RIAA actually thinks they can get the Internet shut down

[rijir2001]

RIAA wants to shut down the internet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's official the RIAA thinks they are God!! I hear that next they are going to consider it piracy if you sing along in your car since the songs are copywrited.



By Nick Farrell: Wednesday 29 November 2006, 08:38
ONE OF THE lawyers involved in defending cases bought against people by the RIAA claims that if the music industry wins a crucial case, the Internet will have to be switched off.

Speaking on the DefectiveByDesign anti-DRM campaign site, Ray Beckerman said the case of Electro vs. Barker has become very important for the web's future.

Barker was being defended by Beckerman who made a motion to dismiss the case because the RIAA had forgot to provide any acts or dates or times of copyright infringement as the law normally requires.

The RIAA argued that by merely making files available on the Internet Barker was making a copyright infringement.

Beckerman said that it was a shocking argument because if it were accepted by the court it would probably shut down the entire Internet. If you send any file on the Net the RIAA will be allowed to suspect that you are in breach of copyright.

What was more disturbing is that the RIAA called up its mates in Washington to back it up. Apparently the United States Government has put in motions supporting the RIAA.

[adam]

Mr. Beckerman stated that about the internet on his blog. Its hyperbole. I don't take the statement seriously and I don't think he does either. If you read all of his motions and briefs on this case he never comes close to saying anything like this. This issue is a procedural one and has to do with just how specific you have to be in your complaint when filing a copyright infringement suit. I don't see how this case can have any real impact on internet usage since this exact same issue has been raised by Mr. Beckerman on three prior cases of his. Each time his legal arguments have been dismissed by the court based on the current law and on past cases. There is no "new" legal issue. Mr. Beckerman raises this same argument in most of his copyright defense cases now. It never works.

Here is Mr. Beckerman's blog. http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

He posts the legal documents for all of his cases here. Its a great resource for some of the RIAA cases. You can read all of the motions and briefs for this case there. Read his memorandum to dismiss and then read the opposing memorandum filed by the RIAA. Make up your own decision but I find Mr. Beckerman's legal arguments to be wholly unpersuasive. He bases his argument on about 3 or 4 cases where the copyright complaint basically alleged nothing at all. The court in those cases did not rule that "making copyrighted files available on the internet" cannot be copyright infringement, they ruled that using ONLY that allegation in your complaint does not give specific enough information to the defendant. "Making copyrighted files available for download on the internet" IS in fact copyright infringement already. Copyright statute says this already and the RIAA cites about 5 cases where people were actually sucessfully sued for this. The law has been this way since 1976, before the creation of the internet. And the internet is still doing just fine. In this case the question is whether the RIAA included enough additional information in their complaint to put the defendant on notice of the infringements. If you read their complaint it is indeed very specific. If you read their brief in opposition they explain how their complaint meets statutory and case law requirements. I really feel that Mr. Beckerman's motion is just a shot in the dark. He's trying to see if he can get lucky. The law is not on his side.