Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

University of San Francisco Law Clinic Joins Fight Against RIAA

Posted by Soulskill on Fri Feb 29, 2008 05:22 AM
from the bay-area-reinforcements dept.
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's litigation campaign has met resistance from the academic community before, but now it's been taken to a whole new level: the defense of RIAA victims who are not part of the college community. First the University of Oregon lashed out on behalf of its students, then it was the University of Maine's Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic on behalf of its undergrads. Now, the University of San Francisco School of Law has taken the fight a giant step further. Its Intellectual Property Law Clinic's attorneys-in-training, working under the supervision of law professors, are going to bat against the RIAA by helping outside lawyers to defend their clients, pro bono. They reached out 3000 miles to get involved in Elektra v. Torres and Maverick v. Chowdhury, two cases going on in Brooklyn, NY, against non-college defendants. Two of the law students in the USF's legal program assisted in the research and preparation of briefs in these cases, opposing the RIAA's motion to dismiss the defendants' counterclaims. Thousands of honor students throughout United States law schools, most of them digital natives who actually understand the legal fallacies and technological missteps the RIAA is taking, and who can't wait to expose them, make a pretty good resource for the poor and middle class people trying to defend these cases."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] U.of Oregon Says No to RIAA 241 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The University of Oregon has filed a motion to quash the RIAA's subpoena for information on student identities in what is believed to be the first such motion made by a university with support from the state Attorney General. The motion (pdf) explains that it is impossible to identify the alleged infringers from the information the RIAA has presented: 'Five of the seventeen John Does accessed the content in question from double occupancy dorm rooms at the University. With regard to these Does, the University is able to identify only the room where the content was accessed and whether or not the computer used was a Macintosh or a PC ... The University cannot determine whether the content in question accessed by one occupant as opposed to another, or whether it was accessed instead by a visitor.' The AG's motion further argues (pdf) that "Plaintiffs' subpoena is unduly burdensome and overbroad. It seeks information that the University does not readily possess. In order to attempt to comply with the subpoena, the University would be forced to undertake an investigation to create discovery for Plaintiffs — an obligation not imposed by Rule 45. As the University is unable to identify the alleged infringers with any accuracy, it cannot comply with its federal obligation to notify students potentially affected by the subpoena. One commentator has likened the AG's argument to saying, in effect, that the RIAA's evidence is 'rubbish'."
[+] U.Maine Law Clinic Is First To Fight RIAA 129 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "'A student law clinic is about to cause a revolution' says p2pnet. For the first time in the history of the RIAA's ex parte litigation campaign against college students, a university law school's legal aid clinic has taken up the fight against the RIAA in defense of the university's students. Student attorneys at the University of Maine School of Law's Cumberland Legal Aid Clinic, under the supervision of law school prof Deirdre M. Smith, have moved to dismiss the RIAA's complaint in a Portland, Maine, case, Arista v. Does 1-27, on behalf of two University of Maine undergrads. Their recently filed reply brief (PDF) points to the US Supreme Court decision in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, and the subsequent California decision following Twombly, Interscope v. Rodriguez, which dismissed the RIAA's 'making available' complaint as mere 'conclusory,' 'boilerplate' 'speculation.'"
[+] Comparing the RIAA To "The Sopranos" 193 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "According to commentator Therese Polletti at Dow Jones MarketWatch, 'the RIAA's tactics are nearly as bad as the actions of mobsters, real or fictional. The analogy comes up easily and frequently in any discussion of the RIAA's maneuvers.' Among other things she cites the extortionate nature of their 'settlement negotiations' pointed out by Prof. Bob Talbot of the University of San Francisco School of Law IP Law Clinic. His student attorneys are helping private practitioners fight the RIAA, and the the illegality of the RIAA's use of unlicensed investigators. She goes on to cite the fact that the RIAA thinks nothing of jeopardizing a student's college education in order to make their point, as support for the MAFIAA/Mafia analogy."
[+] Your Rights Online: Massive Increase in RIAA Copyright Notices 179 comments
According to Wired, universities in the US are experiencing a "20-fold increase" in the number of takedown notices from the RIAA in the last ten days. Indiana University reports 80 notices a day, but they say their traffic hasn't increased significantly over the same time period. It will be interesting to see if the affected schools join the legal battle against the RIAA, or cave under the increased pressure. "University of California at Berkeley's chief information officer Shel Waggener confirmed he'd heard of the spikes and suggested there was a political purpose driving them. 'Public universities are in a unique position since the industry puts pressure on us through state legislatures to try to impose what are widely considered to be draconian content monitoring measures and turn us into tech police forces in support of a specific industry,' Waggener said. The RIAA is also backing legislation in states such as Illinois and Tennessee that would require schools that get a certain number of notices to begin installing deep packet monitoring equipment on their internet and intranets, according to Luker."
[+] New Hampshire Law Students Take On RIAA 173 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "We have recently learned that another law school legal aid clinic has joined the fight against the RIAA. Student attorneys from the Consumer and Commercial Law Clinic of the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, New Hampshire, working under law school faculty supervision, are representing a lady targeted by the RIAA in UMG Recording v. Roy in New Hampshire. The case is scheduled for trial next Fall. That makes at least 4 law schools providing anti-RIAA defense services: University of Maine, University of San Francisco, Franklin Pierce, and, most recently, Harvard. Hopefully many more will follow. One commentator theorizes that this news 'will ... [encourage] professors and students at other law schools to take on hitherto defenseless people being pilloried by the corporate music industry.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by kaos07 (1113443) on Friday February 29 2008, @05:30AM (#22598398)

