Browse by topic

News

MPAA to judge: We don't need no stinking proof

21 June 2008 11:02 by Rich "vurbal" Fiscus | 25 comments

The MPAA is arguing in a legal brief that plaintiffs should be allowed to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages with no proof that anyone has actually downloaded from a defendant's shared folder. The brief was filed by MPAA lawyers in Jammie Thomas' appeal of the $222,000 judgement against her for copyright infringement. Judge Michael Davis asked for public comments on whether simply making files available is a violation of The Copyright Act and the MPAA took the opportunity to put in their 2 cents worth.

Actually 2 cents may be a little generous for the MPAA's contribution. Their argument basically goes something like this, it's difficult, or maybe impossible, to prove that people are actually downloading files from someone's shared folder so the courts should just assume files are shared with the intention of distributing them illegally and rule in favor of the plaintiff.

The real problem with the MPAA's position isn't necessarily the idea that sharing files is infringement. Even some legal scholars who disagree with the "making available" as infringement argument have pointed out that copying a song to your computer for the purpose of sharing it illegally might be infringement. But that's not the same thing as no proof. It would still require the RIAA to show a defendant's intent.

Their lawyers don't stop there either. They also make the claim that because of a judicial principle that US laws be interpretted in a way that conforms to international treaties "making available" automatically became infringement with the signing of 2 WIPO copyright treaties in the 1990s.

As is typical for the entertainment industry, the MPAA filed their brief on the last day arguments were to be accepted. This effectively presents any counter-arguments to be entered into the record to point out the flaws in their reasoning.

Permalink to this article | Topic: Lawsuits & Legislation

RIAA lawyers still fighting to stop Jammie Thomas' new trial (12 November 2008)

Ray Beckerman urges defense lawyers to go after MediaSentry (13 August 2008)

Central Michigan University asks regulators to shut down RIAA investigators (6 August 2008)

The MPAA sues two more movie streaming sites (30 July 2008)

MPAA planning website to find legal movies online (28 July 2008)

MPAA hired hacker to 'spy' on The Pirate Bay (27 July 2008)

MediaSentry investigated over North Carolina RIAA lawsuits (14 July 2008)

DreamStream clarifies: no MPAA endorsement (8 July 2008)

MediaSentry denies being investigators to avoid licensing (7 July 2008)

Ray Beckerman denies Impeding Universal Music investigation (5 July 2008)

Judge once again affirms award against RIAA in Tanya Andersen case (26 June 2008)

Gene Simmons blames NIN, Radiohead and fans, for 'death' of music industry (25 June 2008)

EFF shoots down "making available" argument in Jammie Thomas case (23 June 2008)

AP resolves copyright dispute with blogger (21 June 2008)

RIAA prepares to drop long running P2P suit for a lack of evidence (20 June 2008)

Law professors argue against making available as infringement in Jammie Thomas appeal (20 June 2008)

BPI CEO gets defensive about Virgin Media partnership (16 June 2008)

RIAA allegedly seeking piracy tax on internet access (14 June 2008)

RIAA goes judge shopping in New York (14 June 2008)

