about the copyright law and ways to legally enjoy music online. The major record companies have actively licensed their music to dozens of innovative services where fans can go to listen to and/or purchase their favorite songs. A list of many of these services is available at www.musicunited.org.

It should be made clear by this letter that downloading and distributing copyrighted songs via peer to peer networks is not an anonymous activity. Not only is distributing copyrighted works on a peer to peer network a public activity visible by other users on that network, an historic 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirmed the unmistakable unlawfulness of uploading and downloading copyrighted works. The website www.musicunited.org contains valuable information about what is legal and what is not when it comes to copying music. In addition to taking steps to notify the network user at issue about the illegal nature of his/her activity, we strongly encourage you to refer him/her to this helpful site.

Please bear in mind that this letter serves as an official notice to you that this network user may be liable for the illegal activity occurring on your network. This letter does not constitute a waiver of our members' rights to recover or claim relief for damages incurred by this illegal activity, nor does it waive the right to bring legal action against the user at issue for engaging in music theft. We assert that the information in this notice is accurate, based upon the data available to us. Under penalty of perjury, we submit that the RIAA is authorized to act on behalf of its member companies in matters involving the infringement of their sound recordings, including enforcing their copyrights and common law rights on the Internet.

Thank you in advance for your prompt assistance in this matter. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me via e-mail at [email protected], via telephone at *Phone Number*, or via mail at RIAA, 1025 F Street, NW, 10th Floor, Washington, D.C., 20004. Please reference *Case ID* in any response or communication regarding this matter.

Sincerely,

RIAA

List of infringing content
------------------------------
*Infringing Content*
-------------------------
INFRINGEMENT DETAIL
-------------------
Infringing Work : XXXXXX
Filename : XXXXXX
First found (UTC): XXXXXX
Last found (UTC): XXXXXX
Filesize : XXXXXX
IP Address: XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX
IP Port: XXXXX
Network: XXXXXX
Protocol: XXXXXX

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10127050-93.html

 

[Joker]

They've already been doing this for a while. I know a few people who've gotten letters saying "stop illegally downloading things please" from their ISPs.

 

[Majic Walrus]

Yeah. I've got two comments really.

Oh noes! What happens if you keep doing this and then you can't get access anywhere because you've been banned from so many ISPs. Here's an idea: Stop illegally downloading music.

I firmly feel that music downloads should be free and I love p2p sharing of files. Passing on that copyrighted art like the true artistic rebels we all love. I feel just like ****ing V (for Vendetta) when I download that **** and the RIAA wants to hold it away from me. But I show them by downloading the latest copy of my favorite artists music...

Wait you see what I just did there? I managed to totally screw over the people who are of like mind, the artist. **** the RIAA they're total *******s, but your favorite musician or studio or actor or movie is't a total *******. Don't take your rebelious frustration out on them.

Also I just want to say that if this shocks you in someway you're too naive to be on the internet. Art is a business like anything else and the RIAA is just protecting it's interests in the most effective way. If you went to a museum and stole a Monet they'd probably chase your ass down too. If the easiest way to do that is to talk to your landlord and let him know what's going on then that's what they'll do.

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

I bet RIAA has spent more money litigating file sharers and just now realized it.

 

[jaguarr]

Another good article on this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/19/AR2008121902930.html

RIAA's New Piracy Plan Poses a New Set of Problems
The RIAA is backing down from consumer copyright infringement lawsuits, but consumers should still be concerned.
JR Raphael, PC World
PC World
Saturday, December 20, 2008; 12:19 AM

The Recording Industry Association of America is taking a dangerous step with its decision to stop suing suspected music sharers and start cutting off their Internet access instead. While the discontinuation of the lawsuit practice has its merits, the move opens up a whole new can of worms -- one that could have serious implications for our future rights as consumers of information.
On the one hand, the shift -- revealed Friday, initially in a story published in The Wall Street Journal -- does mark the end of a troubling and generally ineffective process. RIAA's past practice of independently tracking down and going after individual users has raised countless questions, most of which have focused on the group's data gathering methodology. The organization has filed numerous lawsuits that have appeared to be faulty, including one now-infamous instance in which it attempted to sue a deceased woman. The woman -- who was 83 when she passed away -- "hated computers," her children said.
Most data also suggests the lawsuits have done little to curb the online sharing of copyrighted music -- rather, the number of filesharers appears to have actually increased since RIAA started its lawsuit push in 2003. A report released this past September by the Electronic Frontier Foundation notes that music sharing is "more popular than ever, despite the widespread public awareness of lawsuits." Furthermore, the report points out, "the lawsuit campaign has not resulted in any royalties to artists."
(The vast majority of RIAA's lawsuits have resulted in minimal out-of-court settlements. The sole case that went to trial -- against a mother of six named Jammie Thomas -- saw its verdict thrown out in September. That case is still scheduled to be retried.)
The new plan, while ending the era of problem-ridden legal attacks, appears to circumvent the law and instead put the power directly into the hands of RIAA. The group says it will work directly with Internet service providers to go after people it believes are illegally sharing files. RIAA will notify an ISP, which will then warn the user and ultimately suspend or discontinue his access if a change is not observed. "Major ISPs" are said to be on-board with the idea.
Effectively, RIAA has turned itself into the sheriff, and your ISP into its deputy. Based on the same data gathering and user identification methods that have come under fire from the start, RIAA will now be able to get your Internet access limited or discontinued on its own if it for some reason flags you as an illegal filesharer. And I'm not the only one left feeling a little wary about that.
"This means more music fans are going to be harassed by the music industry," saysFred von Lohmann, senior staff attorney of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
"The problem is the lack of due process for those accused," von Lohmann continues. "In a world where hundreds of thousands, or millions, of copyright infringement allegations are automatically generated and delivered to ISPs, mistakes are going to be made. ... Anyone who has ever had to fight to correct an error on their credit reports will be able to imagine the trouble we're in for."
In essence, the music industry is trading one questionable practice for another. Striking a deal to deem itself the judge and your ISP the regulator is not the answer -- and it's not going to win the war, either.
What is the solution, then? The EFF suggests RIAA support a "voluntary collective licensing regime" -- basically, a legal peer-to-peer network that'd let music fans pay a small monthly fee for the right to freely trade music. A survey conducted this summer found an overwhelming 80 percent of current peer-to-peer users would be interested in paying for such a system. If organized, it'd put a stamp of approval on a process that's going on anyway -- and, for an inconsequential individual fee of something like $5 a month, the industry would be able to pay rights-holders based on how much their music is being downloaded.
"The more people share, the more money goes to rights-holders," the EFF points out. "The more competition in P2P software, the more rapid the innovation and improvement. The more freedom for fans to upload what they care about, the deeper the catalog."
The model follows the system set up for radio stations by organizations such as ASCAP and BMI. Perhaps RIAA would be wise to consider such a system, one that could serve the interests of all parties involved rather than harming them.
Here's what it boils down to: When almost every voice in earshot is crying out against the way you operate, you have to start wondering if maybe -- just maybe -- you're going about things the wrong way. The world is crying out, RIAA. It's time to start listening.

The problem here is that the RIAA's data collection methods are incredibly faulty and prone to error. Countless innocents have been prosecuted by the RIAA for file-sharing, including some dead people. It's tied up our legal system and incurred legal bills for people who had done nothing wrong. Now imagine them using this same faulty data to get people's internet access revoked and added to lists of file-sharers, regardless of whether they're guilty or not, with no legal system oversight whatsoever involved. Not good.

jag