    Come on, NewYorkCountryLawyer, Slashdot isn't your personal outlet! Get your own blog.

    Maybe something like http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Unfortunately, due to the prominence and infamy of Slashdot, it is in fact very appealing as a public forum and soapbox. Plus, it'd take ages to drum up enough publicity for http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

      Just saying...
    • by Deadfyre_Deadsoul (1193759) on Friday February 29 2008, @05:55AM (#22598470) Journal
      I imagine the RIAA is having seizures from this news.
      • For some reason, this made me think of a pub warcraft3 game and then lotr when sauruman sent all his troops to helmsdeep then the ents attacked and he had nothing but peons to defend. Hate that shit when it happens in a good game....

        "The Ents! zomg the Ents!! wtf! all my creeps are attacking ur town! No fair fucking imba!" -Sauruman

        I mean, like, the RIAA didn't see this coming and stuff and now their townz is gone and....

        Sorry

    • by mrvan (973822) on Friday February 29 2008, @06:06AM (#22598510)
      I like the posts of NewYorkCountryLawyer, and if the editors or readers of slashdot would get sick of them they would not get past the firehose. And if slashdot were against people keeping journals and submitting them as stories, why do you think "Slashdot journal entries can be automatically submitted as stories"?

      If you care about Your Rights Online, I think both his stories and his comments are to the point and well written and at least HIAL. If you don't care about your rights online, you can choose not to see that section in your preferences.

      NewYorkCountryLawyer, keep up the good work!
  • Are they just lazy? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by QuantumG (50515) <qg@biodome.org> on Friday February 29 2008, @05:31AM (#22598402) Homepage Journal
    Is there a legal way the RIAA could be achieving their goals or is the mere concept of aggressively enforcing their rights under copyright law against regular folk something the legal system is currently stacked against?

    I guess what I'm asking is, are they just lazy or just stupid?

    • Answer: (Score:5, Funny)

      by azrider (918631) on Friday February 29 2008, @07:12AM (#22598688)
      yes.
    • The problem the RIAA has right now is that the evidence they have to show that was talking sharing is not as ironclad as it should be (and the tactics they are using to collect that evidence aren't that good)
    • by JasterBobaMereel (1102861) on Friday February 29 2008, @07:21AM (#22598716)
      The problem is the RIAA do not represent the Artists, and do not care about the buyers of music

      They represent the Big Four music producers, and are only answerable to them ....