« Previous news article
PlayStation 3 tops Japanese console hardware sales

Next news article »
NHK unveils Super Hi-Vision projection system

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
ZippyDSM (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 11:06
Oh boy more mumbo jumbo....focus on profit to infringement and you will win every time, but of coarse they want to end fair use and all aspects of sharing and bully and belittle the consumer. [ + quote]
geestar20 (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 11:28
HEY! im suing you -Zippy- for the simple fact you said... *Quote:* fair use and all aspects of sharing bt we can settle out of court for...$20 dollars :P [ + quote]
ZippyDSM (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 11:32
*Quote:* HEY! im suing you -Zippy- for the simple fact you said... *Quote:* fair use and all aspects of sharing bt we can settle out of court for...$20 dollars :P stats tossing coasters at you and runs like a ninja :P [ + quote]
7thsinger (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 11:34
So by this same logic the fact that i own a handgun, a brown paper bag, and a ski mask means my "intent" is to rob a convient store? [ + quote]
lxfactor (Senior Member) 21 June 2008 11:52
*Originally posted by 7thsinger:* So by this same logic the fact that i own a handgun, a brown paper bag, and a ski mask means my "intent" is to rob a convient store? lmao! seriously.. just because OJ had a bloody glove, doesn't mean it was him.. everybody has a bloody glove somewhere. =D [ + quote]
mspurloc (Member) 21 June 2008 12:53
How much of my tax money is wasted by these lawyers using my justice system to experiment? [ + quote]
ZippyDSM (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 12:55
*Originally posted by mspurloc:* How much of my tax money is wasted by these lawyers using my justice system to experiment? about as much as our officials get taking breaks and giving them selfs raises. [ + quote]
Icanbe (Member) 21 June 2008 13:53
Hmmmmmmm, must be a new type of law, none of us has heard of. What world does the MPAA live in anyway? Geezzzz [ + quote]
nobrainer (Inactive) 21 June 2008 14:09
*Originally posted by Icanbe:* Hmmmmmmm, must be a new type of law, none of us has heard of. What world does the MPAA live in anyway? Geezzzz its called extortion! The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above! The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX. [ + quote] This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21 June 2008 14:11
Rudeboi (Junior Member) 21 June 2008 14:49
*Originally posted by 7thsinger:* So by this same logic the fact that i own a handgun, a brown paper bag, and a ski mask means my "intent" is to rob a convient store? Yes ! Unless you plan on going Skiing drunk while shooting deer ;) [ + quote]
svtstang (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 15:47
Why need proof when you have pretty much every politician in your back pocket? If the MPAA had their way, discussing films without direct written consent from them would also be copyright infringement. [ + quote]
Icanbe (Member) 21 June 2008 15:59
Well going by the logic of the MPAA, every crime ever committed could be solved in a matter of mins, The police respond to a crime, walk out to the street, pick a person at random and convict that person of the crime, I mean they don't need any proof now do they. [ + quote]
blueroad (Newbie) 21 June 2008 19:15
hmm is anyone else hearing the words injustice tyrants conspiracy and a few more that would require an unprecedented amount of *** [ + quote]
Pop_Smith (Senior Member) 21 June 2008 21:04
Innocent until proven guilty gets thrown out the window into a furnace if this is the case. I love how they rely on old and extremely out-dated laws to "prove" they are "right". This makes me want to put a bunch of effort into getting the out-dated junk re-written and up-to-date. Oh well, it probably wouldn't be worth the effort as the RIAA/MPAA would just throw some money around and make the new, up-to-date laws "illegal" for some reason or another. [ + quote]
fgamer (Member) 21 June 2008 22:37
This essentially is the MPAA/RIAA fighting for the companies pockets to be richer, NOT the artist, like they always try to say. When will they realize the more attention they put on piracy such as file lawsuits etc will only further people into piracy as to avoid supporting such a corrupt org like the MPAA/RIAA. The people they're suing are their damn customers..LOL so stupid! [ + quote]
svtstang (AfterDawn Addict) 21 June 2008 22:47
*Originally posted by fgamer:* This essentially is the MPAA/RIAA fighting for the companies pockets to be richer, NOT the artist, like they always try to say. When will they realize the more attention they put on piracy such as file lawsuits etc will only further people into piracy as to avoid supporting such a corrupt org like the MPAA/RIAA. The people they're suing are their damn customers..LOL so stupid! The thing is the general public do not understand a lot of this. We read up and understand the motives of the MAFIAA.....the typical person just feeds on what their local news provides them. Sad reality, but non the less true. This is also why there will never be a true revolution when it comes to law concerning fair use and such, not enough people understand the current state of things. [ + quote]
