A Boy Named Sued

Jesse Jordan, a student at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, created the site ChewPlastic.com as a search engine for his campus's network. Unsurprisingly, but unfortunately for Jesse, there were some pirated MP3s on the network. According to the Recording Industry Association of America, that makes these search engines just like Napster, the file-trading network sued out of existence by the recording industry.

Now the RIAA has turned its team of lawyers on students, and Jesse, facing a legal juggernaut, settled for $12,000—his entire life savings. Of course, if we follow the RIAA's logic, Google is also fair game, since it too can be used to find copyrighted music. But Google might, you know, fight back or something. And taking on an opponent with the resources to challenge these bullying tactics is decidedly not part of RIAA's gameplan.

Comments

[Bill G]

I think the RIAA hopes these walkover suits against small fry will be enough of a scare/PR victory to stem the tide.

I think they're dreaming. Most people who share files don't even *know* about the suits. And if they did, I doubt it would change a significant number of people's behavior.

Until the recording industry adapts to current technical realities, whatever the legal realities, they're wasting their time.

[Plutarck]

It would be nice if, you know, maybe the government could do something about people - particularly exceedingly well funded organizations - using their powers and systems (the legal system) to abuse and intimidate people who are not breaking the law into changing their behavior.

Perhaps a sort of improved "Not In Our Name" campaign by prosecutors, judges, lawmakers - that sort of thing. I'd think they wouldn't much approve of people cutting into their action and being unwittingly used as a weapon in a way that contradicts their intent and reason for existing.

That'd be kinda nice, you know?

[Jarrod]

Looks like the 'Tute Screw still works.

[jomc]

Bill -- the RIAA's new technique has been knicknamed "shock and awe" because they're using an individual (or say, four college students) as a scapegoat. As soon as this story broke virtually all operators of similar GOOGLE-esque (as opposed to Napster-esque -- but save that for another comment) programs immediatly shut them off.

RIAA is now threatening that the next offenders will have to settle for twice as much. With Grokster et al in appeals (and we can't be too optimistic about that one) we absolutely should keep an eye on these cases. They're out of control

[omnibus bill]

I think the RIAA are bastards. I can't believe the nerve of them. Intellectual Property law is a fraud that infringes on my right to listen to what I want to listen to.

By the way, you need to check out my new book, The Complete Works of Omnibus Billspeare. I've got this story about a prince whose uncle kills his dad and sleeps with his mother; another one about this star crossed young couple from feuding families, and an even better one about this old man king who has a couple ungrateful daughters (and he's not named Bush!) You can also check out my new book, the Seagull Brief, about an idealistic young lawyer who fights big corporate sleeze; or my other new book, Children of the Peas.

Sure, maybe I copied a little bit from some other folks, but if it's okay for music, it's okay for books, too. Right?

[DC]

Omnibus -

Thinking that Intellectual "Property" is a fraud isn't the same as thinking that plagiarism is fine. No one who opposes IP (at least that I know) thinks that because I should be able to copy Metallica, that I therefore should go around claiming that Fade to Black is my work of art (not that I'd want to).

[Xrlq]

Add to that the fact that Shakespeare's works aren't copyrighted anyway. Nothing that old is, or can be.

[Czar]

No, no, Bill, the hypocrites don't think that you should be able to claim other people's hard work and effort as your own. They just think that capitalism becomes inconvenient in these cases so you should be able to distribute these products for free instead of, you know, allowing parties to decide their own values for the products and making value-for-value trades.

Whether you like the RIAA or not is never an issue. Resorting to collectivism and outright theft is hardly the correct way to defeat corrupt businesses.

[omnibus bill]

Why do you think Kinkos (or for that matter any reputable printing shop) wont let you copy any work that is copyrighted? Because they could be held liable.

The same principle applies here. The medium doesn't matter; the copyright of the words and the uniqueness of the arrangement of the notes matter.