      That is the problem - They have no Copyright (of their own) to defend, they have no customers to care about....

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        They represent the Big Four music producers, and are only answerable to them ....

        That is the problem - They have no Copyright (of their own) to defend, they have no customers to care about....


        The big four that they represent own the copyrights. The Corporate Owned Congress made musical recordings "works for hire" granting copyright to the record company, not the people who actualkly perform the music.

        As Lynard Skynard said,

        Want you to sign the contract
        Want you to sign today
        Gonna make lots of money
        Workin' fo
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      They are trying though court cases and laws (DMCA) to over turn "fair use."

      Also to be convicted of selling or distributing copywritten material, you typically have to a) charge for it and b) prove that you actually distributed it. But the RIAA is trying to say just "making it available" is the same. This isn't supported in case law (yet...).

      I just can't wait until someone hits them with something like RICO.
      • http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html [gnu.org]

        Digital information technology contributes to the world by making it easier to copy and modify information. Computers promise to make this easier for all of us.

        Not everyone wants it to be easier. The system of copyright gives software programs "owners", most of whom aim to withhold software's potential benefit from the rest of the public. They would like to be the only ones who can copy and modify the software that we use.

        The copyright system grew up with printing-
  • by Dannkape (1195229) on Friday February 29 2008, @05:38AM (#22598422)
    The little funny quote at the bottom of the page at the moment read "What's done to children, they will do to society."

    Would be great if this is the children that have been sued bankrupt for musicdownloads that finally (in time) sues the MAFIAA out of business. But being pesimi... erh, I mean, realistic, I'm not going to hold my breath...
  • Honestly... (Score:2, Interesting)

    it's about time that people outside of schools are tapping this resource. I would have expected law students to have been tapped a long time ago, not only for this but in general by law firms since they have an expertise in the field in question largely due to having lived and grown with computers their entire lives.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      There is a big difference between between using a computer and an understanding of the law, nevermind grasping that there is an even bigger difference between the machinations of the legal system and justice.
  • by LiquidCoooled (634315) on Friday February 29 2008, @06:31AM (#22598580) Homepage Journal
    This is a cautionary note based upon experience i have seen in the movies:

    When you find a new super weapon and decide to use it to help the people, it almost always backfires.

    We are cheering the fact that MORE lawyers are being created.
    What will happen when they finish with the RIAA?

    "It won't stop at anything, and it will never stop hunting you until you are dead."
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      When you find a new super weapon and decide to use it to help the people, it almost always backfires.
      "That's no moon... it's a gigantic grey ball of legal practitioners!"
    • We are cheering the fact that MORE lawyers are being created.
      What will happen when they finish with the RIAA?
      We simply unleash wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the lawyers. Then, we've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat. Then comes the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death.
  • by splutty (43475) on Friday February 29 2008, @06:48AM (#22598612)
    I think if I was a law student, I'd be very very happy doing this sort of work.

    Actual cases with a lot of what every defence lawyer is looking for: Suspense, Lying, Cheating, Inexpert Witnesses, Corporate Greed, Perjury, Farfetched application of laws...

    This would be great. You could probably make a TV series out of it even!

    (Okay okay.. Some of this is tongue in cheeck, but the basic premise is obvious: This is great material for law students to study and participate in. They get a real life example of how screwed up and convoluted cases can get)

    And maybe, just maybe this'll breed a generation of lawyers not hellbent on making Escheresque pictures out of the law.
    • This would be great. You could probably make a TV series out of it even!

      Please don't give David E Kelley any ideas.

