Cantrell, the associate provost for information technology at A&M, said the University received two courtesy notifications from the RIAA: one on Feb. 2, stating six students will be sued, and one on Feb. 28, stating that three more students will be sued.

"The RIAA files John Doe lawsuits in the local federal district court in Houston, and then the judge has to issue a subpoena and then that'll come to the University," Cantrell said.

The subpoena contains Internet protocol (IP) addresses, which allow University officials to identify a particular computer. Cantrell said the A&M System keeps logs that determine which computer goes with which IP address. It can then track the location of the computer - a dorm room for instance - and determine the user.

A&M is signatory to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), Cantrell said. If the University receives a subpoena, they are required by law to cooperate and release the names of the students tracked through IP addresses.

Although no formal subpoena has been received, Cantrell said one is coming.

The University received nine subpoenas last April, but the documents were for events that took place after University logs had been erased. Logs are now kept for about a year, he said.

Cantrell said people receiving lawsuits have been file sharing. Sharing songs enables officials from the RIAA to download the song, determine if the material is copyrighted and learn the IP address of the song provider. The IP addresses are specific to A&M, and an Internet Web site provides their location. Cantrell said the reason for the lawsuit is to compel the University to turn over the names of the students.

"When we get the subpoenas, the general council will examine them and alert the students," Cantrell said.

Laura Craig, freshman biology major, said the actions of the RIAA are extreme, and nine students should not be punished for something a majority of students at A&M do.

"I don't agree with illegally downloading music," Craig said. "But, I'd rather get music for free than pay for it."

Junior management major Brenna Cmerek said she used to download songs until she saw a Pepsi commercial during the Super Bowl advertising the chance to win free iTunes.

"One out of three Pepsi bottles have a free song on the cap. I have an iPod and drink a lot of diet Pepsi, so this worked for me," Cmerek said. "I understand the industries need to make money, but I heard in one of my classes that the majority of bands don't get their money from CD sales. They make it from concerts."

The RIAA was unavailable for comment, but according to its Web site, its goals are, "to work with our industry and others to enable technologies that open up new opportunities, while at the same time protecting the rights of artists and copyright owners."

From http://www.thebatt.com/news/2005/03/08/News/Riaa-To.Sue.9.Am.Students.For.Downloading.Illegally-888400.shtml

why do i smell yet another RIAA push at a university to force it's administration into bundling payments to their member companies into university bills?

Let's see.. theyve done it to about a dozen large schools already.. and it's imminent in my school (thankfully i have the option of commuting rather than paying their mandatory bribes)

"why do i smell yet another RIAA push at a university"

Because it's spring and they want to leave a bad impression over the summer, making it easier to con them into buying Napster next year.

"Sharing songs enables officials from the RIAA to download the song, determine if the material is copyrighted and learn the IP address of the song provider."

Hehehe, based on the above quote, I just thought of the best way to screw those RIAA bastards!! Have a shared folder full of NON-RIAA music, change the filename to something resembling RIAA copyrighted files...hehe!! If enough people did this, the RIAA lackies would be spending all day weeding through the files...hahaha!! Unfortunately, it would make it difficult for others looking for RIAA stuff, but hey I don't care about that!

I don't know what's up with me tonight, but I just got an even better idea!! I recall users talking about Peer Guardian, and seeing the IP address of the RIAA show up in their log files. Now, let's say you have a router with firewall setup between your computer and the internet. It might be possible to block all IPs from accessing your computer's "shared" folder, except that of the RIAA. Then its a simple matter of filling your shared folder with any number of viruses, trojan horses, worms, VB scripts, you name it, all titled with RIAA copyrighted names of course!!! Hehehe, what a surprise they would get when they ran those!!!!!

"Sharing songs enables officials from the RIAA to download the song, determine if the material is copyrighted and learn the IP address of the song provider."

In addition to Capt-Jack's excellent suggestions, this quote is a keeper.

I'm now wondering how many songs the RIAA downloads per day. If, as they keep insisting, downloading is illegal, then what's their excuse?

RIAA to sue 9 A&M students for downloading illegally

For DOWNLOADING, or for making available for others to download??

for 3000 to 10000 us dollars. down/up loading is irrelevant if no one is going to fight them

"RIAA to sue 9 A&M students for downloading illegally . . ."

"For DOWNLOADING, or for making available for others to download??

Technically both; but we all know that uploaders are the ones that the RIAA is targeting because of practical reasons.
Those who share copyrighted music are considered as allowing for availability an average (pers song) of ten unauthorized downloads by others; that's the model being used. And each of those songs can be pretty expensive, if the full extent of the DMCA is wielded...which doesn't happen as long as the defendant being sued agrees to settle out of court. Except in extreme cases, these types of subpoenas have typically resulted in settlements of $3,000 to $7,000.
Many defendants have yet to settle, and that raises some interesting questions.

Preaching to the choir:
Adhere to the Boycott.
Avoid RIAA music.
Promote and enjoy indie music.

"pers" = per

(Wish we had an edit button.)

They sue for both, or just uploading if I had to take a guess. How could those assholes sue for someone just downloading because of the legal and practical implications that would be involved. WHen I say they sue for both, I mean someone who has downloaded songs that are available for anyone else to download. That is how they can use the word download and scare the average joe into thinking that downloading music is very risky. In reality, it seems as if the ones who have downloaded music and were sued happened to be unaware that the music they downloaded was in a publicly accessible shared folder by default, thus making them an easyu target. But how would the RIAA find out what you download if you your downloaded files aren't saved to a publicly shared folder? They couldn't find out unless they used illegal means like implanting a secret tracking trojan on your PM or setting up a honeypot and letting you download from them. What do you think?

You're correct.

Why this site has always news about RIAA? Are they the only one who's sueing for illegal downloading and file sharing?

Soloist, the MPAA is also suing. But this site is called Boycott RIAA. So, while we talk about the MPAA, file-sharing, copyright infringement, politics, the weather, and even music, we are people on a mission--to see the end of the evil-doers.