Icanbe (Member) 21 June 2008 23:19
*Originally posted by svtstang:* *Originally posted by fgamer:* This essentially is the MPAA/RIAA fighting for the companies pockets to be richer, NOT the artist, like they always try to say. When will they realize the more attention they put on piracy such as file lawsuits etc will only further people into piracy as to avoid supporting such a corrupt org like the MPAA/RIAA. The people they're suing are their damn customers..LOL so stupid! The thing is the general public do not understand a lot of this. We read up and understand the motives of the MAFIAA.....the typical person just feeds on what their local news provides them. Sad reality, but non the less true. This is also why there will never be a true revolution when it comes to law concerning fair use and such, not enough people understand the current state of things. So true, more people have understand whats going on, before it's too late. http://www.dvdspot.com/member=morguex Used to put up with it, I will not be anymore. [ + quote]
7thsinger (AfterDawn Addict) 22 June 2008 10:17
*Originally posted by svtstang:* *Originally posted by fgamer:* This essentially is the MPAA/RIAA fighting for the companies pockets to be richer, NOT the artist, like they always try to say. When will they realize the more attention they put on piracy such as file lawsuits etc will only further people into piracy as to avoid supporting such a corrupt org like the MPAA/RIAA. The people they're suing are their damn customers..LOL so stupid! The thing is the general public do not understand a lot of this. We read up and understand the motives of the MAFIAA.....the typical person just feeds on what their local news provides them. Sad reality, but non the less true. This is also why there will never be a true revolution when it comes to law concerning fair use and such, not enough people understand the current state of things. Well said Stang! Not enough people want to understand. Ignorance is bliss. Learn To Backup DVDs Here [ + quote]
nobrainer (Inactive) 22 June 2008 11:33
This is even worse than sony (the riaa,mpaa) stating that copying media you own is stealing. Sony BMG's chief anti-piracy lawyer: "Copying" music you own is "stealing" *Originally posted by October 02, 2007:* Gabriel asked if it was wrong for consumers to make copies of music which they have purchased, even just one copy. Pariser replied, "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," she said. And why, well read my last entry "EXTORTION" iPod tax: UK music biz open to format shifting... for a fee *Originally posted by April 14, 2008:* And then came hints that this apple might come with a serious worm. Early this year, the BPI again said all the right things about format shifting, but we noted that the Association of Independent Music was making noises; apparently, the group wanted to get paid whenever music was transferred from a CD to a portable device. or is it? The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above! The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX. [ + quote]
dufas (Member) 27 June 2008 13:59
We can all take solace that someone wasn't murdered. Any person picked at random would be guilty... [ + quote]
Mez (Senior Member) 30 June 2008 8:33
dufas, actuially that is not even funny! 50% of the persons on death row that had their cases reopened because there was DNA evidance that could be tested were innocent. Our justice system is a joke. The are looking to convict not to find the guilty party. The music industry doesn't really care if you back up your own music as long as they get a piece of the action. For all their complaining, they provide the best tag info database. They are just slime. Not that I am not equally slimy since I pay them 5 USD per year for their service. [ + quote]
Mez (Senior Member) 2 July 2008 9:08
This article might be a bit of a sleeper. I read another article that stated only 30,000 had been punished todate. They haven't done much slapping around in a year if 30,000 was the correct number. This rulling might cost them the ball-game. The greedy pigs should have gone for a small settlement. 200K+ is a good deal of money to cough up with out any hard evidance. By the time they get back in action the game will have changed. Pirate Bay is offering a new service that will greatly reduce the ability for cyber police to get any needed info to do much of anything. They will turn off the lights! Gene Simmons EAT YOUR HEART OUT! [ + quote]
7thsinger (AfterDawn Addict) 2 July 2008 9:36
*Quote:* Gene Simmons EAT YOUR HEART OUT! Good call, but don't forget Prince! Learn To Backup DVDs Here And Here. [ + quote]
Mez (Senior Member) 2 July 2008 11:36
Yeah, another even more worthless hack! At least Gene pained his face and has a big tounge. [ + quote]
qazwiz (Junior Member) 15 November 2008 16:23
*Originally posted by Mez:* Yeah, another even more worthless hack! At least Gene pained his face and has a big tongue. oh yeah, big tongue... you sure he isn't the son of two MIAA lawyers... where there's a big tongue there must be a big mouth (or two) [ + quote]