    • There is also the potential for a new lawyer to get media exposure in a high profile lawsuit. As long as they are winning, media exposure would have to be good for their budding career.
  • Double Standards (Score:3, Interesting)

    by fork_daemon (1122915) on Friday February 29 2008, @07:12AM (#22598686) Journal
    I dont Understand this RIAA Crap. The other day i was watching the Movie JUNO. A character in the movie burns a CD containing some songs for Juno. Now is that not illegal according to RIAA? Why not raise a voice against that rather than draggin their ass behind innocent students??
    Honestly speaking RIAA and MPAA are not loosing anything near what they claim.
  • What happens now? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Arancaytar (966377) <arancaytar.ilyaran@gmail.com> on Friday February 29 2008, @07:16AM (#22598702) Homepage
    In the past, the RIAA has shown that the grapes are too sour when it comes to attacking colleges whose law students and faculty stand ready to defend them. Now these same colleges are taking the fight to the RIAA? This cannot end well for the latter, I think.
    • by zappepcs (820751) on Friday February 29 2008, @08:11AM (#22598896) Journal
      The simple fact that the latest batch of lawyers see the wrongful doings of previous batches heralds a kind of change. It's not just a cry of 'that's not fair', it is a cry of 'that's not fair use'. The tide will have turned when older established lawyers hire the newer tech savvy lawyers. They will need to: DNA tests, AI, robotics, and many other new technologies will spawn legal cases that deal with matters unheard of before.

      It is, in some way, perhaps the beginnings of the fight against the corporate control of America. It is definitely a fight against IP and copyright run amok, as well as shady lawyer tactics. It's not clear cut when looking at only one case but if you look at the situation on the whole, the RIAA still needs to get some wins in court somewhere. Add to this what is happening to MS and others in the EU with regard to their business practices a picture begins to form about the general state of play in courtrooms around the globe. In Russia schools are moving to F/OSS because of legal action. The EU lobbed a 1.3Billion Dollar fine against MS. US law students are fighting against the **AA. Of course that is only a few of the cases. The big picture is that the fight against software IP, extended copyright laws, and bad corporate tactics is taking shape one case at a time.
      • The tide will have turned when older established lawyers hire the newer tech savvy lawyers. They will need to: DNA tests, AI, robotics, and many other new technologies will spawn legal cases that deal with matters unheard of before.

        Just like doctors and programmers keep current, so do lawyers. Age doesn't keep one from learning, and it doesn't keep one from being able to understand technology.

        Now get off my lawn!

        -mcgrew
  • Law Clinic? (Score:4, Funny)

    by presarioD (771260) on Friday February 29 2008, @08:18AM (#22598936)
    Hmmmm, a clinic is a place where sick people go in order to get well. A "law clinic" is a place where sick lawyers go in order to get well... nah, it's the place where sick laws get in order to get well... nah, it's the place where new lawyers test their immunity system when exposed to sick lawyers... nah, it's the place where the new breeds of laws test their immunity system against the sick laws... nah, it's the place where sick law interbreeding happens... aghhh, I give up...
  • Its Intellectual Property Law Clinic's attorneys-in-training, working under the supervision of law professors, are going to bat against the RIAA by helping outside lawyers to defend their clients, pro bono.

    Even a literate layman who takes the time to read the US Constitution can see that the concept of intellectual "property" is unamerican. "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discover
  • That's what this is. The best way to teach a subject is through the medium of something the student is interested in and cares about. What better way to instruct a generation of legal professionals on the previously arcane area of copyright law than to enlist them in the fight to bring down the RIAA/MPAA?

    It seems to me that every law school clinic in the country should be doing the same thing--there'd be no shortage of students willing to participate. But if every law school doesn't do this, the ones that
  • A New Legal Argument (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FromTheAir (938543) on Friday February 29 2008, @10:04AM (#22599892) Homepage
    Maybe this idea will get to the right minds perhaps one of you know who they are and will create awareness. When we purchase music we purchase a license to listen to the songs we paid for. I don't think the music industry understands this; apparently this has not been clarified in the courts. We are not buying the piece of plastic they are printed on.

    It does not matter what the source is or what format we have it in. We are purchasing a license to listen at our leisure to a song or watch a movie. We can have a thousand copies because we can only listen to one at a time. Somebody needs to argue this in court. That we are in fact purchasing a license to listen, not a piece of plastic or a digital file of zero's and ones.

