AfterDawn: Tech news

Appeals court extends Verizon's deadline

Written by Petteri Pyyny (Google+) @ 11 May 2003 15:38 User comments (12)

Appeals court extends Verizon's deadline A federal appeals court has extended the 14-day deadline for Verizon to give up its subscriber's personal details to RIAA. The 14-day limit was set by a district court at the end of April.
Appeals court is expected to make its own decision by end of this month whether Verizon should comply with the district court order and hand out the data immediately to RIAA or whether it can wait for the full hearing of appeals court that is scheduled to begin at 16th of September, this year.

The case is about a subscriber of Verizon (Verizon is one of the biggest American ISPs) that RIAA claims has distributed illegal music over the P2P networks. RIAA sued Verizon because it didn't provide RIAA the subscribers details. Verizon claims that RIAA has to first sue the "John Doe" anonymously and if the court decides that "John Doe"'s personal details should be told to RIAA, Verizon would then comply. District court ruled in April that Verizon must provide the details to RIAA, whether the RIAA can prove that the subscriber has violated law or not, without a court order.

Source: News.com

Previous Next

Related news

 

12 user comments

112.5.2003 0:07

So, what's your take on all of this?? The RIAA, it seems, will continue to put the fear of God into users of P to P systems from time to time, but what good (really) is it ever going to do?? Those poor college students (earlier news announcement) are now going to be paying out thousands of dollars over the next three years to the RIAA in "lost royalties", (what a f-----g joke) and heaven only knows who else in the future is going to get "dinged", but I think you and I and the RIAA and the worldwide online community are aware that the RIAA is pis---g up a tree, and that these little 'pot shots' of theirs are never going to amount to more than a hill of beans in the overall scheme of things. P to P is here to stay, and as soon as they succeed in putting one down, three more are going to pop up in it's place, and the various ISP providers are going to find the bottom fall out of their subscriber base if they comply with these strong-arm tactics, (Hang in there, Verizon!!)and just between you and me, I think it's about high-time for another all-out massive RIAA website hack or two. (But I just woke up and haven't had my coffee yet, so what do I know?) I only know that I will be getting on WinMX, (a PtoP), very shortly to see if I can round out my Three Dog Night collection. Thinking of putting in KaZaa as well. Any recommendition for a good PtoP to add? Cheers, -- Mike --.

212.5.2003 6:30
Sefy
Inactive

I Think if the RIAA wins this, it means trouble for every P2P user. Mostly because they are getting more and more legal ground in each country with no one noticing. They are getting more laws being written, till they will be like Microsoft, Terrorists of the Open World.


Best Regards,
Sefy Levy,
Certified Computer Technician.

312.5.2003 6:40

The RIAA is claiming that their losing so much money so much business due to massive P2P piracy of copyrighted material. Isnt the RIAA forgetting about someone? Namely the artist who recorded said copyrighted material.. Ohh yea the RIAA could careless if the artist is being 'raped' by P2P sharing/trading of music, the RIAA is only concered with itself. Well I'd hate to tell them this but there are quite a few artist that DGAF that their music is being traded online.. Take for example Rage against the machine whom was practically giving away their music over the internet till their record label went ballastic and forced Rage to cease giving away their music.. Now why would the record label be so uppity that the band themselfs was giving away the music to their fans? Someone tell me why please. Rage was promoting themselfs by giving away their music to fans.. sharing music via P2P such as WinMX,Kazaa, iMesh did Rage a favor , it offered their music to fans that might not have heard of them before and the ability to sample their music in its complete form not some pathetic 3 second promo lets a fan get a taste of that artist's music. Kay enuff of that ranting rave. The RIAA is going continue on with these pointless crusade till either the government steps in and shuts them up for good OR they really develop a method of making pirated copies of copyrighted werks a reality (which has YET to werk so far ). P2P isnt going to die out it isnt going to fall silently into the nite, the RIAA might as well get that thru their thickheads now.. Here's an idea : instead of battling these P2P networks why doesnt the RIAA try settling with them coming to a common ground.. Not suggesting that pay per song crap the RIAA suggested cause I for one sure as hell am not supporting that. As for the RIAA trying to force ISPs into giving over users personal information, thats going over the line. whats to stop the RIAA from peeking in on what that user is doing online all the time? Whats to stop the RIAA from taking the law into their own hands IF they do manage to win the ruling and force Verizon to hand over users details.. anyone recall the FBI's little scheme to convince Congress to allow the FBI to plant a trojan horse on suspected criminals computers? The RIAA is trying to go that route and they just might get there if they are granted access to an ISP user's personal details.. I dunno bout anyone else, but I say its bout tyme someone put the RIAA in its place once and for all.

