Login/New-Account | Search | Submit a Story! | Greplaw!??
- About
- Discussions
- Messages
- Topics
- Authors

- Preferences
- Older Stuff
- Past Polls
- Submit Story

This site is a production of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Please email if you have questions, contributions, or ideas about improving this site.

F & F


RIAA Again Requests Subscriber Information From Verizon
posted by justfred on Wednesday August 21, @03:20PM
from the free-up-subscriber-info dept.
Digital Entertainment The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed a request Wednesday-- with the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia-- which would force the Internet service provider Verizon to turn over private information for a subscriber. The RIAA suspects the subscriber of offering a large collection of MP3s for download. Verizon has already refused to comply with a July 24 subpoena issued by the federal court, saying the legal merits of the order were wrong.

Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), ISPs enjoy a "safe harbor" protection against potential liability for their subscribers' activities. Once an ISP finds out that a subscriber is illegally sharing files, however, it loses the protection. The RIAA claims that once it informed Verizon of the infringement by a subscriber, the ISP protection disappeared.

Check out Wired for the report.

Company Uses Copyright and Trademark Laws to Fight Spam | The Rhetoric of Lawrence Lessig  >


GrepLaw Login


[ Create a new account ]

Related Links
  • Wired
  • More on Digital Entertainment
  • Also by justfred
  • This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    RIAA Again Requests Subscriber Information From Verizon | Login/Create an Account | Top | 2 comments | Search Discussion
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Proof (Score:1)
    by gowlin on Thursday August 22, @07:09AM (#245)
    User #202 Info | http://www.student.math.uwaterloo.ca/~rmgolbec
    The article says that the RIAA isn't even sure that the person is doing it. So all that they did was tell Verizon that they think someone is breaching copyright and immeadiately the ISP has to give up their information? Wouldn't some sort of proof be needed? Otherwise, what's the point.
    Network's liabilities: computer vs. network (Score:1)
    by crispy on Thursday August 22, @01:42PM (#246)
    User #300 Info

    It seems that the customer in question uses Verizon as an ISP - his computer is hooked up to Verizon's network, he isn't using Verizon servers or storage (this isn't really made clear, although the last quote in the article strongly suggests it). My naive reading of Section 512.a [cornell.edu] seems to say that as long as the ISP isn't hosting the questionable material on their own servers, they are not liable. It doesn't even matter if they have been informed of infringement, provided they transmit data only at the request of the endpoints, and do not modify or filter content.

    The RIAA is making their case with 512.c [cornell.edu], which relates to "material that resides on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider". But the nuance is that a computer hooked up to Verizon's network (and thus residing "on" it) is subject to far more draconian regulation than a network hooked up to Verizon's network - which would place Verizon in the Transitory category subject to 512.a.

    Am I missing something?

    Humanity has the stars in its future, and that future is too important to be lost under the burden of juvenile folly and ignorant superstition. - Isaac Asimov

    [ home | contribute story | older articles | past polls | faq | authors | preferences ]