    This is the New legal justification for open downloads of music or copy righted material:

    In fact the record labels need to, I think legally provide, free downloads of music. The record companies have not provided a way for me to enjoy my license to listen if the CD gets scratched, as it is now they force us to buy a new license they should probably reimburse anyone who has had to buy more than one license because of damage media.

    I noticed about 10 years ago CDs became very easy to scratch not the bottom but the top. I wonder if this was by design to produce more sales? If so then the recording industry owes the consumers money

    Because the carrier medium can be damaged we should all be able to get a download of a new instance of the song we paid for from the Internet if we purchased the license to listen to it. Since the record companies have not provided a way for us to get a replacement copy the Internet downloads can ethically be justified.

    Truth is we don't need the record companies anymore. We can all buy from the artists direct and vote with a link what is most popular. I would be happy to pay the creative talent directly without the huge middle man cut. Another things is corporate pressure to maintain the status quo system cannot be put on artists by large corporations.

    Hopefully someone will get this into the hands of the attorneys for the defendants.

    Technically based on quantum physics there is only one copy of a piece of music in the universe. This exists in the intangible realm; all tangible manifestations of this one copy are simply a physical conveyance of this one real instance. It is an information universe, everything is ultimately just information.

    • I noticed about 10 years ago CDs became very easy to scratch not the bottom but the top. I wonder if this was by design to produce more sales? If so then the recording industry owes the consumers money

      Actually, the "top" of the CD is more important than the bottom. The actual data is burned into the very thin layer of writeable material thats on the "bottom" of the top layer of the CD. Try scratching off the pretty picture from a music CD and see if it plays.

  • While it's nice to have another ally in the fight, I am left with the question of what took them so long to get involved? These suits have been going on for years, and the campaign against college and university students for over a year itself. Did the wrong someone at this school finally get extorted/sued?
    • by coats (1068) on Friday February 29 2008, @07:19AM (#22598710) Homepage
      The supreme lw of the land says "for a limited time". Tell me:

      When does that encryption expire? For that matter, is the term of copyright "limited" in human terms? (Name ten works whose copyright term has expired in your lifetime.)

      It doesn't expire. The DMCA is unConstitutional on its face. The RIAA are trying to enforce an illegal law. Enforced by a corrupt judicial system.

      • The DMCA is unConstitutional on its face.

        So is the Bono Act, but the Supreme Court says it isn't, that "limited" means whatever Congress says it means. That of course means that every word in the Constitution means whatever Congress says it means. Which means that the Constitution is now completely meaningless, and we no longer have rule of law but rule of men.
      • Let's see. The CSS encryption on DVDs expired in about 30 days. The AACS encryption on HD-DVDs expired in about 6 months... FairUse4QT or WMA anyone? Trust me. Copyright law far outlives encryption.
    • by totally bogus dude (1040246) on Friday February 29 2008, @07:24AM (#22598736)

      Actually it's about the methods the RIAA is using. It's very important to do everything possible to prevent this sort of thing being seen as okay, or even normal, "so long as they're catching the bad guys". Just like it's not generally considered okay for the police to break the law in order to make an arrest, no matter how bad the guy they're arresting is, because it sets precedents of "acceptable behaviour" that are ultimately far more detrimental to society than the acts of even lots of individual bad guys.

      Same deal here. If the RIAA can use these sorts of tactics with impunity, then so can everyone else with enough money. Even though some - indeed, probably almost all - of the people being sued did infringe on someone's copyrights, the harm they did pales in comparison to the harm these kind of abuses of the law would do to society if they became (even more) widespread.

      It's not just the RIAA, but the fact that it's hard to show actual harm or even deprivation of income from copyright infringement seems to make this a more morally appealing battlefront than others.