412.5.2003 6:47
Sefy
Inactive

I Agree, problem is, what are we or can we do about it ? personaly, even though I download, I also buy alot, cause I suppose the artist which I like his music. But on the other hand, you won't see me buying two or three copies of the same disc, so I make myself backups that I can take with me and I leave the original material at home. I Think ARTISTS should quit using those idiotic Label Companies! and start doing their own business over the net, and THAT will get the RIAA and MPAA out of the picture, cause they won't be protecting anyone except their own blasted egos', and it will be proven once and for all. But for that, we need the Artists to do something about it!


Best Regards,
Sefy Levy,
Certified Computer Technician.

512.5.2003 8:59
Rendering
Inactive

Another flaw in the RIAA's argument is that their argument is entirely zero-sum; they propose that money not paid for a single or album is money out of their pocket. All it really is is money they don't get. For instance, if I can't download (or borrow or some other way acquire without buying) a copyrighted song, would I then necessarily go out and buy it? If all I want is a single song can I buy just that single song from the record song (only if it was popular enough to release separately). I could still listen to a song over the radio or at the website of one of the hundreds of online radio stations for free. Also keep in mind that the decline in record sales not only coincides with the advent of Internet downloading activity over the last two years, but also with the rapid run-up in CD prices, the increase in the number of multi-format radio stations that play a wide variety of material, internet-based radio stations, the prevalence of CD burners, the globalization of popular music (resulting in American buyers purchasing the works of artists signed with foreign recording studios) and the general American economic recession that has reduced discretionary income. Also question the decline of the superstar system in the recording industry, where mega pop stars accounted for the majority of sales, and the emplacement of small-label, alternative music styles like rap that attract smaller, younger audiences possessing less spendable cash. The multinationals that dominate American music fear internet music downloading activity because these companies have not been able to develop a business model that would allow them to maintain their control over distribution rights while benefiting from the efficiencies an internet download structure provides. Clearly, the companies would love to be able to profit from the reduced costs of internet downloads, but until they can find a way to encrypt MP3 files so that they can't be shared beyond one or two generations, expect the RIAA to blame the very people it needs the most--the customer.

612.5.2003 9:14

the problem is, it has nothing to do with the artists really, the music totally owned by the labels. i think we should organize a boycott in protest, just to show the RIAA how much revenue is still generated by the music sales. if no one bought any music at all for just 1 week, it would be devasting to overall monthly sales. just for one week everyone could leech the hell out of the music they want and not buy it. this would give the RIAA actual figures on paper (which is all the understand anyway) of how much money is generated by music sales and not effected by downloading. the chances of the world's music lovers uniting like this is very remote and far fetched, but i think it will take such a drastic measure to get the point acrossed to the commie's. I remember a time when metallica put "do not pay more than $5.98 for this disc" on the front of one of their cd's. but years later they were the first to get "sue happy". I think alot of this resulted from the shear greed of the record companies and the artists making very little from cd sales. The artists see their income potential being downloaded right out of their wallet, but this is simply not our fault, it is the fault of the record companies for only paying the artists 25-40 cents per disc sale. these discs wholesale for $6-7 bucks and that giant margin of profit goes to the record company. the artists, in most cases also have to cover their studio time to record the cd. all record companies are for is marketing, plain and simple. and market is nothing more that generating sales. The artists have nothing to do with this war, this is us against the record companies, and it will take us to stop it.






