Here are some of the songs I am going to play on my radio program this weekend. I am very excited to be playing five tracks from The Herd – its hard to pick my favourite from this list they are such a great band but if pushed to choose perhaps I would say 2020 or Its Time to Face the Truth are two that stand out.
Billy Bragg, Help Save the Youth of America
Billy Bragg, Days Like These
Billy Bragg, Ideology
Eliot, Freedom of Speech
Pitch Black, Speech (Freedom of Speech Remix)
Mamie Brown and the Birmingham Movement Choir, I’m on My Way
Freedom Singers, Ain’t Gonna Let Nobody Turn Me Around
Woody Guthrie, 1913 Massacre
Simple Minds, Mandela Day
Peter Tosh, Equal Rights
Neville Brothers, Sister Rosa
Our Land Our Home, Forgotten Tribe
Our Land Our Home (Goanna), Solid Rock
Joe Glazer, Preacher and the Slave
Joe Glazer, There’s Power in a Union
Tracy Chapman, Talkin About a Revolution
John Lennon, Imagine
No FX, Franco UnAmerican
Neil Young, Lets Impeach the President
John Butler Trio, Fire In the Sky
Edwin Starr, War
Meredith Brooks, Bitch
No Doubt, Just a Girl
The Herd, Time to Face the Truth
The Herd, 2020
The Herd, The King is Dead
The Herd, 77%
The Herd, Emergency
Country Joe McDonald, Save the Whales
Julian Lennon, Saltwater
Jamiroquai, Emergency on Planet Earth
U2, Sunday Bloody Sunday
Friday, November 28, 2008
Year in Review: International Copyright Issues
The primary concern regarding international copyright developments in 2008 was the secret negotiation of the ACTA treaty – Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement – between the United States of America, the European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland and Mexico.[1]
As the text of the agreement has not been made public and public interest groups have not had an opportunity to contribute it is unclear what the treaty will impose in terms of new intellectual property law and enforcement. Speculation as to the terms suggests that the agreement will impose mandatory ISP level filtering and monitoring of users accounts, the disclosure of user identities, a three strikes proposal, the need for countries with high rates of physical piracy to register and monitor the sale of discs and the materials used to produce discs, increased criminal and civil penalties including the criminalisation of peer to peer file sharing, greater enforcement of intellectual property laws and border searches of personal devices.[2]
The majority of the information to date on the terms of the agreement has been from leaks published on the internet.[3] Lobbying against the secrecy of the negotiations, in September 2008 100 international public interest groups signed a letter demanding that the process be opened for public consultation.[4]
In September 2008 the US Trade Representative held an open hearing and explained that the agreement was focused on ‘criminal enforcement, border measures, civil enforcement, optical disc piracy and IPR enforcement issues relating to internet distribution.’[5] Claims that the agreement would result in the border inspection of personal computing devices were dismissed.[6]
In October 2008 two high profile politicians from the United States, Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) wrote to the Bush administration expressing concern that the terms of the agreement would negatively impact on Congress’s ability to make constructive policy changes in the future.[7] They suggested that the agreement should not contain provisions relating to the liability or obligations of internet service providers nor deal with issues relating to digital rights management technology.[8]
[1] Wired, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement: Fact or Fiction? (15 September 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/international-i.html> at 21 September 2008; TechDirt, Canada Takes ACTA Secrecy To New Levels (29 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080728/1914061820.shtml> at 31 July 2008; ZeroPaid, ACTA Negotiations to Continue Next Week (23 July 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9645/ACTA+Negotiations+to+Continue+Next+Week> at 23 July 2008; TechDirt, Entertainment Industry Continues To Try To Sneak Copyright Expansion Through ACTA (8 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080703/0301501586.shtml> at 9 July 2008; TechDirt, We Need More Sunlight On ACTA: Where Is The Mainstream Press? (4 June 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080603/1247531301.shtml> at 6 June 2008
[2] ZeroPaid, Report - ACTA Stalled Amid War Between Australian ISPs and Copyright Industry (20 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9766/Report+-+ACTA+Stalled+Amid+War+Between+Australian+ISPs+and+Copyright+Industry> at 21 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Over 100 International Public Interest Organizations Demand ACTA Be Made Public (17 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9754/Over+100+International+Public+Interest+Organizations+Demand+ACTA+Be+Made+Public> at 21 September 2008; ZeroPaid, ACTA Negotiations to Continue Next Week (23 July 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9645/ACTA+Negotiations+to+Continue+Next+Week> at 23 July 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA's ACTA wishlist includes gutted DMCA, mandatory filters (30 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080630-inside-the-riaas-acta-wishlist.html> at 4 July 2008; ZeroPaid, US Proposes 'Pirate Bay Killer' Trade Agreement (24 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9511/US+Proposes+%27Pirate+Bay+Killer%27+Trade+Agreement> at 5 June 2008
[3] ZeroPaid, Another Critical ACTA Leak Surfaces (1 August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9669/Another+Critical+ACTA+Leak+Surfaces> at 6 August 2008
[4] ZeroPaid, Over 100 International Public Interest Organizations Demand ACTA Be Made Public (17 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9754/Over+100+International+Public+Interest+Organizations+Demand+ACTA+Be+Made+Public> at 21 September 2008; TechDirt, Groups Demanding That ACTA Negotiations Be Made Public (16 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080916/1839352286.shtml> at 21 September 2008
[5] TechDirt, The ACTA Hearing: USTR Claims There's Nothing To See Here... Move Along Politics (25 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080924/1732262362.shtml> at 26 September 2008
[6] TechDirt, The ACTA Hearing: USTR Claims There's Nothing To See Here... Move Along Politics (25 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080924/1732262362.shtml> at 26 September 2008
[7]ZeroPaid, Senators Push for Transparency for ACTA (4 October 2008)<http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9788/Senators+Push+for+Transparency+for+ACTA> at 5 October 2008; ArsTechnica, Key senators oppose DRM, ISP filtering in secret ACTA treaty (3 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081003-key-senators-oppose-drm-isp-filtering-in-secret-acta-treaty.html> at 5 October 2008; TechDirt, Even Senators Who Want Stronger Copyright Laws Are Worried About ACTA (3 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081003/0029142439.shtml> at 5 October 2008
[8] ArsTechnica, Key senators oppose DRM, ISP filtering in secret ACTA treaty (3 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081003-key-senators-oppose-drm-isp-filtering-in-secret-acta-treaty.html> at 5 October 2008; ZeroPaid, Senators Push for Transparency for ACTA (4 October 2008)<http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9788/Senators+Push+for+Transparency+for+ACTA> at 5 October 2008; TechDirt, Even Senators Who Want Stronger Copyright Laws Are Worried About ACTA (3 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081003/0029142439.shtml> at 5 October 2008
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Economic Contribution of Australian (c) Industries
Price Waterhouse Coopers and the Australian Copyright Council have just released a report into the economic contribution of Australian copyright industries.
There are a number of interesting points to the report with findings that 837,507 people or 8% of the Australian workforce are employed by copyright industries (compared with 8.3% in 1996). The industries generated economic value equal to 10.3% of gross domestic product and $6.873 billion in exports or 4.1% of total Australian exports.
The value added of copyright industries has grown from $58.9 billion in 1995/96 to $97.8 billion in 2006/2007. Core copyright industries compounded annual growth over this period was 5.1% per year and across all related industries 4.7% per year with the greatest growth value being in software and databases (10.4%) with music theatrical productions and operas growing 2.7% per year.
Core industries have also experienced compound annual growth in employment with software and databases increasing 7.3% per year and music, theatrical productions and operas increasing 1.4% per year. There has also been an increase in the average wage of those engaged in these industries up from $51,572 in 1995/96 to $61,355 in 2006/2007.
This report does not paint a picture of an industry in distress but shows that while there has been some overall drop in the percentage of Australians employed in the copyright industries that there continues to be some growth in both the core and related industries that depend on intangible works.
Further Reading
Australian Copyright Council/Price Waterhouse Coopers, Making the Intangible Tangible: The Economic Contribution of Australia's Copyright Industries (November 2008) <http://www.copyright.org.au/bcepv04.pdf> at 27 November 2008
There are a number of interesting points to the report with findings that 837,507 people or 8% of the Australian workforce are employed by copyright industries (compared with 8.3% in 1996). The industries generated economic value equal to 10.3% of gross domestic product and $6.873 billion in exports or 4.1% of total Australian exports.
The value added of copyright industries has grown from $58.9 billion in 1995/96 to $97.8 billion in 2006/2007. Core copyright industries compounded annual growth over this period was 5.1% per year and across all related industries 4.7% per year with the greatest growth value being in software and databases (10.4%) with music theatrical productions and operas growing 2.7% per year.
Core industries have also experienced compound annual growth in employment with software and databases increasing 7.3% per year and music, theatrical productions and operas increasing 1.4% per year. There has also been an increase in the average wage of those engaged in these industries up from $51,572 in 1995/96 to $61,355 in 2006/2007.
This report does not paint a picture of an industry in distress but shows that while there has been some overall drop in the percentage of Australians employed in the copyright industries that there continues to be some growth in both the core and related industries that depend on intangible works.
Further Reading
Australian Copyright Council/Price Waterhouse Coopers, Making the Intangible Tangible: The Economic Contribution of Australia's Copyright Industries (November 2008) <http://www.copyright.org.au/bcepv04.pdf> at 27 November 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Get Up - Save the Internet Campaign
Great news this week that the Greens appear determined to vote against the proposed mandatory ISP filtering that the Government is trying to introduce. Of course they do not hold the balance of power completely so more work needs to be done to ensure that this draconian regulation is not implemented.
Get Up are running a Save the Net campaign. I urge everyone to sign the petition and send it on to all of your friends and family and encourage them to get involved. As the material on the GetUp website explains, mandatory ISP level filtering will slow up internet speeds by up to 87%, will block 1 in 12 legitimate sites and will miss much of the inappropriate content - especially the 60% of traffic from peer to peer sites. It is completely unnecessary, expensive and ineffective to filter the internet in this way. Have your say today and do what you can to stop the Government from introducing the worst internet access in the world outside of China.
You can also write to Stephen Conroy (as I already have - see here and here) and express your concerns directly:
More Information
Get Up, Save the Net <http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet/442> at 26 November 2008
News.com.au, Greens Could Block Plans for Internet Filter (25 November 2008) <http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,24703499-5014239,00.html> at 25 November 2008
ZeroPaid, Australian Web Filter to Block More than 10,000 Unwanted Sites (14 November 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9842/Australian+Web+Filter+to+Block+More+than+10%2C000+%27Unwanted%27+Sites> at 26 November 2008
ZeroPaid, Australian ISP Agrees to 'Ridiculous' Net-Filter Trial to Prove 'How Stupid It Is' (12 November 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9838/Australian+ISP+Agrees+to+%27Ridiculous%27+Net-Filter+Trial+to+Prove+%27How+Stupid+it+Is%27> at 26 November 2008
The Register, Is the Internet Going Down Down Under (5 November 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/05/aussie_internet/> at 26 November 2008
ZeroPaid, Australian Govt's Plans to Censor the Internet is Stricter than Iran (24 October 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9821/Australian+Govt%27s+Plan+to+Censor+the+Internet+is+%27Stricter+than+Iran%27> at 26 November 2008
ArsTechnica, 'Net Filters "required" for all Australians, No Opt Out (16 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081016-net-filters-required-for-all-australians-no-opt-out.html> at 26 November 2008
TechDirt, Australian Internet Filters Have No Real Opt-Out; Only Opt-In to Fewer Filters (13 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081013/1135502530.shtml> at 26 November 2008
The Australian, Net Censorship to Cost Users (5 August 2008) <http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,24128728-15306,00.html> at 26 November 2008
Get Up are running a Save the Net campaign. I urge everyone to sign the petition and send it on to all of your friends and family and encourage them to get involved. As the material on the GetUp website explains, mandatory ISP level filtering will slow up internet speeds by up to 87%, will block 1 in 12 legitimate sites and will miss much of the inappropriate content - especially the 60% of traffic from peer to peer sites. It is completely unnecessary, expensive and ineffective to filter the internet in this way. Have your say today and do what you can to stop the Government from introducing the worst internet access in the world outside of China.
You can also write to Stephen Conroy (as I already have - see here and here) and express your concerns directly:
Senator, The Hon. Stephen Conroy
Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy
Level 4, 4 Treasury Place
Melbourne Vic 3002
More Information
Get Up, Save the Net <http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet/442> at 26 November 2008
News.com.au, Greens Could Block Plans for Internet Filter (25 November 2008) <http://www.news.com.au/technology/story/0,25642,24703499-5014239,00.html> at 25 November 2008
ZeroPaid, Australian Web Filter to Block More than 10,000 Unwanted Sites (14 November 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9842/Australian+Web+Filter+to+Block+More+than+10%2C000+%27Unwanted%27+Sites> at 26 November 2008
ZeroPaid, Australian ISP Agrees to 'Ridiculous' Net-Filter Trial to Prove 'How Stupid It Is' (12 November 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9838/Australian+ISP+Agrees+to+%27Ridiculous%27+Net-Filter+Trial+to+Prove+%27How+Stupid+it+Is%27> at 26 November 2008
The Register, Is the Internet Going Down Down Under (5 November 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/05/aussie_internet/> at 26 November 2008
ZeroPaid, Australian Govt's Plans to Censor the Internet is Stricter than Iran (24 October 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9821/Australian+Govt%27s+Plan+to+Censor+the+Internet+is+%27Stricter+than+Iran%27> at 26 November 2008
ArsTechnica, 'Net Filters "required" for all Australians, No Opt Out (16 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081016-net-filters-required-for-all-australians-no-opt-out.html> at 26 November 2008
TechDirt, Australian Internet Filters Have No Real Opt-Out; Only Opt-In to Fewer Filters (13 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081013/1135502530.shtml> at 26 November 2008
The Australian, Net Censorship to Cost Users (5 August 2008) <http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,24128728-15306,00.html> at 26 November 2008
Year in Review: Individual lawsuits USA
Once again the RIAA litigation campaign against individual file sharers continued in 2008. It is estimated that 30,000 people have now been targeted in the United States for file sharing.[1] There were a number of important matters considered by the courts and new grounds for defence were tried.
I have prepared an overview of the most notable events that have taken place over the past 12 months - this is just a summary with many of the cases still underway. I will be looking at primary sources for the purposes of my thesis so have not gone into a lot of detail here.
Thomas
Jamie Thomas was held liable for sharing 24 songs in 2007 and ordered to pay $222,000 in damages.[2] The Judge in the case however later declared a mistrial on the basis that instructions he gave to the jury may have been erroneous.[3] The US District Court judge Michael J. Davis instructed the jury that simply making the files available in a shared folder was a sufficient basis to establish copyright infringement but then later considered that the law required proof of actual dissemination.[4] The RIAA appealed the interlocutory ruling but it is expected that the trial will be held again.[5]
In the process of ordering a retrial the judge also made express comments regarding the award of damages in these cases noting that they were excessive and designed to discourage commercial piracy and that while the court does not excuse the behaviour of file sharers that it nonetheless considers the statutory damages to be far in excess of what is warranted in instances of personal use.[6]
Howell
While Jeffery Howell was held liable for file sharing and ordered to pay $40,850 in damages the decision in this case was based on the fact that he had acted in bad faith and wiped his hard drive despite the court ordering him not to destroy the evidence.[7] The court appeared willing to consider arguments that simply making a file available in a shared folder was insufficient to establish copyright infringement.[8]
Sire
London v Sire was another case in which the court appeared willing to consider arguments that making a file available in a shared folder does not amount to distribution, finding that publication and distribution are not identical.[9]
Brennan
In Atlantic v Brennan the court also denied the RIAA’s application for default judgement on the basis that making a file available does not amount to distribution.[10]
Harper
Whitney Harper was aged between 14 and 16 years at the time that she used Kazaa to download and share music.[11] She argued before the court that her infringement was innocent as she had no knowledge of the law or the way the architecture operated at the time of the infringement.[12] Her computer ran Kazaa with the software operational without her knowledge for a number of years after she had initially downloaded the music.[13] The court agreed that this was a case of innocent infringement and ordered her to pay damages of $200 per song.[14]
In the later part of the trial and following on from the ruling in the Thomas case she attempted to argue that while she had admitted to sharing 31 songs that the RIAA only had proof of her disseminating 6 tracks and that on this basis her damages should be reduced.[15] The court was unwilling to entertain this argument and she was ordered to pay $7,400.[16]
Tenenbaum
In the later months of 2008 a defence was filed in the case of Joel Tenebaum who was accused of sharing 7 songs using Kazaa in August 2007.[17] The case is yet to go to trial however the defendant is being assisted by Professors from the Berkman Centre for Internet and Society and claims that damages for copyright infringement introduced through the Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages Improvement Act of 1999 are unconstitutional. He also argues that the RIAA are abusing the court process by undertaking the litigation campaign as they view the actions as part of a deterrence education campaign and thus the lawsuits and threats are based on an improper purpose.[18]
UMG v Doe
In this case the court held that universities are required to comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act which specifies that the private information of students cannot be disclosed without the knowledge of parents.[19] This decision means that universities which receive subpoenas must be given adequate time to identify the students and contact their parents to warn them that the personal information of the student is to be released and why.[20]
Arista v Does 1-17
This case concerns students from the University of Oregon. The court required the RIAA to resubmit its subpoena to specify that the university is required to provide the personal details of all people that may have used the identified IP address for downloading. This came after a complaint from the university that in circumstances where more than one person has access to an account they should not be required to conduct an investigation process to determine which users personal information should be disclosed.[21]
Boyer
In Atlatnic v Boyer a motion to dismiss brought by the RIAA was denied with counterclaims of civil conspiracy, extortion, illegal investigation, computer fraud, trespass, deception and abuse of process remaining to be heard.[22]
Barker
Denise Barker settled her dispute with the RIAA paying $756 in damages for each of the eight songs she was accused of sharing.[23] In earlier proceedings for this case the court held that publication and distribution were synonymous and that making a file available in a shared folder was sufficient grounds to hold that the content had been distributed.[24]
Andersen
Tanya Andersen was awarded $107,951 in lawyers fees after mounting a successful defence to a file sharing case.[25] The RIAA withdrew the case after it became apparent that they did not have sufficient evidence to pursue the claims.[26] Andersen is still pursuing counterclaims against the RIAA including conspiracy, abuse of the legal process, negligence, wire fraud, mail fraud and wrongfully filing a lawsuit.[27]
Cassin
The RIAA was also forced to withdraw the case against Joan Cassin after it determined that there was insufficient evidence to suggest that she was responsible for sharing music.[28] The RIAA refilled a claim against the remaining members of her house.[29]
Amurao
The case against Mr Amurao was withdrawn in January 2008.[30]
Other relevant issues
In 2008 it was reported that new technology has been developed to automate the file sharing investigation process.[31] It is not clear that this technology has been implemented yet, however should this be the case it will stream line the litigation process enabling the RIAA to sue more people for copyright infringement.[32]
A number of questions were raised as to whether investigators such as those engaged by Media Sentry are required to hold Private Investigators licenses with the State of Michigan passing an amendment to its legislation making the holding of such a license a requirement.[33] The American Bar Association issued a report suggesting that organisations such as Media Sentry should not be required to obtain Private Investigators licenses arguing that this loophole detracted from the substantive issues surrounding the investigations.[34]
There was a significant increase in the number of file sharing lawsuits commenced against college students with many higher education facilities reporting a dramatic increase in the number of subpoenas issued and pre litigation settlement offers made to students. [35] This led in part to legislative measures requiring universities to take active steps to prevent infringement on their networks (to be considered in more detail in a later post regarding ISP Liability).[36]
Some universities attempted to prevent the disclosure of the personal information of students with Tufts University arguing that they did not have the technology in place to accurately identify the correct user at the time of the alleged infringement.[37] Marshall University made a similar argument but was ordered by the court to disclose the details of all students that may have shared the illegal content in question.[38]
There were also a couple of instances in which the courts were forced again to consider the issue of joining John Doe lawsuits together with the courts preferring that the suits were not commenced together in large groups.[39]
The courts have entered default judgements against those that do not respond to the pre litigation letters and who do not defend the action.[40]
It was also reported that the RIAA were increasing the damages sought for students that did not respond to an initial settlement offer made in the pre litigation phase in an attempt to force compliance and reduce the number of file sharers seeking to challenge claims.[41]
There was also increased speculation as to the quality of evidence on which the lawsuit campaign is based with independent researchers finding that inanimate objects such as printers can attract DMCA take down notices and be considered to have illegally file shared based on the investigation techniques employed in these cases.[42]
Reports indicate that despite the estimated 30,000 lawsuits that have been commenced none of the funds recovered have been directed to artists.[43]
Further Reading
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has an excellent summary of the lawsuits over the past five years see:
EFF, RIAA v. The People Five Years Later (September 2008) <http://www.eff.org/wp/riaa-v-people-years-later> at 3 October 2008
[1] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[2] ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; Wired Blog, Professors Siding With Jammie Thomas in RIAA Case (18 June 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/professors-sidi.html> at 26 June 2008; The Register, World's Dumbest File Sharer loses lawyer, sells knickers (3 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/03/jammie_thomas_attorney_flees/> at 8 January 2008
[3] ZeroPaid, RIAA Appeals Jammie Thomas Mistrial Ruling (17 October 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9810/RIAA+Appeals+Jammie+Thomas+Mistrial+Ruling> at 19 October 2008; Slyck, Jammie Thomas Verdict Thrown Out, Judge Orders New Trial in P2P Case (25 September 2008) <http://www.slyck.com/story1770_Jammie_Thomas_Verdict_Thrown_Out_Judge_Orders_New_Trial_in_P2P_Case> at 5 October 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Capitol v. Thomas: Judge Orders New Trial, Implores Congress to Lower Statutory Penalties for P2P (24 September 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/09/capitol-v-thomas-judge-orders-new-trial-implores-c> at 5 October 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Tosses RIAA Victory; Glare Continues on Making Available (25 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092408riaa> at 26 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; The Register, RIAA filesharing target Jammie Thomas wins retrial (25 September 2008)<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/25/jammie_thomas_again/> at 26 September 2008; Wall Street Journal, Music File-Sharing Decision To Have Broad Impact (15 August 2008) <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121875652064642585.html> at 20 August 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Victory... Headed Towards a Mistrial? (5 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/080408riaa> at 7 August 2008; TechDirt, Judge In Jammie Thomas Trial Seems Likely To Declare A Mistrial (4 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080804/1612281887.shtml> at 6 August 2008; The Arizona Republic, Labels urge judge to uphold decision in 1st piracy trial (5 August 2008) <http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/2008/08/05/20080805biz-mktsector0805.html> at 6 August 2008; ArsTechnica, Final RIAA/Jammie Thomas briefs in; new trial decision looms (14 July 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080714-final-riaajammie-thomas-briefs-in-new-trial-decision-looms.html> at 15 July 2008; ArsTechnica, Jammie Thomas, RIAA cross swords in final briefs to judge (1 July 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080701-jammie-thomas-riaa-cross-swords-in-final-briefs-to-judge.html> at 4 July 2008; TechDirt, Should RIAA Win Against Jammie Thomas Be Tossed After RIAA Admits It Misspoke On The Stand? (4 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080104/155907.shtml> at 8 January 2008
[4] ZeroPaid, RIAA Appeals Jammie Thomas Mistrial Ruling (17 October 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9810/RIAA+Appeals+Jammie+Thomas+Mistrial+Ruling> at 19 October 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Tosses RIAA Victory; Glare Continues on Making Available (25 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092408riaa> at 26 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; ArsTechnica, EFF attacks foundation of entire RIAA lawsuit campaign (22 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080622-eff-attacks-foundation-of-riaa-lawsuit-campaign.html> at 27 June 2008; Wired Blog, Professors Siding With Jammie Thomas in RIAA Case (18 June 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/professors-sidi.html> at 26 June 2008; ZeroPaid, 10 Law Professors Tell Court 'Making Available' Not Copyright Infringement (21 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9577/10+Law+Professors+Tell+Court+%27Making+Available%27+Not+Copyright+Infringement> at 26 June 2008; ZeroPaid, EFF Files Amicus Brief of Jammie Thomas Trial, Demands Re Trial (21 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9581/EFF+Files+Amicus+Brief+on+Jammie+Thomas+Trial%2C+Demands+Re-Trial> at 26 June 2008; TechDirt, MPAA Explains Why Proof Shouldn't Be Necessary In Copyright Infringement Cases (23 June 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080621/1257061470.shtml> at 26 June 2008
[5] CNet News, RIAA appeals mistrial in file-sharing case (16 October 2008) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10068547-38.html> at 19 October 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Appeals Mistrial Ruling In The Jammie Thomas Trial (16 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081016/0024202556.shtml> at 19 October 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Suits Up Against Jammie Thomas; Appeal Begins (17 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101608riaa> at 19 October 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA wants to appeal on contested jury instruction (16 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081016-riaa-wants-to-appeal-on-contested-jury-instruction.html> at 17 October 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Tosses RIAA Victory; Glare Continues on Making Available (25 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092408riaa> at 26 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Also Tells Judge That Proof Shouldn't Be Necessary To Sue For Infringement (1 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080630/2000361557.shtml> at 1 July 2008
[6] RecordingIndsutryvThePeopleBlog, RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judge rejects 'making available'; attacks excessive damages (24 September 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/09/riaas-222000-verdict-in-capitol-v.html> at 5 October 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Capitol v. Thomas: Judge Orders New Trial, Implores Congress to Lower Statutory Penalties for P2P (24 September 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/09/capitol-v-thomas-judge-orders-new-trial-implores-c> at 5 October 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; TechDirt, Judge Declares Mistrial In RIAA's Only Court Victory (25 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080924/2255532365.shtml> at 26 September 2008; ArsTechnica, Thomas verdict overturned, making available theory rejected (24 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080924-thomas-verdict-overturned-making-available-theory-rejected.html> at 25 September 2008
[7] ArsTechnica, Howell verdict: RIAA wins $40,850 P2P judgment (1 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080901-howell-verdict-riaa-wins-40850-p2p-judgment.html> at 12 September 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Defendant Picks Up $40,850 Infringement Tab (3 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/090208riaa> at 4 September 2008; ArsTechnica, Howell verdict: RIAA wins $40,850 P2P judgment (1 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080901-howell-verdict-riaa-wins-40850-p2p-judgment.html> at 2 September 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Beats the Howells; Critical Evidence Destroyed (27 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/082708riaa> at 1 September 2008; TechDirt, Howell Loses To RIAA... But For Evidence Destruction (27 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080827/0004082109.shtml> at 1 September; CNet News, Report: RIAA wins case over erased hard drive (26 August 2008) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10026694-93.html> at 28 August 2008
[8] Digital Music News, ...And Fresh Challenges Emerge on "Making Available" (15 May 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051508jammie> at 21 May 2008; The Patry Copyright Blog, Atlantic Recording Corp. v. Howell (30 April 2008) <http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008/04/atlantic-recording-corp-v-howell.html> at 10 May 2008; ZeroPaid, File-Sharing Lawsuits - Could They Be Over? (2 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9452/File+Sharing+Lawsuits+-+Could+they+be+over%3F> at 5 May 2008; Digital Music News, Court Questions Making Available Theory, Trial Ahead (2 May 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/050108riaa> at 3 May 2008; CNet News, Court rejects RIAA's 'making available' piracy argument (29 April 2008) <http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9932004-7.html> at 2 May 2008; TechDirt, Court Rejects RIAA's 'Making Available' Theory In Infamous Howell Case (29 April 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080429/125025979.shtml> at 2 May 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Big Victory in Atlantic v. Howell: Court Rejects RIAA "Making Available" Theory (29 April 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/big-victory-atlantic-v-howell-court-rejects-making> at 30 April 2008; ArsTechnica, Judge deals another blow to RIAA's making available theory (29 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080429-judge-deals-another-blow-to-riaas-making-available-theory.html> at 30 April 2008; EFF Deeplinks, EFF Takes on RIAA Lawsuit Strategy in Wednesday Court Hearing (3 March 2008) <http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/03/03> at 10 March 2008; ArsTechnica, EFF to take RIAA on in court over "making available" claim (4 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080304-eff-to-take-riaa-on-in-court-over-making-available-claim.html> at 6 March 2008; ZeroPaid, EFF Takes on the RIAA in File-sharing Case (5 March 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9307/EFF+Takes+on+the+RIAA+in+File-sharing+Case> at 6 March 2008; EFF Deeplinks, RIAA File-Sharing Complaint Fails to Support Default Judgment (25 February 2008)<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/02/riaa-file-sharing-complaint-fails-support-default-judgment> at 29 February 2008; EFFector, "Attempted Distribution" Not a Crime Vol. 21, No. 2 (15 January 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eff-files-brief-atlantic-v-howell-resisting-riaas-attempted-distribution-theory> at 20 January 2008; ZeroPaid, Can the RIAA Sue for Attempted Copyright Infringement? (14 January 2008)<http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9197/Can+the+RIAA+Sue+for+Attempted+Copyright+Infringement%3F> at 20 January 2008; Digital Music News, EFF Needles RIAA Once Again, Challenges "Making Available" (18 January 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/011807riaa> at 20 January 2008; TechDirt, EFF Files Brief In Howell Case, Says 'Making Available' Is Not Infringement (14 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080114/002412.shtml> at 18 January 2008
[9] EFF Deeplinks, Making Available is Not Distribution, Says Court in London-Sire v. Doe (2 April 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/making-available-distribution-says-court-london-sire-v-doe> at 8 April 2008; The Patry Copyright Blog, The recent making available cases (3 April 2008) <http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008/04/recent-making-available-cases.html> at 8 April 2008; SiliconValley/Associated Press, Judges take opposite sides on legality of uploading music files to share (4 April 2008) <http://www.siliconvalley.com/news/ci_8813684> at 8 April 2008
[10] RecordingIndsutryvThePeople, Default judgment denied in Atlantic v. Brennan, RIAA complaint insufficient, possible defenses of copyright misuse, excessive damages (25 February 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/02/default-judgment-denied-in-atlantic-v.html> at 28 February 2008
[11] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[12] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008; TechDirt, 'Innocent Infringement' As A Way To Lower Copyright Infringement Damages? (11 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080811/0353381944.shtml> at 20 August 2008; The Register, Filesharing teen gets damages reduced in ignorance claim (12 August 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/12/teenager_filesharing_damages_reduced/> at 20 August 2008; RecordingIndustryvThePeople, Innocent infringement defense may reduce damages to $200 per song file in Maverick v. Harper (9 August 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/08/innocent-infringement-defense-may.html> at 12 August 2008; Digital Music News, Innocent Infringing? Latest RIAA Defendant Claims Ignorance (11 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081008innocent> at 12 August 2008
[13] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[14] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[15] TechDirt, Judge Reject's Woman's Request For A Jury Trial; Orders Her To Pay RIAA (27 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081027/0321442650.shtml> at 29 October 2008; Digital Music News, Innocent Infringer' Smells Blood; Pushes for Full Trial (21 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102108innocent> at 22 October 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Calls Another Critic Vexatious After She Points Out Flaw In RIAA Logic (20 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0045092577.shtml> at 22 October 2008; Wired, RIAA Decries Texas Woman as 'Vexatious' for Demanding File Sharing Trial (17 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-decries-te.html> at 21 October 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA now wants to avoid trial in innocent infringement case (19 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081019-riaa-now-wants-to-avoid-trial-in-innocent-infringement-case.html> at 21 October 2008
[16] TechDirt, Judge Reject's Woman's Request For A Jury Trial; Orders Her To Pay RIAA (27 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081027/0321442650.shtml> at 29 October 2008; Digital Music News, Innocent Infringer' Smells Blood; Pushes for Full Trial (21 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102108innocent> at 22 October 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Calls Another Critic Vexatious After She Points Out Flaw In RIAA Logic (20 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0045092577.shtml> at 22 October 2008; Wired, RIAA Decries Texas Woman as 'Vexatious' for Demanding File Sharing Trial (17 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-decries-te.html> at 21 October 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA now wants to avoid trial in innocent infringement case (19 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081019-riaa-now-wants-to-avoid-trial-in-innocent-infringement-case.html> at 21 October 2008
[17] TechDirt, Big Guns Come Out In Effort To Show RIAA's Lawsuits Are Unconstitutional (30 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081030/0203582685.shtml> at 5 December 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA defendant enlists Harvard Law prof, students (29 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081029-riaa-defendant-enlists-harvard-law-prof-students.html> at 30 October 2008; Digital Music News, Showdown In Boston: Harvard Prof Takes on RIAA... (29 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102808nesson> at 30 October 2008
[18] TechDirt, Big Guns Come Out In Effort To Show RIAA's Lawsuits Are Unconstitutional (30 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081030/0203582685.shtml> at 5 December 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA defendant enlists Harvard Law prof, students (29 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081029-riaa-defendant-enlists-harvard-law-prof-students.html> at 30 October 2008; Digital Music News, Showdown In Boston: Harvard Prof Takes on RIAA... (29 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102808nesson> at 30 October 2008
[19] Find Law, Before the RIAA Can Sue a Student, Mom and Dad Can Call a Lawyer: An Interesting Innovation Affords Some Notice to Students Accused of Illegal Downloading (6 October 2008) <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20081006.html> at 12 October 2008; TechDirt, University Gets Time To Notify Students Before Handing Over Info To The RIAA (10 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081009/2153312509.shtml> at 12 October 2008
[20] Find Law, Before the RIAA Can Sue a Student, Mom and Dad Can Call a Lawyer: An Interesting Innovation Affords Some Notice to Students Accused of Illegal Downloading (6 October 2008) <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20081006.html> at 12 October 2008; ArsTechnica, Judge forces U of Oregon to cough up student data to RIAA (30 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080930-judge-forces-u-of-oregon-to-cough-up-student-data-to-riaa.html> at 5 October 2008
[21] Find Law, Before the RIAA Can Sue a Student, Mom and Dad Can Call a Lawyer: An Interesting Innovation Affords Some Notice to Students Accused of Illegal Downloading (6 October 2008) <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20081006.html> at 12 October 2008; ArsTechnica, Marshall University fails to block RIAA's P2P subpoenas (16 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080416-marshall-university-fails-to-block-riaas-p2p-subpoenas.html> at 17 April 2008
[22] RecordingIndustry v ThePeopleBlog, Counterclaims for extortion, conspiracy, trespass, consumer fraud & abuse, abuse of process upheld in Atlantic v. Boyer (6 May 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/05/counterclaims-for-extortion-conspiracy.html> at 7 May 2008
[23] TechDirt, Woman Who Claimed RIAA Infringement Damages Were Unconstitutional Settles For $756/Song (18 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080818/1936552018.shtml> at 20 August 2008; Digital Music News, Another Courtroom Dance? RIAA Settles Elektra v. Barker (19 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081808elektra> at 20 August 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Defendant Pleads Guilty, But Challenges Charges (30 July 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/072908riaa/view> at 31 July 2008; TechDirt, Woman Admits File Sharing; Challenges Constitutionality Of Copyright Act (29 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080729/0114391821.shtml> at 31 July 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Offering to Distribute = Distribution, says Court in Elektra v. Barker (1 April 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/offering-distribute-distribution-says-elektra-v-barker-ruling> at 8 April 2008
[24] ZeroPaid, Court Helps Record Labels Define Kazaa's 'Shared Folder' in Lawsuit (2 April 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9374/Court+Helps+Record+Labels+Define+KaZaA%27s+%27Shared+Folder%27+in+Lawsuit> at 3 April 2008; ArsTechnica, New ruling may "grease the wheels" of RIAA litigation machine (31 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080331-new-ruling-may-grease-the-wheels-of-riaa-litigation-machine.html> at 2 April 2008; RecordingIndsutryvThePeople, Judge rejects RIAA "making available" theory but sustains complaint, and gives RIAA chance to replead defective theory in Elektra v. Barker (31 March 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/03/judge-rejects-riaa-making-available.html> at 2 April 2008; Billboard.biz, Court Backs Majors On File-Sharing Question (31 March 2008) <http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i73f32003f239851a2a6aae5368d831e9> at 2 April 2008
[25] ZeroPaid, RIAA Finally Pays $107,951 to Wrongfully Accused File Sharer (2o August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9707/RIAA+Finally+Pays+%24107%2C951+to+Wrongfully+Accused+File-Sharer> at 22 August 2008; TechDirt, Once Again (With Feeling): RIAA Told To Pay Tanya Andersen's Legal Fees (28 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080728/1844461819.shtml> at 29 July 2008; Slyck, P2P Defendant Awarded Attorney Fees (15 May 2008) <http://www.slyck.com/story1687_P2P_Defendant_Awarded_Attorney_Fees> at 5 June 2008; Effector, Score Two for Defendants in the P2p Wars (16 May 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/05/score-two-defendants-p2p-wars> at 5 June 2008; The Register, RIAA ordered to shell out $100k for P2P witch hunt (15 May 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/15/tanya_andersen_attorneys_fees/> at 21 May 2008; ZeroPaid, RIAA Must Pay $107,834 in Legal Fees (17 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9497/RIAA+Must+Pay+%24107%2C834+in+Legal+Fees> at 21 May 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA doesn't want to pay for a fair defense, says victor (26 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080326-riaa-andersen-attorney-should-only-get-10-of-requested-fee.html> at 27 March 2008; The Register, RIAA told to pay legal fees for harrassed defendant (17 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/17/tanya_andersen_riaa_attorneys_fees/> at 20 January 2008
[26] ZeroPaid, RIAA Finally Pays $107,951 to Wrongfully Accused File Sharer (2o August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9707/RIAA+Finally+Pays+%24107%2C951+to+Wrongfully+Accused+File-Sharer> at 22 August 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Approves Lawyer Fees; RIAA Owes $107,834 (25 June 2008)<http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/062508andersen> at 27 June 2008; BusinessWeek, Does She Look Like a Music Pirate? (24 April 2008) <http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/08_18/b4082042959954.htm> at 30 April 2008; The Register, Woman accuses RIAA of killing dolphins (20 March 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/20/tanya_andersen_complaint/> at 22 March 2008
[27] ArsTechnica, Andersen relentless in quest to nail the RIAA (5 May 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080505-andersen-relentless-in-quest-to-nail-the-riaa.html> at 6 May 2008; TechDirt, Tanya Andersen Decides To Drop Racketeering Charges Against The RIAA (28 April 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080427/161528962.shtml> at 30 April 2008
[28] ArsTechnica, Third time's the charm? RIAA tries end run around old case (13 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080613-third-times-the-charm-riaa-tries-end-run-around-old-case.html> at 15 June 2008; Digital Music News, Plot Thickens on RIAA Dismissal; More Court Filings Emerge (13 June 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/061208riaa> at 15 June 2008
[29] ArsTechnica, Third time's the charm? RIAA tries end run around old case (13 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080613-third-times-the-charm-riaa-tries-end-run-around-old-case.html> at 15 June 2008
[30] RecordingIndstryvThePeopleBlog, RIAA withdraws Lava v. Amurao, argues it should not be assessed attorneys fees; defendant moves to exclude MediaSentry evidence for illegality (29 January 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/01/riaa-withdraws-lava-v-amurao-case.html> at 31 Janaury 2008
[31] ZeroPaid, Coming Soon: Automated Piracy Identification & Settlement System (18 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9755/Coming+Soon%3A+Automated+Piracy+Identification+%26+Settlement+System> at 21 September 2008g
[32] ZeroPaid, Coming Soon: Automated Piracy Identification & Settlement System (18 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9755/Coming+Soon%3A+Automated+Piracy+Identification+%26+Settlement+System> at 21 September 2008
[33] ArsTechnica, Michigan law passed requiring MediaSentry to have PI license (5 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080905-michigan-law-passed-requiring-mediasentry-to-have-pi-license.html> at 12 September 2008; ZeroPaid, College Demands RIAA Anti-Piracy Investigator get PI License (8 August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9687/College+Demands+RIAA+Anti-Piracy+Investigator+Get+PI+License> at 12 August 2008; TechDirt, Another Claim Of Illegal RIAA Investigative Techniques (6 February 2008)<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080205/230542187.shtml> at 7 February 2008; Slyck, RIAA Not Impressed with Legal Concerns Surrounding Media Sentry (6 February 2008) <http://www.slyck.com/story1657_RIAA_Not_Impressed_with_Legal_Concerns_Surrounding_Media_Sentry>
[34] TechDirt, ABA Says RIAA File Sharing Watchers Shouldn't Need Private Investigators' Licenses (28 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080827/2143312115.shtml> at 1 September 2008
[35] ZeroPaid, RIAA Steps Up Campus File-Sharing War, Says Using 'Better Software, More Servers' (7 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9459/RIAA+Steps+Up+Campus+File-Sharing+War%2C+Says+Using+%27Better+Software%2C+More+Servers%27> at 8 May 2008; Digital Music News, Universities Report Climb In RIAA Letters... (2 May 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/050108college> at 5 May 2008; Wired Blog, Universities Baffled By Massive Surge In RIAA Copyright Notices (30 April 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/riaa-sends-spik.html> at 3 May 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Massively Ramps Up Warning Notices To College Students Over File Sharing (May 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080502/1552351013.shtml> at 3 May 2008; ArsTechnica, Campuses swimming in flood of infringement notices from RIAA (30 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080430-campuses-swimming-in-flood-of-infringement-notices-from-riaa.html> at 2 May 2008; ZeroPaid, Biggest RIAA Campus Crackdown Ever: 569 Students Get Settlement Letters (16 April 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9407/Biggest+RIAA+Campus+Crackdown+Ever%3A+569+Students+Get+%27Settlement%27+Letters> at 17 April 2008; CNet News Blog, RIAA marks one year of college threat-letter drive (21 February 2008) <http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9876121-7.html> at 29 February 2008; ZeroPaid, RIAA College Crackdown Part 13, Targets 401 More Students (26 February 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9288/RIAA+College+Crackdown+Part+13%2C+Targets+401+More+Students> at 27 February 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA College Crackdown Hits Sophomore Year (22 February 2008)<http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/022108riaa> at 25 February 2008; ZeroPaid, Oklahoma State Hands Over Names of Suspected File Sharers to RIAA (15 February 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9268/Oklahoma+State+Hands+Over+Names+of+Suspected+File-Sharers+to+RIAA> at 17 February 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Announces 12th Round of University Lawsuits (14 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9196/RIAA+Announces+12th+Round+of+University+Lawsuits> at 20 January 2008; Digital Music News, New Year, New Lawsuits: RIAA Filings Continue In '08 (10 January 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/010908riaa> at 20 January 2008
[36] ArsTechnica, Big content goes after colleges through funding bills (15 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080415-big-content-goes-after-college-p2p-through-funding-bills.html> at 17 April 2008; ZeroPaid, Tennessee Proposes Own Crackdown On College Campus File Sharing (28 February 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9293/Tennessee+Proposes+Own+Crackdown+on+College+Campus+File-Sharing> at 29 February 2008; ArsTechnica, Tennessee legislation would turn schools into copyright cops (25 February 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080225-tennessee-legislation-would-turn-schools-into-copyright-cops.html> at 28 February 2008
[37] Digital Music News, Another University Brushes Back Against the RIAA... (7 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/080708tufts> at 12 August 2008
[38] ArsTechnica, Marshall University fails to block RIAA's P2P subpoenas (16 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080416-marshall-university-fails-to-block-riaas-p2p-subpoenas.html> at 17 April 2008
[39] ArsTechnica, Maine law students try to derail RIAA lawsuit express (2 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080402-maine-law-students-try-to-derail-riaa-lawsuit-express.html> at 3 April 2008; ArsTechnica, Improper joinder rulings, sanctions threats don't deter RIAA (14 February 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080214-improper-joinder-rulings-sanctions-threats-dont-deter-riaa.html> at 18 February 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Says RIAA Should Be Fined For Bundling File Sharing Lawsuits (30 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/194839120.shtml> at 4 February 2008; Slyck, Magistrate judge suggests sanctions against RIAA lawyers (30 January 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080130-magistrate-judge-suggests-sanctions-against-riaa-lawyers.html> at 31 January 2008
[40] ArsTechnica, Kazaa downloads cost one man $750 per song in RIAA suit (16 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080316-kazaa-downloads-cost-one-man-750-per-song-in-riaa-suit.html> at 18 March 2008
[41] ArsTechnica, RIAA doubles settlement cost for students fighting subpoenas (11 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080611-riaa-doubles-settlement-cost-for-students-fighting-subpoenas.html> at 13 June 208
[42] EFF Deeplinks, Laser Printers Found Guilty of "Making Available" Crimes (5 June 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/06/laser-printers-found-guilty-making-available-crime> at 13 June 2008; ZeroPaid, STUDY: BitTorrent Users Prone to False Copyright Infringement Claims (6 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9535/STUDY%3A+BitTorrent+Users+Prone+to+False+Copyright+Infringement+Claims> at 7 June 2008; TechDirt, Would You Believe Copyright Infringement Notices Are Based On Faulty Information? (5 June 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080605/1227001318.shtml> at 7 June 2008; ArsTechnica, Study paints grim picture of automated P2p enforcement (5 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080605-study-paints-grim-picture-of-automated-dmca-notice-accuracy.html> at 6 June 2008
[43] TechDirt, Musicians Wondering Why They're Not Seeing A Cut Of RIAA Settlements (28 February 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080228/125620382.shtml> at 3 March 2008
I have prepared an overview of the most notable events that have taken place over the past 12 months - this is just a summary with many of the cases still underway. I will be looking at primary sources for the purposes of my thesis so have not gone into a lot of detail here.
Thomas
Jamie Thomas was held liable for sharing 24 songs in 2007 and ordered to pay $222,000 in damages.[2] The Judge in the case however later declared a mistrial on the basis that instructions he gave to the jury may have been erroneous.[3] The US District Court judge Michael J. Davis instructed the jury that simply making the files available in a shared folder was a sufficient basis to establish copyright infringement but then later considered that the law required proof of actual dissemination.[4] The RIAA appealed the interlocutory ruling but it is expected that the trial will be held again.[5]
In the process of ordering a retrial the judge also made express comments regarding the award of damages in these cases noting that they were excessive and designed to discourage commercial piracy and that while the court does not excuse the behaviour of file sharers that it nonetheless considers the statutory damages to be far in excess of what is warranted in instances of personal use.[6]
Howell
While Jeffery Howell was held liable for file sharing and ordered to pay $40,850 in damages the decision in this case was based on the fact that he had acted in bad faith and wiped his hard drive despite the court ordering him not to destroy the evidence.[7] The court appeared willing to consider arguments that simply making a file available in a shared folder was insufficient to establish copyright infringement.[8]
Sire
London v Sire was another case in which the court appeared willing to consider arguments that making a file available in a shared folder does not amount to distribution, finding that publication and distribution are not identical.[9]
Brennan
In Atlantic v Brennan the court also denied the RIAA’s application for default judgement on the basis that making a file available does not amount to distribution.[10]
Harper
Whitney Harper was aged between 14 and 16 years at the time that she used Kazaa to download and share music.[11] She argued before the court that her infringement was innocent as she had no knowledge of the law or the way the architecture operated at the time of the infringement.[12] Her computer ran Kazaa with the software operational without her knowledge for a number of years after she had initially downloaded the music.[13] The court agreed that this was a case of innocent infringement and ordered her to pay damages of $200 per song.[14]
In the later part of the trial and following on from the ruling in the Thomas case she attempted to argue that while she had admitted to sharing 31 songs that the RIAA only had proof of her disseminating 6 tracks and that on this basis her damages should be reduced.[15] The court was unwilling to entertain this argument and she was ordered to pay $7,400.[16]
Tenenbaum
In the later months of 2008 a defence was filed in the case of Joel Tenebaum who was accused of sharing 7 songs using Kazaa in August 2007.[17] The case is yet to go to trial however the defendant is being assisted by Professors from the Berkman Centre for Internet and Society and claims that damages for copyright infringement introduced through the Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages Improvement Act of 1999 are unconstitutional. He also argues that the RIAA are abusing the court process by undertaking the litigation campaign as they view the actions as part of a deterrence education campaign and thus the lawsuits and threats are based on an improper purpose.[18]
UMG v Doe
In this case the court held that universities are required to comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act which specifies that the private information of students cannot be disclosed without the knowledge of parents.[19] This decision means that universities which receive subpoenas must be given adequate time to identify the students and contact their parents to warn them that the personal information of the student is to be released and why.[20]
Arista v Does 1-17
This case concerns students from the University of Oregon. The court required the RIAA to resubmit its subpoena to specify that the university is required to provide the personal details of all people that may have used the identified IP address for downloading. This came after a complaint from the university that in circumstances where more than one person has access to an account they should not be required to conduct an investigation process to determine which users personal information should be disclosed.[21]
Boyer
In Atlatnic v Boyer a motion to dismiss brought by the RIAA was denied with counterclaims of civil conspiracy, extortion, illegal investigation, computer fraud, trespass, deception and abuse of process remaining to be heard.[22]
Barker
Denise Barker settled her dispute with the RIAA paying $756 in damages for each of the eight songs she was accused of sharing.[23] In earlier proceedings for this case the court held that publication and distribution were synonymous and that making a file available in a shared folder was sufficient grounds to hold that the content had been distributed.[24]
Andersen
Tanya Andersen was awarded $107,951 in lawyers fees after mounting a successful defence to a file sharing case.[25] The RIAA withdrew the case after it became apparent that they did not have sufficient evidence to pursue the claims.[26] Andersen is still pursuing counterclaims against the RIAA including conspiracy, abuse of the legal process, negligence, wire fraud, mail fraud and wrongfully filing a lawsuit.[27]
Cassin
The RIAA was also forced to withdraw the case against Joan Cassin after it determined that there was insufficient evidence to suggest that she was responsible for sharing music.[28] The RIAA refilled a claim against the remaining members of her house.[29]
Amurao
The case against Mr Amurao was withdrawn in January 2008.[30]
Other relevant issues
In 2008 it was reported that new technology has been developed to automate the file sharing investigation process.[31] It is not clear that this technology has been implemented yet, however should this be the case it will stream line the litigation process enabling the RIAA to sue more people for copyright infringement.[32]
A number of questions were raised as to whether investigators such as those engaged by Media Sentry are required to hold Private Investigators licenses with the State of Michigan passing an amendment to its legislation making the holding of such a license a requirement.[33] The American Bar Association issued a report suggesting that organisations such as Media Sentry should not be required to obtain Private Investigators licenses arguing that this loophole detracted from the substantive issues surrounding the investigations.[34]
There was a significant increase in the number of file sharing lawsuits commenced against college students with many higher education facilities reporting a dramatic increase in the number of subpoenas issued and pre litigation settlement offers made to students. [35] This led in part to legislative measures requiring universities to take active steps to prevent infringement on their networks (to be considered in more detail in a later post regarding ISP Liability).[36]
Some universities attempted to prevent the disclosure of the personal information of students with Tufts University arguing that they did not have the technology in place to accurately identify the correct user at the time of the alleged infringement.[37] Marshall University made a similar argument but was ordered by the court to disclose the details of all students that may have shared the illegal content in question.[38]
There were also a couple of instances in which the courts were forced again to consider the issue of joining John Doe lawsuits together with the courts preferring that the suits were not commenced together in large groups.[39]
The courts have entered default judgements against those that do not respond to the pre litigation letters and who do not defend the action.[40]
It was also reported that the RIAA were increasing the damages sought for students that did not respond to an initial settlement offer made in the pre litigation phase in an attempt to force compliance and reduce the number of file sharers seeking to challenge claims.[41]
There was also increased speculation as to the quality of evidence on which the lawsuit campaign is based with independent researchers finding that inanimate objects such as printers can attract DMCA take down notices and be considered to have illegally file shared based on the investigation techniques employed in these cases.[42]
Reports indicate that despite the estimated 30,000 lawsuits that have been commenced none of the funds recovered have been directed to artists.[43]
Further Reading
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has an excellent summary of the lawsuits over the past five years see:
EFF, RIAA v. The People Five Years Later (September 2008) <http://www.eff.org/wp/riaa-v-people-years-later> at 3 October 2008
[1] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[2] ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; Wired Blog, Professors Siding With Jammie Thomas in RIAA Case (18 June 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/professors-sidi.html> at 26 June 2008; The Register, World's Dumbest File Sharer loses lawyer, sells knickers (3 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/03/jammie_thomas_attorney_flees/> at 8 January 2008
[3] ZeroPaid, RIAA Appeals Jammie Thomas Mistrial Ruling (17 October 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9810/RIAA+Appeals+Jammie+Thomas+Mistrial+Ruling> at 19 October 2008; Slyck, Jammie Thomas Verdict Thrown Out, Judge Orders New Trial in P2P Case (25 September 2008) <http://www.slyck.com/story1770_Jammie_Thomas_Verdict_Thrown_Out_Judge_Orders_New_Trial_in_P2P_Case> at 5 October 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Capitol v. Thomas: Judge Orders New Trial, Implores Congress to Lower Statutory Penalties for P2P (24 September 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/09/capitol-v-thomas-judge-orders-new-trial-implores-c> at 5 October 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Tosses RIAA Victory; Glare Continues on Making Available (25 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092408riaa> at 26 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; The Register, RIAA filesharing target Jammie Thomas wins retrial (25 September 2008)<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/25/jammie_thomas_again/> at 26 September 2008; Wall Street Journal, Music File-Sharing Decision To Have Broad Impact (15 August 2008) <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121875652064642585.html> at 20 August 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Victory... Headed Towards a Mistrial? (5 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/080408riaa> at 7 August 2008; TechDirt, Judge In Jammie Thomas Trial Seems Likely To Declare A Mistrial (4 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080804/1612281887.shtml> at 6 August 2008; The Arizona Republic, Labels urge judge to uphold decision in 1st piracy trial (5 August 2008) <http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/2008/08/05/20080805biz-mktsector0805.html> at 6 August 2008; ArsTechnica, Final RIAA/Jammie Thomas briefs in; new trial decision looms (14 July 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080714-final-riaajammie-thomas-briefs-in-new-trial-decision-looms.html> at 15 July 2008; ArsTechnica, Jammie Thomas, RIAA cross swords in final briefs to judge (1 July 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080701-jammie-thomas-riaa-cross-swords-in-final-briefs-to-judge.html> at 4 July 2008; TechDirt, Should RIAA Win Against Jammie Thomas Be Tossed After RIAA Admits It Misspoke On The Stand? (4 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080104/155907.shtml> at 8 January 2008
[4] ZeroPaid, RIAA Appeals Jammie Thomas Mistrial Ruling (17 October 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9810/RIAA+Appeals+Jammie+Thomas+Mistrial+Ruling> at 19 October 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Tosses RIAA Victory; Glare Continues on Making Available (25 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092408riaa> at 26 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; ArsTechnica, EFF attacks foundation of entire RIAA lawsuit campaign (22 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080622-eff-attacks-foundation-of-riaa-lawsuit-campaign.html> at 27 June 2008; Wired Blog, Professors Siding With Jammie Thomas in RIAA Case (18 June 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/professors-sidi.html> at 26 June 2008; ZeroPaid, 10 Law Professors Tell Court 'Making Available' Not Copyright Infringement (21 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9577/10+Law+Professors+Tell+Court+%27Making+Available%27+Not+Copyright+Infringement> at 26 June 2008; ZeroPaid, EFF Files Amicus Brief of Jammie Thomas Trial, Demands Re Trial (21 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9581/EFF+Files+Amicus+Brief+on+Jammie+Thomas+Trial%2C+Demands+Re-Trial> at 26 June 2008; TechDirt, MPAA Explains Why Proof Shouldn't Be Necessary In Copyright Infringement Cases (23 June 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080621/1257061470.shtml> at 26 June 2008
[5] CNet News, RIAA appeals mistrial in file-sharing case (16 October 2008) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10068547-38.html> at 19 October 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Appeals Mistrial Ruling In The Jammie Thomas Trial (16 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081016/0024202556.shtml> at 19 October 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Suits Up Against Jammie Thomas; Appeal Begins (17 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/101608riaa> at 19 October 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA wants to appeal on contested jury instruction (16 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081016-riaa-wants-to-appeal-on-contested-jury-instruction.html> at 17 October 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Tosses RIAA Victory; Glare Continues on Making Available (25 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/092408riaa> at 26 September 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Also Tells Judge That Proof Shouldn't Be Necessary To Sue For Infringement (1 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080630/2000361557.shtml> at 1 July 2008
[6] RecordingIndsutryvThePeopleBlog, RIAA's $222,000 verdict in Capitol v. Thomas set aside. Judge rejects 'making available'; attacks excessive damages (24 September 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/09/riaas-222000-verdict-in-capitol-v.html> at 5 October 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Capitol v. Thomas: Judge Orders New Trial, Implores Congress to Lower Statutory Penalties for P2P (24 September 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/09/capitol-v-thomas-judge-orders-new-trial-implores-c> at 5 October 2008; ZeroPaid, Judge Tosses Out RIAA's First File-Sharing Conviction, Thomas Granted New Trial (25 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9774/Judge+Tosses+Out+RIAA%27s+First+File-Sharing+Conviction%2C+Thomas+Granted+New+Trial%21> at 26 September 2008; TechDirt, Judge Declares Mistrial In RIAA's Only Court Victory (25 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080924/2255532365.shtml> at 26 September 2008; ArsTechnica, Thomas verdict overturned, making available theory rejected (24 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080924-thomas-verdict-overturned-making-available-theory-rejected.html> at 25 September 2008
[7] ArsTechnica, Howell verdict: RIAA wins $40,850 P2P judgment (1 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080901-howell-verdict-riaa-wins-40850-p2p-judgment.html> at 12 September 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Defendant Picks Up $40,850 Infringement Tab (3 September 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/090208riaa> at 4 September 2008; ArsTechnica, Howell verdict: RIAA wins $40,850 P2P judgment (1 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080901-howell-verdict-riaa-wins-40850-p2p-judgment.html> at 2 September 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Beats the Howells; Critical Evidence Destroyed (27 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/082708riaa> at 1 September 2008; TechDirt, Howell Loses To RIAA... But For Evidence Destruction (27 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080827/0004082109.shtml> at 1 September; CNet News, Report: RIAA wins case over erased hard drive (26 August 2008) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10026694-93.html> at 28 August 2008
[8] Digital Music News, ...And Fresh Challenges Emerge on "Making Available" (15 May 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/051508jammie> at 21 May 2008; The Patry Copyright Blog, Atlantic Recording Corp. v. Howell (30 April 2008) <http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008/04/atlantic-recording-corp-v-howell.html> at 10 May 2008; ZeroPaid, File-Sharing Lawsuits - Could They Be Over? (2 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9452/File+Sharing+Lawsuits+-+Could+they+be+over%3F> at 5 May 2008; Digital Music News, Court Questions Making Available Theory, Trial Ahead (2 May 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/050108riaa> at 3 May 2008; CNet News, Court rejects RIAA's 'making available' piracy argument (29 April 2008) <http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9932004-7.html> at 2 May 2008; TechDirt, Court Rejects RIAA's 'Making Available' Theory In Infamous Howell Case (29 April 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080429/125025979.shtml> at 2 May 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Big Victory in Atlantic v. Howell: Court Rejects RIAA "Making Available" Theory (29 April 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/big-victory-atlantic-v-howell-court-rejects-making> at 30 April 2008; ArsTechnica, Judge deals another blow to RIAA's making available theory (29 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080429-judge-deals-another-blow-to-riaas-making-available-theory.html> at 30 April 2008; EFF Deeplinks, EFF Takes on RIAA Lawsuit Strategy in Wednesday Court Hearing (3 March 2008) <http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/03/03> at 10 March 2008; ArsTechnica, EFF to take RIAA on in court over "making available" claim (4 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080304-eff-to-take-riaa-on-in-court-over-making-available-claim.html> at 6 March 2008; ZeroPaid, EFF Takes on the RIAA in File-sharing Case (5 March 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9307/EFF+Takes+on+the+RIAA+in+File-sharing+Case> at 6 March 2008; EFF Deeplinks, RIAA File-Sharing Complaint Fails to Support Default Judgment (25 February 2008)<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/02/riaa-file-sharing-complaint-fails-support-default-judgment> at 29 February 2008; EFFector, "Attempted Distribution" Not a Crime Vol. 21, No. 2 (15 January 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eff-files-brief-atlantic-v-howell-resisting-riaas-attempted-distribution-theory> at 20 January 2008; ZeroPaid, Can the RIAA Sue for Attempted Copyright Infringement? (14 January 2008)<http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9197/Can+the+RIAA+Sue+for+Attempted+Copyright+Infringement%3F> at 20 January 2008; Digital Music News, EFF Needles RIAA Once Again, Challenges "Making Available" (18 January 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/011807riaa> at 20 January 2008; TechDirt, EFF Files Brief In Howell Case, Says 'Making Available' Is Not Infringement (14 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080114/002412.shtml> at 18 January 2008
[9] EFF Deeplinks, Making Available is Not Distribution, Says Court in London-Sire v. Doe (2 April 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/making-available-distribution-says-court-london-sire-v-doe> at 8 April 2008; The Patry Copyright Blog, The recent making available cases (3 April 2008) <http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2008/04/recent-making-available-cases.html> at 8 April 2008; SiliconValley/Associated Press, Judges take opposite sides on legality of uploading music files to share (4 April 2008) <http://www.siliconvalley.com/news/ci_8813684> at 8 April 2008
[10] RecordingIndsutryvThePeople, Default judgment denied in Atlantic v. Brennan, RIAA complaint insufficient, possible defenses of copyright misuse, excessive damages (25 February 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/02/default-judgment-denied-in-atlantic-v.html> at 28 February 2008
[11] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[12] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008; TechDirt, 'Innocent Infringement' As A Way To Lower Copyright Infringement Damages? (11 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080811/0353381944.shtml> at 20 August 2008; The Register, Filesharing teen gets damages reduced in ignorance claim (12 August 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/12/teenager_filesharing_damages_reduced/> at 20 August 2008; RecordingIndustryvThePeople, Innocent infringement defense may reduce damages to $200 per song file in Maverick v. Harper (9 August 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/08/innocent-infringement-defense-may.html> at 12 August 2008; Digital Music News, Innocent Infringing? Latest RIAA Defendant Claims Ignorance (11 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081008innocent> at 12 August 2008
[13] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[14] Wired, Former Teen Cheerleader Defies RIAA Over $7,400 File Sharing Tab (20 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-seeks-7400.html> at 30 October 2008
[15] TechDirt, Judge Reject's Woman's Request For A Jury Trial; Orders Her To Pay RIAA (27 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081027/0321442650.shtml> at 29 October 2008; Digital Music News, Innocent Infringer' Smells Blood; Pushes for Full Trial (21 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102108innocent> at 22 October 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Calls Another Critic Vexatious After She Points Out Flaw In RIAA Logic (20 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0045092577.shtml> at 22 October 2008; Wired, RIAA Decries Texas Woman as 'Vexatious' for Demanding File Sharing Trial (17 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-decries-te.html> at 21 October 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA now wants to avoid trial in innocent infringement case (19 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081019-riaa-now-wants-to-avoid-trial-in-innocent-infringement-case.html> at 21 October 2008
[16] TechDirt, Judge Reject's Woman's Request For A Jury Trial; Orders Her To Pay RIAA (27 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081027/0321442650.shtml> at 29 October 2008; Digital Music News, Innocent Infringer' Smells Blood; Pushes for Full Trial (21 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102108innocent> at 22 October 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Calls Another Critic Vexatious After She Points Out Flaw In RIAA Logic (20 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081020/0045092577.shtml> at 22 October 2008; Wired, RIAA Decries Texas Woman as 'Vexatious' for Demanding File Sharing Trial (17 October 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/10/riaa-decries-te.html> at 21 October 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA now wants to avoid trial in innocent infringement case (19 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081019-riaa-now-wants-to-avoid-trial-in-innocent-infringement-case.html> at 21 October 2008
[17] TechDirt, Big Guns Come Out In Effort To Show RIAA's Lawsuits Are Unconstitutional (30 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081030/0203582685.shtml> at 5 December 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA defendant enlists Harvard Law prof, students (29 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081029-riaa-defendant-enlists-harvard-law-prof-students.html> at 30 October 2008; Digital Music News, Showdown In Boston: Harvard Prof Takes on RIAA... (29 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102808nesson> at 30 October 2008
[18] TechDirt, Big Guns Come Out In Effort To Show RIAA's Lawsuits Are Unconstitutional (30 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081030/0203582685.shtml> at 5 December 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA defendant enlists Harvard Law prof, students (29 October 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081029-riaa-defendant-enlists-harvard-law-prof-students.html> at 30 October 2008; Digital Music News, Showdown In Boston: Harvard Prof Takes on RIAA... (29 October 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/102808nesson> at 30 October 2008
[19] Find Law, Before the RIAA Can Sue a Student, Mom and Dad Can Call a Lawyer: An Interesting Innovation Affords Some Notice to Students Accused of Illegal Downloading (6 October 2008) <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20081006.html> at 12 October 2008; TechDirt, University Gets Time To Notify Students Before Handing Over Info To The RIAA (10 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081009/2153312509.shtml> at 12 October 2008
[20] Find Law, Before the RIAA Can Sue a Student, Mom and Dad Can Call a Lawyer: An Interesting Innovation Affords Some Notice to Students Accused of Illegal Downloading (6 October 2008) <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20081006.html> at 12 October 2008; ArsTechnica, Judge forces U of Oregon to cough up student data to RIAA (30 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080930-judge-forces-u-of-oregon-to-cough-up-student-data-to-riaa.html> at 5 October 2008
[21] Find Law, Before the RIAA Can Sue a Student, Mom and Dad Can Call a Lawyer: An Interesting Innovation Affords Some Notice to Students Accused of Illegal Downloading (6 October 2008) <http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/ramasastry/20081006.html> at 12 October 2008; ArsTechnica, Marshall University fails to block RIAA's P2P subpoenas (16 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080416-marshall-university-fails-to-block-riaas-p2p-subpoenas.html> at 17 April 2008
[22] RecordingIndustry v ThePeopleBlog, Counterclaims for extortion, conspiracy, trespass, consumer fraud & abuse, abuse of process upheld in Atlantic v. Boyer (6 May 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/05/counterclaims-for-extortion-conspiracy.html> at 7 May 2008
[23] TechDirt, Woman Who Claimed RIAA Infringement Damages Were Unconstitutional Settles For $756/Song (18 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080818/1936552018.shtml> at 20 August 2008; Digital Music News, Another Courtroom Dance? RIAA Settles Elektra v. Barker (19 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/081808elektra> at 20 August 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Defendant Pleads Guilty, But Challenges Charges (30 July 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/072908riaa/view> at 31 July 2008; TechDirt, Woman Admits File Sharing; Challenges Constitutionality Of Copyright Act (29 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080729/0114391821.shtml> at 31 July 2008; EFF Deeplinks, Offering to Distribute = Distribution, says Court in Elektra v. Barker (1 April 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/offering-distribute-distribution-says-elektra-v-barker-ruling> at 8 April 2008
[24] ZeroPaid, Court Helps Record Labels Define Kazaa's 'Shared Folder' in Lawsuit (2 April 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9374/Court+Helps+Record+Labels+Define+KaZaA%27s+%27Shared+Folder%27+in+Lawsuit> at 3 April 2008; ArsTechnica, New ruling may "grease the wheels" of RIAA litigation machine (31 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080331-new-ruling-may-grease-the-wheels-of-riaa-litigation-machine.html> at 2 April 2008; RecordingIndsutryvThePeople, Judge rejects RIAA "making available" theory but sustains complaint, and gives RIAA chance to replead defective theory in Elektra v. Barker (31 March 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/03/judge-rejects-riaa-making-available.html> at 2 April 2008; Billboard.biz, Court Backs Majors On File-Sharing Question (31 March 2008) <http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i73f32003f239851a2a6aae5368d831e9> at 2 April 2008
[25] ZeroPaid, RIAA Finally Pays $107,951 to Wrongfully Accused File Sharer (2o August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9707/RIAA+Finally+Pays+%24107%2C951+to+Wrongfully+Accused+File-Sharer> at 22 August 2008; TechDirt, Once Again (With Feeling): RIAA Told To Pay Tanya Andersen's Legal Fees (28 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080728/1844461819.shtml> at 29 July 2008; Slyck, P2P Defendant Awarded Attorney Fees (15 May 2008) <http://www.slyck.com/story1687_P2P_Defendant_Awarded_Attorney_Fees> at 5 June 2008; Effector, Score Two for Defendants in the P2p Wars (16 May 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/05/score-two-defendants-p2p-wars> at 5 June 2008; The Register, RIAA ordered to shell out $100k for P2P witch hunt (15 May 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/15/tanya_andersen_attorneys_fees/> at 21 May 2008; ZeroPaid, RIAA Must Pay $107,834 in Legal Fees (17 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9497/RIAA+Must+Pay+%24107%2C834+in+Legal+Fees> at 21 May 2008; ArsTechnica, RIAA doesn't want to pay for a fair defense, says victor (26 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080326-riaa-andersen-attorney-should-only-get-10-of-requested-fee.html> at 27 March 2008; The Register, RIAA told to pay legal fees for harrassed defendant (17 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/17/tanya_andersen_riaa_attorneys_fees/> at 20 January 2008
[26] ZeroPaid, RIAA Finally Pays $107,951 to Wrongfully Accused File Sharer (2o August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9707/RIAA+Finally+Pays+%24107%2C951+to+Wrongfully+Accused+File-Sharer> at 22 August 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Approves Lawyer Fees; RIAA Owes $107,834 (25 June 2008)<http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/062508andersen> at 27 June 2008; BusinessWeek, Does She Look Like a Music Pirate? (24 April 2008) <http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/08_18/b4082042959954.htm> at 30 April 2008; The Register, Woman accuses RIAA of killing dolphins (20 March 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/20/tanya_andersen_complaint/> at 22 March 2008
[27] ArsTechnica, Andersen relentless in quest to nail the RIAA (5 May 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080505-andersen-relentless-in-quest-to-nail-the-riaa.html> at 6 May 2008; TechDirt, Tanya Andersen Decides To Drop Racketeering Charges Against The RIAA (28 April 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080427/161528962.shtml> at 30 April 2008
[28] ArsTechnica, Third time's the charm? RIAA tries end run around old case (13 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080613-third-times-the-charm-riaa-tries-end-run-around-old-case.html> at 15 June 2008; Digital Music News, Plot Thickens on RIAA Dismissal; More Court Filings Emerge (13 June 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/061208riaa> at 15 June 2008
[29] ArsTechnica, Third time's the charm? RIAA tries end run around old case (13 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080613-third-times-the-charm-riaa-tries-end-run-around-old-case.html> at 15 June 2008
[30] RecordingIndstryvThePeopleBlog, RIAA withdraws Lava v. Amurao, argues it should not be assessed attorneys fees; defendant moves to exclude MediaSentry evidence for illegality (29 January 2008) <http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/01/riaa-withdraws-lava-v-amurao-case.html> at 31 Janaury 2008
[31] ZeroPaid, Coming Soon: Automated Piracy Identification & Settlement System (18 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9755/Coming+Soon%3A+Automated+Piracy+Identification+%26+Settlement+System> at 21 September 2008g
[32] ZeroPaid, Coming Soon: Automated Piracy Identification & Settlement System (18 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9755/Coming+Soon%3A+Automated+Piracy+Identification+%26+Settlement+System> at 21 September 2008
[33] ArsTechnica, Michigan law passed requiring MediaSentry to have PI license (5 September 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080905-michigan-law-passed-requiring-mediasentry-to-have-pi-license.html> at 12 September 2008; ZeroPaid, College Demands RIAA Anti-Piracy Investigator get PI License (8 August 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9687/College+Demands+RIAA+Anti-Piracy+Investigator+Get+PI+License> at 12 August 2008; TechDirt, Another Claim Of Illegal RIAA Investigative Techniques (6 February 2008)<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080205/230542187.shtml> at 7 February 2008; Slyck, RIAA Not Impressed with Legal Concerns Surrounding Media Sentry (6 February 2008) <http://www.slyck.com/story1657_RIAA_Not_Impressed_with_Legal_Concerns_Surrounding_Media_Sentry>
[34] TechDirt, ABA Says RIAA File Sharing Watchers Shouldn't Need Private Investigators' Licenses (28 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080827/2143312115.shtml> at 1 September 2008
[35] ZeroPaid, RIAA Steps Up Campus File-Sharing War, Says Using 'Better Software, More Servers' (7 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9459/RIAA+Steps+Up+Campus+File-Sharing+War%2C+Says+Using+%27Better+Software%2C+More+Servers%27> at 8 May 2008; Digital Music News, Universities Report Climb In RIAA Letters... (2 May 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/050108college> at 5 May 2008; Wired Blog, Universities Baffled By Massive Surge In RIAA Copyright Notices (30 April 2008) <http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/04/riaa-sends-spik.html> at 3 May 2008; TechDirt, RIAA Massively Ramps Up Warning Notices To College Students Over File Sharing (May 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080502/1552351013.shtml> at 3 May 2008; ArsTechnica, Campuses swimming in flood of infringement notices from RIAA (30 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080430-campuses-swimming-in-flood-of-infringement-notices-from-riaa.html> at 2 May 2008; ZeroPaid, Biggest RIAA Campus Crackdown Ever: 569 Students Get Settlement Letters (16 April 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9407/Biggest+RIAA+Campus+Crackdown+Ever%3A+569+Students+Get+%27Settlement%27+Letters> at 17 April 2008; CNet News Blog, RIAA marks one year of college threat-letter drive (21 February 2008) <http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9876121-7.html> at 29 February 2008; ZeroPaid, RIAA College Crackdown Part 13, Targets 401 More Students (26 February 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9288/RIAA+College+Crackdown+Part+13%2C+Targets+401+More+Students> at 27 February 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA College Crackdown Hits Sophomore Year (22 February 2008)<http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/022108riaa> at 25 February 2008; ZeroPaid, Oklahoma State Hands Over Names of Suspected File Sharers to RIAA (15 February 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9268/Oklahoma+State+Hands+Over+Names+of+Suspected+File-Sharers+to+RIAA> at 17 February 2008; Digital Music News, RIAA Announces 12th Round of University Lawsuits (14 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9196/RIAA+Announces+12th+Round+of+University+Lawsuits> at 20 January 2008; Digital Music News, New Year, New Lawsuits: RIAA Filings Continue In '08 (10 January 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/010908riaa> at 20 January 2008
[36] ArsTechnica, Big content goes after colleges through funding bills (15 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080415-big-content-goes-after-college-p2p-through-funding-bills.html> at 17 April 2008; ZeroPaid, Tennessee Proposes Own Crackdown On College Campus File Sharing (28 February 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9293/Tennessee+Proposes+Own+Crackdown+on+College+Campus+File-Sharing> at 29 February 2008; ArsTechnica, Tennessee legislation would turn schools into copyright cops (25 February 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080225-tennessee-legislation-would-turn-schools-into-copyright-cops.html> at 28 February 2008
[37] Digital Music News, Another University Brushes Back Against the RIAA... (7 August 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/080708tufts> at 12 August 2008
[38] ArsTechnica, Marshall University fails to block RIAA's P2P subpoenas (16 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080416-marshall-university-fails-to-block-riaas-p2p-subpoenas.html> at 17 April 2008
[39] ArsTechnica, Maine law students try to derail RIAA lawsuit express (2 April 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080402-maine-law-students-try-to-derail-riaa-lawsuit-express.html> at 3 April 2008; ArsTechnica, Improper joinder rulings, sanctions threats don't deter RIAA (14 February 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080214-improper-joinder-rulings-sanctions-threats-dont-deter-riaa.html> at 18 February 2008; Digital Music News, Judge Says RIAA Should Be Fined For Bundling File Sharing Lawsuits (30 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/194839120.shtml> at 4 February 2008; Slyck, Magistrate judge suggests sanctions against RIAA lawyers (30 January 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080130-magistrate-judge-suggests-sanctions-against-riaa-lawyers.html> at 31 January 2008
[40] ArsTechnica, Kazaa downloads cost one man $750 per song in RIAA suit (16 March 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080316-kazaa-downloads-cost-one-man-750-per-song-in-riaa-suit.html> at 18 March 2008
[41] ArsTechnica, RIAA doubles settlement cost for students fighting subpoenas (11 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080611-riaa-doubles-settlement-cost-for-students-fighting-subpoenas.html> at 13 June 208
[42] EFF Deeplinks, Laser Printers Found Guilty of "Making Available" Crimes (5 June 2008) <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/06/laser-printers-found-guilty-making-available-crime> at 13 June 2008; ZeroPaid, STUDY: BitTorrent Users Prone to False Copyright Infringement Claims (6 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9535/STUDY%3A+BitTorrent+Users+Prone+to+False+Copyright+Infringement+Claims> at 7 June 2008; TechDirt, Would You Believe Copyright Infringement Notices Are Based On Faulty Information? (5 June 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080605/1227001318.shtml> at 7 June 2008; ArsTechnica, Study paints grim picture of automated P2p enforcement (5 June 2008) <http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080605-study-paints-grim-picture-of-automated-dmca-notice-accuracy.html> at 6 June 2008
[43] TechDirt, Musicians Wondering Why They're Not Seeing A Cut Of RIAA Settlements (28 February 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080228/125620382.shtml> at 3 March 2008
Friday, November 21, 2008
Music with a Message
Here are some of the tracks I will be playing on my radio show this weekend. I have also just downloaded the most recent The Herd album, Summerland, from eMusic which is fantastic and will be trying to get a couple of those tracks in as well – its is fantastic to see some Australian content on eMusic – I highly recommend the album.
Jonatha Brooks, Madonna On the Curb
Ben Harper, With My Own Two Hands
Tracy Chapman, The Rape of the World
Sting and the Radioactors, Nuclear Megawaste
Jeffrey Walk and Michael Droste, Save the Planet
Blue King Brown, Moment of Truth
Aretha Franklin, Respect
Lions Gate Chorus, Sisters are Doin’ It For Themselves
Wildfire, Make Music Not War
Dukes of Windsor, Its A War
Bob Dylan, Masters of War
Michael Schenker, Tim ‘Ripper’ Owens, War Pigs
The John Butler Trio, Fire in the Sky
Cold Chisel, Khe Sanh
Neville Brothers, With God on Our Side
Gil Scott-Heron, Winter in America
J.B. Lenoir, Livin’ in the White House
J.B. Lenoir, Remove this Rope
SNCC Freedom Singers, Ballad of Medgar Evers
Fannie Lou Hammer, Bob Moses, Get on Board
Fannie Lou Hammer, Wade In the Water
The Clash, The Guns of Brixton
Sex Pistols, God Save the Queen
Sex Pistols, Anarchy in the UK
Dead Kennedys, Holiday in Cambodia
Joe Glazer, We Will Sing One Song
Joe Glazer, Preacher and the Slave
Simple Minds, Mandela Day
Jonatha Brooks, Madonna On the Curb
Ben Harper, With My Own Two Hands
Tracy Chapman, The Rape of the World
Sting and the Radioactors, Nuclear Megawaste
Jeffrey Walk and Michael Droste, Save the Planet
Blue King Brown, Moment of Truth
Aretha Franklin, Respect
Lions Gate Chorus, Sisters are Doin’ It For Themselves
Wildfire, Make Music Not War
Dukes of Windsor, Its A War
Bob Dylan, Masters of War
Michael Schenker, Tim ‘Ripper’ Owens, War Pigs
The John Butler Trio, Fire in the Sky
Cold Chisel, Khe Sanh
Neville Brothers, With God on Our Side
Gil Scott-Heron, Winter in America
J.B. Lenoir, Livin’ in the White House
J.B. Lenoir, Remove this Rope
SNCC Freedom Singers, Ballad of Medgar Evers
Fannie Lou Hammer, Bob Moses, Get on Board
Fannie Lou Hammer, Wade In the Water
The Clash, The Guns of Brixton
Sex Pistols, God Save the Queen
Sex Pistols, Anarchy in the UK
Dead Kennedys, Holiday in Cambodia
Joe Glazer, We Will Sing One Song
Joe Glazer, Preacher and the Slave
Simple Minds, Mandela Day
Year in Review: Individual Lawsuits Other Countries
Around the world lawsuits continue against individual file sharers with many countries taking a more stringent view of the privacy implications and evidential burdens which must be met in order to justify the disclosure of personal information based on IP addresses.
China (Hong Kong)
In September 2008 a 14 year old boy was arrested for sharing Cantonese pop songs on the internet and now faces a maximum 4 year jail term.[1]
Denmark
In October 2008 a Danish man was found liable for sharing 13,000 songs and was fined approximately $24,000 or around $2 per song after the court estimated the actual loss of money to the recording industry was around $1 per song and then doubled the damages.[2]
France
In July 2008 the French Court of Appeals of Rennes overturned two file sharing convictions on the basis that their IP addresses were obtained illegally.[3]
Germany
In July 2008 a German court held that an internet account holder could not be held liable for other peoples actions on an open WiFi network.[4]
Earlier, in June 2008, another German court ruled that file sharing lawsuits are unconstitutional because ISPs can not give out personal information unless it is for a serious criminal offence.[5] The evidence in the case was obtained by Logistep, then a criminal complaint commenced from which the account holder’s personal information was released and which was subsequently used to commence civil proceedings.[6] This process was held to be a violation of the right to privacy.[7]
Previously, in March 2008, it was reported that the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany ruled that file sharing lawsuits are not serious offences along the lines of terrorism and murder and that the disclosure of personal information on the basis of an IP address was a breach of the right to privacy.[8]
Iceland
In March 2008 it was reported that 9 Icelanders were convicted of sharing movies online. Eight of the accused were sentenced to 2 years probation with the other, Bjarki Magnusson given a 30 day suspended sentence. Together they must pay legal costs of ISK 2.6 million ($US39,000).[9]
Italy
In March 2008 it was reported that the Italian agency Garante della Privacy had ruled that it was illegal for Logistep, the piracy investigation firm, to collect IP addresses of alleged copyright infringers.[10]
Japan
In July 2008 Kazuhiro Maki, a 34 year old man in Japan was sentenced to 18 months in prison suspended for 3 years for distributing popular TV animation footage through the file sharing network, Share.[11]
Netherlands
In the Netherlands in June 2008 a court ruled that despite the legislative entitlement for citizens to download material from file sharing networks as part of the personal use exceptions to copyright infringement, that where the original source of the material is uploaded unlawfully, all downloads of that material are also unlawful.[12]
Sweden
In Sweden in May 2008 Andreas Karlsson was convicted of sharing 4,500 music files and more than 30 films and received a suspended prison sentence, a fine and was ordered to pay more than $7,000 in court costs.[13] Initially prosecutors had sought to make him liable for the distribution of 23,000 music tracks but questionable investigation techniques forced the withdrawal of some of the charges and resulted in a retrial.[14]
Switzerland
In March 2008 it was reported that Swiss authorities had ruled that IP addresses are considered private information and that it is illegal to conduct investigations based on matching IP addresses to personal information because they do not qualify as serious offences.[15]
UK
In the UK a man, Euan MacLay, received a letter indicating that he had been detected file sharing (a movie) despite the fact that he had cancelled his subscription to the ISP Freedom2Surf some six months earlier.[16] The investigation was based on the IP address which he had previously held with many commentators noting that this was yet another example of the poor quality of evidence on which many file sharing lawsuits are commenced.[17] Freedom2Surf eventually apologised.[18]
A number of file sharing investigations in the UK conducted by Logistep on behalf of the firm Davenport Lyons have been shown to be based on incorrect evidence.[19] In response to this the firm Lawdit Solicitors announced that it would be willing to assist those falsely accused of file sharing on a pro bono basis.[20]
Europe
In February 2008 the European Court of Justice determined the matter of Promusicae v Telefonica.[21] The Spanish music rights organisation, Promusicae, sought disclosure of personal information of file sharers from an ISP.[22] The court held that European law does not require member countries to have laws that force the release of personal information in these circumstances.[23] The court held that it was a matter of consideration for each member country. [24]
[1] TechDirt, Officials In Hong Kong Arrest 14-Year-Old For Music Sharing (24 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080922/1924292335.shtml> at 26 September 2008
[2] TechDirt, Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song (21 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/1312092608.shtml> at 22 October 2008
[3] ZeroPaid, French Court - File-Sharer's IP Addresses Were Illegally Obtained, Conviction Overturned (8 July 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9618/French+Court+-+File-Sharer%27s+IP+Addresses+Were+Illegally+Obtained%2C+Conviction+Overturned> at 9 July 2008
[4] TechDirt, German Court Says That Open WiFi Owners Not Responsible For File Sharing Done By Others (10 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080709/1742241635.shtml> at 15 July 2008
[5] ZeroPaid, German Courts - P2p Lawsuits Unconstitutional (17 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9561/German+Courts+-+P2P+Lawsuits+Unconstitutional> at 19 June 2008; P2p Blog, German court: P2P lawsuits are unconstitutional (21 June 2008) <http://www.p2p-blog.com/index.php?itemid=696> at 15 June 2008
[6] ZeroPaid, German Courts - P2p Lawsuits Unconstitutional (17 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9561/German+Courts+-+P2P+Lawsuits+Unconstitutional> at 19 June 2008
[7] ZeroPaid, German Courts - P2p Lawsuits Unconstitutional (17 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9561/German+Courts+-+P2P+Lawsuits+Unconstitutional> at 19 June 2008
[8] Digital Music News, German, Italian Courts Offer Pro-ISP Privacy Rulings (20 March 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032008isp> at 23 March 2008
[9] The Register, File-swapping Icelanders slapped on writsts (6 March 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/06/icelandic_file_sharing_conviction/> at 7 March 2008
[10] Digital Music News, German, Italian Courts Offer Pro-ISP Privacy Rulings (20 March 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032008isp> at 23 March 2008; TechDirt, Italy Says P2P Monitoring Firm Broke The Law -- But This Might Not Be A Good Thing (18 March 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080318/074818571.shtml> at 22 March 2008; Billboard.biz, Italian File-Sharers Let Off The Hook (17 March 2008) <http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i4b1f1f7f2a01d2b3c04136a266ca9813> at 19 March 2008
[11] Daily Yomiuri Online, Man receives suspended sentence for file sharing (25 July 2008) <http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080725TDY02304.htm> at 28 July 2008
[12] PC World, Dutch court rules against law that allowed file downloading (27 June 2008) <http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;1262747976> at 28 June 2008
[13] ZeroPaid, Swedish Man Convicted of Illegal File-Sharing (7 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9463/Swedish+Man+Convicted+for+Illegal-File+Sharing> at 8 May 2008; TorrentFreak, File-Sharer Convicted in Sweden’s Biggest P2P Case (5 May 2008) <http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharer-convicted-in-swedens-biggest-p2p-case-080505/> at 6 May 2008 (note that these two reports differ as to the extent of the fine that was imposed).
[14] TorrentFreak, File-Sharer Convicted in Sweden’s Biggest P2P Case (5 May 2008) <http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharer-convicted-in-swedens-biggest-p2p-case-080505/> at 6 May 2008; TorrentFreak, Sweden’s Biggest File-Sharing Case Goes to Retrial Written (8 January 2008) <http://torrentfreak.com/swedens-biggest-file-sharing-case-goes-to-retrial-080108/> at 31 January 2008
[15] TechDirt, Italy Says P2P Monitoring Firm Broke The Law -- But This Might Not Be A Good Thing (18 March 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080318/074818571.shtml> at 22 March 2008
[16] ZeroPaid, UK ISP Warns BitTorrent User on Behalf of US Copyright Holder (3 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9729/UK+ISP+Warns+BitTorrent+User+on+Behalf+of+US+Copyright+Holder> at 4 September 2008
[17] ZeroPaid, UK ISP Warns BitTorrent User on Behalf of US Copyright Holder (3 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9729/UK+ISP+Warns+BitTorrent+User+on+Behalf+of+US+Copyright+Holder> at 4 September 2008
[18] ZeroPaid, UK ISP Warns BitTorrent User on Behalf of US Copyright Holder (3 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9729/UK+ISP+Warns+BitTorrent+User+on+Behalf+of+US+Copyright+Holder> at 4 September 2008
[19] TechDirt, UK Law Firm Tries Suing As Many People As Possible For File Sharing (15 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080714/1551101673.shtml> at 16 July 2008
[20] TechDirt, UK Lawyer Agrees To Represent Falsely Accused File Sharers For Free (26 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080825/2333082095.shtml> at 28 August 2008
[21] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
[22] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
[23] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
[24] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
China (Hong Kong)
In September 2008 a 14 year old boy was arrested for sharing Cantonese pop songs on the internet and now faces a maximum 4 year jail term.[1]
Denmark
In October 2008 a Danish man was found liable for sharing 13,000 songs and was fined approximately $24,000 or around $2 per song after the court estimated the actual loss of money to the recording industry was around $1 per song and then doubled the damages.[2]
France
In July 2008 the French Court of Appeals of Rennes overturned two file sharing convictions on the basis that their IP addresses were obtained illegally.[3]
Germany
In July 2008 a German court held that an internet account holder could not be held liable for other peoples actions on an open WiFi network.[4]
Earlier, in June 2008, another German court ruled that file sharing lawsuits are unconstitutional because ISPs can not give out personal information unless it is for a serious criminal offence.[5] The evidence in the case was obtained by Logistep, then a criminal complaint commenced from which the account holder’s personal information was released and which was subsequently used to commence civil proceedings.[6] This process was held to be a violation of the right to privacy.[7]
Previously, in March 2008, it was reported that the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany ruled that file sharing lawsuits are not serious offences along the lines of terrorism and murder and that the disclosure of personal information on the basis of an IP address was a breach of the right to privacy.[8]
Iceland
In March 2008 it was reported that 9 Icelanders were convicted of sharing movies online. Eight of the accused were sentenced to 2 years probation with the other, Bjarki Magnusson given a 30 day suspended sentence. Together they must pay legal costs of ISK 2.6 million ($US39,000).[9]
Italy
In March 2008 it was reported that the Italian agency Garante della Privacy had ruled that it was illegal for Logistep, the piracy investigation firm, to collect IP addresses of alleged copyright infringers.[10]
Japan
In July 2008 Kazuhiro Maki, a 34 year old man in Japan was sentenced to 18 months in prison suspended for 3 years for distributing popular TV animation footage through the file sharing network, Share.[11]
Netherlands
In the Netherlands in June 2008 a court ruled that despite the legislative entitlement for citizens to download material from file sharing networks as part of the personal use exceptions to copyright infringement, that where the original source of the material is uploaded unlawfully, all downloads of that material are also unlawful.[12]
Sweden
In Sweden in May 2008 Andreas Karlsson was convicted of sharing 4,500 music files and more than 30 films and received a suspended prison sentence, a fine and was ordered to pay more than $7,000 in court costs.[13] Initially prosecutors had sought to make him liable for the distribution of 23,000 music tracks but questionable investigation techniques forced the withdrawal of some of the charges and resulted in a retrial.[14]
Switzerland
In March 2008 it was reported that Swiss authorities had ruled that IP addresses are considered private information and that it is illegal to conduct investigations based on matching IP addresses to personal information because they do not qualify as serious offences.[15]
UK
In the UK a man, Euan MacLay, received a letter indicating that he had been detected file sharing (a movie) despite the fact that he had cancelled his subscription to the ISP Freedom2Surf some six months earlier.[16] The investigation was based on the IP address which he had previously held with many commentators noting that this was yet another example of the poor quality of evidence on which many file sharing lawsuits are commenced.[17] Freedom2Surf eventually apologised.[18]
A number of file sharing investigations in the UK conducted by Logistep on behalf of the firm Davenport Lyons have been shown to be based on incorrect evidence.[19] In response to this the firm Lawdit Solicitors announced that it would be willing to assist those falsely accused of file sharing on a pro bono basis.[20]
Europe
In February 2008 the European Court of Justice determined the matter of Promusicae v Telefonica.[21] The Spanish music rights organisation, Promusicae, sought disclosure of personal information of file sharers from an ISP.[22] The court held that European law does not require member countries to have laws that force the release of personal information in these circumstances.[23] The court held that it was a matter of consideration for each member country. [24]
[1] TechDirt, Officials In Hong Kong Arrest 14-Year-Old For Music Sharing (24 September 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080922/1924292335.shtml> at 26 September 2008
[2] TechDirt, Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song (21 October 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081021/1312092608.shtml> at 22 October 2008
[3] ZeroPaid, French Court - File-Sharer's IP Addresses Were Illegally Obtained, Conviction Overturned (8 July 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9618/French+Court+-+File-Sharer%27s+IP+Addresses+Were+Illegally+Obtained%2C+Conviction+Overturned> at 9 July 2008
[4] TechDirt, German Court Says That Open WiFi Owners Not Responsible For File Sharing Done By Others (10 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080709/1742241635.shtml> at 15 July 2008
[5] ZeroPaid, German Courts - P2p Lawsuits Unconstitutional (17 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9561/German+Courts+-+P2P+Lawsuits+Unconstitutional> at 19 June 2008; P2p Blog, German court: P2P lawsuits are unconstitutional (21 June 2008) <http://www.p2p-blog.com/index.php?itemid=696> at 15 June 2008
[6] ZeroPaid, German Courts - P2p Lawsuits Unconstitutional (17 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9561/German+Courts+-+P2P+Lawsuits+Unconstitutional> at 19 June 2008
[7] ZeroPaid, German Courts - P2p Lawsuits Unconstitutional (17 June 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9561/German+Courts+-+P2P+Lawsuits+Unconstitutional> at 19 June 2008
[8] Digital Music News, German, Italian Courts Offer Pro-ISP Privacy Rulings (20 March 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032008isp> at 23 March 2008
[9] The Register, File-swapping Icelanders slapped on writsts (6 March 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/06/icelandic_file_sharing_conviction/> at 7 March 2008
[10] Digital Music News, German, Italian Courts Offer Pro-ISP Privacy Rulings (20 March 2008) <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/032008isp> at 23 March 2008; TechDirt, Italy Says P2P Monitoring Firm Broke The Law -- But This Might Not Be A Good Thing (18 March 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080318/074818571.shtml> at 22 March 2008; Billboard.biz, Italian File-Sharers Let Off The Hook (17 March 2008) <http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/content_display/industry/e3i4b1f1f7f2a01d2b3c04136a266ca9813> at 19 March 2008
[11] Daily Yomiuri Online, Man receives suspended sentence for file sharing (25 July 2008) <http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080725TDY02304.htm> at 28 July 2008
[12] PC World, Dutch court rules against law that allowed file downloading (27 June 2008) <http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;1262747976> at 28 June 2008
[13] ZeroPaid, Swedish Man Convicted of Illegal File-Sharing (7 May 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9463/Swedish+Man+Convicted+for+Illegal-File+Sharing> at 8 May 2008; TorrentFreak, File-Sharer Convicted in Sweden’s Biggest P2P Case (5 May 2008) <http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharer-convicted-in-swedens-biggest-p2p-case-080505/> at 6 May 2008 (note that these two reports differ as to the extent of the fine that was imposed).
[14] TorrentFreak, File-Sharer Convicted in Sweden’s Biggest P2P Case (5 May 2008) <http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharer-convicted-in-swedens-biggest-p2p-case-080505/> at 6 May 2008; TorrentFreak, Sweden’s Biggest File-Sharing Case Goes to Retrial Written (8 January 2008) <http://torrentfreak.com/swedens-biggest-file-sharing-case-goes-to-retrial-080108/> at 31 January 2008
[15] TechDirt, Italy Says P2P Monitoring Firm Broke The Law -- But This Might Not Be A Good Thing (18 March 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080318/074818571.shtml> at 22 March 2008
[16] ZeroPaid, UK ISP Warns BitTorrent User on Behalf of US Copyright Holder (3 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9729/UK+ISP+Warns+BitTorrent+User+on+Behalf+of+US+Copyright+Holder> at 4 September 2008
[17] ZeroPaid, UK ISP Warns BitTorrent User on Behalf of US Copyright Holder (3 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9729/UK+ISP+Warns+BitTorrent+User+on+Behalf+of+US+Copyright+Holder> at 4 September 2008
[18] ZeroPaid, UK ISP Warns BitTorrent User on Behalf of US Copyright Holder (3 September 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9729/UK+ISP+Warns+BitTorrent+User+on+Behalf+of+US+Copyright+Holder> at 4 September 2008
[19] TechDirt, UK Law Firm Tries Suing As Many People As Possible For File Sharing (15 July 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080714/1551101673.shtml> at 16 July 2008
[20] TechDirt, UK Lawyer Agrees To Represent Falsely Accused File Sharers For Free (26 August 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080825/2333082095.shtml> at 28 August 2008
[21] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
[22] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
[23] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
[24] EFFector, EU Law Does Not Require ISP to Hand Over Customers' Identity Data in Alleged Filesharing Case (6 February 2008)Vol. 21, No. 04 <http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require> at 7 February 2008; The Register, EU data ruling slaps filesharers with red herring (31 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/31/eu_filesharing_bpi_data/> at 4 February 2008; TechDirt, EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names (29 January 2008) <http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080129/134719110.shtml> at 31 January 2008; The Register, EU supremes: ISPs don't always have to finger filesharers (29 January 2008) <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/eu_supreme_civil_isp_filesharing_case_law/> at 30 January 2008; ZeroPaid, 'EU's Top Court ISPs Dont Have to Name File Sharers' (29 January 2008) <http://www.zeropaid.com/news/9229/EU%27s+Top+Court%3A+%27ISPs+Don%27t+Have+to+Name+File-Sharers%27> at 31 January 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