        • If you were alive in the 15th century, I'm sure you'd be arguing against the printing press too.
      • by oojimaflib (1077261) on Friday February 29 2008, @08:16AM (#22598924)

        Where are our lawyers, on the whole*, when our own country's government violates sacred human rights?

        Which "sacred human rights" you're talking about that the government is violating (which I presume to mean "is violating unconstitutionally")?

        The constitution, albeit a fine document, is not the be-all and end-all of human rights; not least because it is somewhat limited in the people to whom it applies. While I will freely admit that the US gov. has a positively sparkling human rights record compared to some, I note that the country is still not party to, for example, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights [wikipedia.org] among others.

        Apologies for being somewhat OT here, but the difference between human rights law in general and the US constitution is an important one and I think it important not to blur the difference.

        • by JesseMcDonald (536341) on Friday February 29 2008, @09:39AM (#22599640) Homepage

          While I will freely admit that the US gov. has a positively sparkling human rights record compared to some, I note that the country is still not party to, for example, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights among others.

          That's a good thing, since none of the items listed in that covenant are actual human rights. There's a simple litmus test for whether a proposed "right" is reasonable: can you exercise the "right" in the absence of other human beings to exploit? In this case the answer is clearly "no"; their so-called "rights" cannot be exercised except by making one or more other people worse off than they would be otherwise.

        • by Dun Malg (230075) on Friday February 29 2008, @12:06PM (#22601672) Homepage

          I note that the country is still not party to, for example, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights [wikipedia.org] among others.

          Apologies for being somewhat OT here, but the difference between human rights law in general and the US constitution is an important one and I think it important not to blur the difference.

          See, the trouble there is that the ICESCR isn't about rights, it's about socialism. A right that imposes a obligation on others isn't classically a right. ICESCR is full of "rights" like the right to paid vacations, welfare, social insurance, and "health".
      • Which "sacred human rights" you're talking about that the government is violating (which I presume to mean "is violating unconstitutionally")?

        You might want to read this old journal [slashdot.org] from last month where I chronicle how my fourth amendment rights against unwarranted search were violated TWICE last year. Or would you posit that it's OK for the police to search YOUR garage without a warrant or even your knowlege because a strange woman, who had not been accused of any crime by anyone, had been prowling around
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        and if I had mod points they would mod you up. Everyone bashes the lawyer... thats like someone who knows nothing about networks bashing the network engineer.. "they just keep deisnging new technology so they can make money and the people who have to pay them will never know if they really need it or not. The lawyers that do their jobs well and with morals are just as good as the engineer who helps his client... this is also the same as the lawyer who is sloppy, does bad work, doesn't bother to learn the la
    • Re:Future scaping? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sm62704 (957197) on Friday February 29 2008, @09:36AM (#22599600) Journal
      What interest me most is how this will evolve in the next generation of lawmakers. If these young people are going to step up against RIAA and win, who will be left to watch the RIAA propaganda videos like recently exposed on /.? Seems to me that RIAA with their complete propaganda machinery is no match for educational facilities :-)

      Back in the seventies, we young people all smoked pot. Now that my genertation's rich people have taken over from the last generation's rich people, is it legal? Hell no, the assshats running things all deny ever having touched the stuff. Well, one famous asshat former doper claims he tried it once but never inhaled, as if he were talking to a nation of idiots. Well maybe he was.

      But at any rate, I think when you in your twenties now are my age, your generation's rich people that become lawmakers are no more going to restore copyright to reasonable terms and legalize noncommercial copying than my generation's rich people that became lawmakers legalized the marijuana that nearly every single one of them broke the law smoking in the seventies.
      • Which just goes to prove that the last people you would want sitting in goverment is rich old people. Unless you like having old lying hypocrites in power.

        OK, that may be a little unfair to a few of them. But really, looking at it statistically, rich old people in power aren't really the best choice unless you want cynical people that could sell their own mother and afterwards convince everyone that it was for her own good.

        Age may reflect wisdom, but it also reflects stagnation and cynicism. Riches may refl