Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

SBC challenges RIAA over DMCA-subpoenas

22 November 2003 15:39 by Jari Ketola | 7 comments

Internet service provider SBC Communications and RIAA have attended a hearing to debate the legitimacy of subpoenas handed out by RIAA. RIAA asked the court to dismiss SBC's case entirely, while SBC requested a summary judgement, which would give them a victory in the case without going to a full trial.

SBC sued RIAA in September for requesting for details of their customers. According to SBC the subpoena process is unconstitutional. The case is pretty much identical to the one Verizon brought against RIAA, and lost.

This time, however, the situation is somewhat different, because there's now factual evidence on how RIAA has used (or abused) the DMCA subpoena system.

Judge Susan Illston heard both sides, but did not make a ruling immediately. She did, however, make a statement that could be seen to favour RIAA. Illston might not let SBC to try their case in California, but transfer the case to Washington D.C., where Verizon lost its case against RIAA.

Sources:
News.com
San Francisco Chronicle

Permalink to this article | Topic: Lawsuits & Legislation

Canadian ISP warns Bit Torrent users (30 August 2004)

RIAA files suits against 532 individuals (21 January 2004)

SBC challenges RIAA's subpoenas (16 September 2003)

Court blocks RIAA subpoenas (9 August 2003)

RIAA's methods questioned again (31 July 2003)

Verizon forced to hand out subscriber details to RIAA (5 June 2003)

Verizon lost its appeal against RIAA (25 April 2003)

RIAA puts legal pressure on Verizon (21 August 2002)

« Previous news article
Digital sales will not save music industry

Next news article »
Nero Recode v2 will improve over DVDShrink v3

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
Dela (Staff Member) 23 November 2003 4:54
Not only is it unconstitutional but its rediculous the amount of money they expect for one file. The reaoson for this is - they estimate the amount of money by how many copies of the file they find online right? Well if they searched kazaa and downloaded a copyrighted song, saved the sources ip address and demanded the full amount of each of them, thats dumb because couldnt one of them only downloaded the song 2 minutes earlier and the RIAA are the only people who got the file from them? Now i know the RIAA have been playing with logs from BigChampagne (these logs are also unconstitutional, they log everything from searchs to downloads, thereby smashing any privacy law out of their way!) but they are still well over estimating the amount of money they are demanding. It's only one thing, insanity. Bankrupting their customers, for all they know one of them might have had a 1000 cd collection. Time for the music industry to completely change now, break away from this money hunger and go back to getting money for music that deserves money! http://www.BillLonero.com - Check out a true artists music! aD channel on IRC: rod.liquidirc.com #ad_buddies Newbie IRC Guide- http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/47221 [ + quote]
tr0j4xx (Newbie) 23 November 2003 20:26
When these companies come knocking to sue for their losses how do they justify a few million dollars loss on a billion dollar income? I live quite well off less than 17K a year... [ + quote]
Nephilim (Moderator) 24 November 2003 6:00
It's about time someone stood up for their customers. Hopefully this will finally go to court and prove DMCA to be the piece of special-interest garbage that it is. We desperately need DMCA to be challenged in court with a high profile case such as this. I don't see the glass as half empty or half full. I just want to know if anyone spit in it. [ + quote]
skarsan34 (Newbie) 24 November 2003 20:30
I think it is time for SBC to the right thing Sabina Karsan [ + quote]
maryjayne (Junior Member) 30 November 2003 20:49
yeah, the judge is sending it to D.C. so that SBC and get burned by big brother and add another court record so that the riaa can continue to reach into average joe's wallet. it is good though that SBC is taking a stand for its customers. other companies should do the same because if their customers get sued and have to pay lots of dollars, then where is the customers going to get the cash? they are going to have to cut bills somehow. looking at bills: high speed internet or food...hmmm... Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin Time is never wasted when you are wasted all the time. [ + quote]
wazus (Inactive) 1 December 2003 14:24
It is amazing what people with money will do aka Madonna etc. If you download or share for your own benefit and not profit what is the harm there is no money lost as they claim. I can remember back in the 60's when i listened to the radio liked a song and recorded it to my cassette plyer where was the RIAA then. How many artists lost money to the recording Industry because of faulty contracts. Nobody is trying to take their bread and butter away from them, but then again I dont drive a Porche with all the trimings. Even with sharing files I still go out and buy music at times. To do what the RIAA has done to get names is totally manipulates the Constitution for which we are suppose to obey and live with in a democratic society. What a shame that this is alowed to continue. For in truth juctice is blind. Freedom is disappearing and the right to due process goes to the rich. I have seen this to many times yes once in awhile we win because it seems they throw us a bone. Mr.or Mrs. Congressman, Senator were are you now when we go after 12 year old kids. [ + quote]
wazus (Inactive) 1 December 2003 14:26
Please forgive some of my spelling due to the anger [ + quote]