http://www.Lonero.net - friend of the forums, great guitar player
#afterdawn (well i have no idea where it is anymore)

712.5.2003 9:25
Sefy
Inactive

I Still think the Artists can do something about it as well, this is the 21st century, and everyone has a webpage, they can access their fans directly and advertise themselfs perfectly fine without no label company. Heck, as far as I recall, some of the artists bought or have their own record company, and they could come forward and help the rest, and kick the money grabbing RIAA out of the way!


Best Regards,
Sefy Levy,
Certified Computer Technician.

812.5.2003 11:16

The RIAA is HUGE. (And so are beached whales). The RIAA is dying. Just like beached whales washed ashore, the RIAA itself is washed up. The bigger they are the harder they fall. The evidence is everywhere, hence their "death throe" stabs at survival. The RIAA website is 98% bullshit. Time for another all-out hack, methinks. It's just a matter of time. Let's help to put them out of their misery. (Did I ever tell you guys, that when Napster was a going concern, I downloaded *108* (one hundred and eight) FULL LP albums (the vast majority of which were out of print for years)?? Well, I did. I got 'em over a pokey, slow 56K dial-up modem too. HMV, for example, which are a little too 'crooked' for my liking, (I recently tried) are sitting on a goddamned goldmine of past out-of-print albums, but their heads are stuck so far up their as---s they don't know how to take advantage of it. -- Mike --

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 12 May 2003 @ 11:24

912.5.2003 13:29

Poor Verizon! If the RIAA wins this case, it could be a huge problem for other ISP's as well. - TRIBAL-T

1012.5.2003 14:37

I wonder how many Verizon customers have recently switched ISP's? Personally I think that Verizon's customer service and procedures are horrible, and I would never get any service from them that I did not need. I am glad that I use a "Mom and Pop" ISP! Why arent other ISP's getting involved in this matter? Do they really think that the RIAA will stop at just Verizon?


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. - Catherine Zandonella
Reality is an illusion that occurs due to the lack of alcohol. - W.C. Fields

1112.5.2003 15:33
Rendering
Inactive

Maryjayne, I think thing only actions available to other ISP's are filing "friend of the court" briefs, wherein they state legal and technical arguments against the RIAA's position. Bear in mind that Verizon is not disputing whether someone who participated in illegal file sharing (piracy) should be prosecuted. Verizon claims that RIAA has to first sue the "John Doe" anonymously and if the court decides that "John Doe"'s personal details should be told to RIAA, Verizon would then comply. You see, Verizon is concerned that just anybody can demand information about its subscribers without having any legal reason for that demand. So Verizon wants the privacy of its subscribers protected until, in a proper court of law, an applicable legal case is made alleging (in this instance, piracy) that the subscriber committed an unlawful act and a judge has had an opportunity to adjudicate the matter. Unfortunately, even the "Mom and Pop" ISP you use can be forced under the DMCA to disclose your identity, WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE ILLEGALLY DOWNLOADED AND SHARED MUSIC FILES. That, I think, is the scary part.

1213.5.2003 7:30

so now we wait...... andd see if defing a judge is more important then losing custmers... this will break the company if not handled correctly... also who knows it could have been a bogus address listed behind a fire wall.... but on the other hand what if we all use some thing like Black Ice that will change our IP address then they cant find a soul..... and how is Verison going to figure out who this one person is this might be the problum in the first place... I'm sure they have had plenty of downloading going on... so how do you pick the one any p2p software that shows your ip adress should be passed over the idea was to be anonoymus.... so where does this leave Verison who really is fighting to stay out of it and not wanting to lose more custmers.... hey would AT&T or MCI fight or give you up to the RIAA?

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive