PDA

View Full Version : Students Settle W/riaa On Song Swap Sites



Jibbler
05-02-2003, 02:35 AM
And that is how it ends...

Students Settle with RIAA on Song-Swap Sites
Thu May 1, 2003 08:05 PM ET
By Sue Zeidler
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A recording industry trade group said on Thursday it reached settlements, ranging from $12,000 to $17,500 each, with four college students it claimed had been operating illegal song-swap networks on campuses.

While the settlements were lower than the hundreds of millions of dollars initially sought, the industry expects they will serve as a deterrent to individuals running "peer-to-peer" services, which let users download files for free.

The settlements also capped a turbulent week for the music business, marked by a flurry of court rulings, the launch of a new commercial music service by Apple Computer Inc. and the unveiling of new anti-piracy tactics by the industry.

"Given that these were the first lawsuits of this kind and that these individuals had limited means, we believe that the settlements were appropriate," said Matt Oppenheim, senior vice president of business and legal affairs for the Recording Industry Association of America. Oppenheim said future settlements may require stiffer penalties.

The RIAA is the trade group for the big five labels, including AOL Time Warner, EMI Group Plc, Bertelsmann AG, Vivendi Universal Music and Sony Corp. .

Earlier this week, the RIAA began sending out millions of instant messages to Web song swappers saying they could be "easily identified" and face "legal penalties."

The mass messaging followed a major legal setback for the industry in its efforts to shut down song-swapping services.

Last week, U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Wilson ruled popular song-swap services like Grokster and Morpheus should not be shut down because they could not control what is traded on their systems.

Film and music studios vowed to appeal the ruling, which at the same time appeared to point the industries toward more aggressive actions against individuals.

The labels' mounting focus on individuals first surfaced last month when the RIAA sued the four students, including Princeton University student Daniel Peng, Michigan Technical University student Joseph Nievelt, and Jesse Jordan and Aaron Sherman at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

The RIAA had likened the students' file-sharing systems, which were open only to students on the universities' internal networks, to miniature versions of Napster -- the software and network that led to the explosion of music file swapping.

It said the four networks were offering nearly 2.5 million files, including more than 1 million files on the largest of the networks.

The complaints asked for the legal limit on damages in such cases of $150,000 per each copyright infringed.

Lee Black, analyst with Jupiter Research, said the settlements may serve as a more realistic assessment of damages brought by file-sharing applications. "It certainly sends a message to people on campuses that they can now be held monetarily liable for infringing copyrights," Black said.

Others agreed. "I think this will be an effective deterrent, even if it doesn't have the shock value of a multi-million dollar settlement," said Gregg Lee, analyst with Raymond James and Associates. "I don't know too many college students who have $15,000 lying around."

The RIAA said at least 18 "local area Napster networks' or campus peer-to-peer services have come down since it filed the lawsuits.

But lawyers for 18-year-old Princeton University student Peng, said terms of the settlement actually reflected the strength of Peng's position under copyright laws. They said the settlement contained no admittance of guilt by Peng.

"It is unfortunate the recording industry, in trying to protect their profits, used the legal system to intimidate students who are often their best customers," said Peng's lawyer, Howard Ende at the firm of Drinker Biddle.

"I don't believe that I did anything wrong. I am glad that the case has been settled amicably, and I hope that for the sake of artists, the larger issues can soon be resolved," Peng said in a statement.

amphoteric88
05-03-2003, 04:00 AM
sounds like the students got off pretty easy in the end then
still, as the article says, it'll be hard for them to come up with the money :(
maybe we could all donate money to them (just a joke, don't start flaming, they deserve what they got imo)

marshall1219
05-03-2003, 04:25 AM
How do they deserve what they got? If you had to pay for $17,000 for file-sharing, which you more than likely take part in if you're looking at this site, you wouldn't think you got what you deserved. They were just sharing, which is exactly what the people on this board want. I know some people say they shouldn't use university connections to share, but I know almost anytime I log onto IRC I get asked to host files based on the fact my connection has a .edu at the end. So, apparently some people will be on these student's sides and find the ruling unjust.

amphoteric88
05-03-2003, 04:29 AM
well, you have to be rather ignorant to use a monitored line to fileshare
if i use my own home conenction for filesharing (which you assume i do), then i would only be using my line, my electricity and my phone bill costs
using a line which is paid for by an educational institute and is monitored is rather silly
don't you agree?

rastilin
05-03-2003, 05:13 AM
maybe we could all donate money to them


Not a bad idea, if one of you guys is reading this, why don't you start a web page for donations. I'd pay.

amphoteric88
05-03-2003, 05:16 AM
i can't tell if that was sarcasm or not
if not, can i have some money as well?
i can always do with some extra cash, plus i'm looking for a new graphics card
the people who were fined will probably be pretty well off anyway (if i remember correctly, in the us, you have to pay for your own university education). the people who were caught were at university, therefore they should be able to pay the fine

MagicNakor
05-03-2003, 06:46 AM
I'll take some of that free cash too. Can always do with free cash. ;)

These guys aren't going to some community college, either. I think the Princeton boy can take care of himself. :rolleyes:

:ninja:

RealitY
05-03-2003, 07:31 AM
Ok, first, let me do some math here, ready...
$15,000 (average) multiplied by four students equals $60,000
So then...
$60,000 divided by 2,500,000 files equals 2.5 cents (actually 2.4) per file
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hey if thats right, then the kid with the Verizon case owes...
2.5 cents multipled by 600 files equals $15.

2.5 cents per file, now thats REALITY, actual value for content!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I can afford that, how about you Jib!!
I am waiting to see what movies cost though.

On a serious note, I have officially started my boycott. I will no longer buy any music through the industry (possibly direct through the artist), even if p2p goes away, which it will not, let them fall to the ground. Should the movie companies jump in, then I will no longer buy DVD's.

FuNkY CaPrIcOrN
05-03-2003, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by REALITY@3 May 2003 - 02:31
Ok, first, let me do some math here, ready...
$15,000 (average) multiplied by four students equals $60,000
So then...
$60,000 divided by 2,500,000 files equals 2.5 cents per file
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Hey if thats right, then the kid with the Verizon case owes...
2.5 cents multipled by 600 files equals $15.
:D 2.5 cent for every song?I am willing to pay that. :lol:

Ad
05-03-2003, 07:58 AM
those RIAA bastards

Jibbler
05-03-2003, 08:00 PM
Isn't it funny how the math works out? Personally, my only real problem with this case, is that the RIAA and the students agree that they were not sharing songs. They created an online database to search for files that were already connected on the network.

So basically, the RIAA won a battle against some brilliant computer programers, but not against any filesharers. :huh:

RealitY
05-04-2003, 12:31 AM
Well that won't be the way it plays in the media!!
People (pussies, little girls and lion from the wizard of oz) will start shakin in their bOOts,
and begin to unshare their folders, running from the phantom boggyman with a...
**plastic knife** as they scream "I don't have no 12 grand". :ph34r:

Jibbler
05-04-2003, 12:35 AM
Yeah, that's true. The media has a wonderful way of putting a spin on anything. However this is more human nature than news bias. Just remember, video killed the radio star. :D

RealitY
05-04-2003, 12:37 AM
Originally posted by Jibbler@4 May 2003 - 01:35
Just remember, video killed the radio star. :D
Ah, The Bugles...
Those guys lOOked like "commy freaks". :ph34r:

TIDE-HSV
05-04-2003, 12:39 AM
As I told Reality earlier, the settlement approximates what the kids' legal costs would have been, even had they won.

RealitY
05-04-2003, 01:08 AM
Logic here is simple...
If I have a 1000 files in MSF and get caught,
then my fine would be $25.
Cash , Check, Charge, or Pay Pal Sir (scum bag, me, the file sharing bad guy).

RealitY
05-04-2003, 01:17 AM
Originally posted by REALITY@4 May 2003 - 01:31
People (pussies, little girls and lion from the wizard of oz) will start shakin in their bOOts,
and begin to unshare their folders, running from the phantom boggyman with a...
**plastic knife** as they scream "I don't have no 12 grand". :ph34r:
Damn honey, there goes the neibourhood, leeches are moving in across the street.
Can you believe it, next door to the fakes and those guys from the music biz.
We gotta move, and cut our losses babe.

Switeck
05-04-2003, 02:55 AM
The reason the students settled was probably because although they would be able to get the charges dropped for probably everything they WEREN'T sharing, there still probably remained at least a handful of infringing files that at $150,000 fines each would still bankrupt them for the rest of their lives.

After all, they were probably sharing SOMETHING themselves...

On a fast uni network, at 100 Mbps, download times would be so low that it wouldn't matter as much if 90% of everyone was a 'leech'. There could be a single computer off in the corner of every other computer lab that has files on it that 'nobody knows how they got there...' and that could keep everyone happy.

TIDE-HSV
05-04-2003, 03:14 AM
Actually, even with today's stiffened bankruptcy laws, they can bankrupt and, in a few years, they can start all over. That is, unless they're "trust-fund babys," who can't afford to lose their interest in trust if they bankrupt.

clocker
05-04-2003, 03:35 AM
I'm wondering if the offer to settle might have come from the prosecuting side.

The RIAA got the media attention that had to be a major goal of this whole affair, and didn't have to risk a protracted and potentially alienating trial.

RealitY
05-04-2003, 04:29 AM
Originally posted by clocker@4 May 2003 - 04:35
I'm wondering if the offer to settle might have come from the prosecuting side.

The RIAA got the media attention that had to be a major goal of this whole affair, and didn't have to risk a protracted and potentially alienating trial.
Well said again.

amphoteric88
05-04-2003, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by TIDE-HSV@4 May 2003 - 04:14
Actually, even with today's stiffened bankruptcy laws, they can bankrupt and, in a few years, they can start all over. That is, unless they're "trust-fund babys," who can't afford to lose their interest in trust if they bankrupt.
declaring yourself works quite well in the uk
if you declare yourself bankrupt, all debts are cleared, however, you are put on a credit blacklist, so you'll be refused for loans and mortgages and stuff
i can't remember how long you stay on the list for, it's either 3 or 5 years i think

OlderThanDirt
05-05-2003, 03:39 AM
When people attempt to screw someone, they generally prefer a weak target ... and I suspect the RIAA felt that students were weak targets most likely to settle. I also suspect the RIAA will confine their lawsuits to weak targets. Screwing the powerful can be dangerous (grin). I can't remember the name of the film but, years ago, a film production company plagarized the work of a screenplay writer ... assuming they could get away with it. Unfortunately, the writer was not only a lawyer ... he was also, at the time, the Governor of Nevada (snicker). If anyone can remember this case, please fill me in on the particulars.

TIDE-HSV
05-05-2003, 04:04 AM
Clocker's right about the proffer coming from the prosecution, and OTD's right about the weak target.