Straight from TECHTV.com as of August 22nd

Here's a list of which ISPs and other service providers have received subpoenas from the RIAA, and how many subpoenas each provider has received. Numbers come from a review of the RIAA subpoenas put online by the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.

* Comcast Cable Communications (259)
* SBC (176)
* Time Warner Cable (135)
* Verizon Internet Services (94)
* Charter Cable (62)
* Adelphia Communications (30)
* RCN (26)
* Cox Communications (19)
* EarthLink (16)
* Mediacom Communications (7)
* InterQuest Communications (6)
* Bentley College (Boston) (5)
* Boston College (3)
* CenturyTel Internet Services (2)
* CSC Holdings
* Northeastern University (2)
* New York University (2)
* San Bruno Municipal Cable (2)
* AT&T Worldnet, America Online, Boston University, Columbia University (New York), DePaul University (Chicago), Insight Midwest, Loyola University (Chicago), Loyola Marymount University (California), MIT, Northeastern University (Boston), Pacific Bell Internet, University of Southern California (1 each)

You can't scare me RIAA.
Come and get me!
Because i won't stop sharing until the cops get into my house and take away my pc.

Scary. My provider is on the list (Time Warner). Did the ISPs already contacted the specific individuals whos IPs were subpoened? In other words, do the poor people already know they are poor?

NCdude

Eghhhhhhhh 259 on comcast....( am I one of them!!!!!!!!!!!)????????

Notice only listed on AOL..

Here's an interesting article that, among other things, talks about what type of P2P user the RIAA is likely to sue:

http://news.com.com/2010-1071_3-5067473.html

They will probably only sue a fraction of the people who's names they are subpoenaing. Apparently, the RIIA is looking for individuals who will make good "poster children" for their anti-P2P campaign, and who they think they can easily beat in court. Here's a colorful quote:

"[The RIAA] want[s] to determine that the defendant has a lot of piercings and a tattoo. Preferably unemployed, dropped out of college, has lice and bad beard maintenance, and he's somehow using the MIT broadband network to distribute this to pirates in the Pacific Rim. That would be the perfect RIAA defendant."

2 people from San Bruno! Where is this place? Do they have more than 2 people living there?
I just looked at their web-page http://www.ci.sanbruno.ca.us/ and here is the city's mission as stated there:
San Bruno will be the Peninsula City of choice in which to live, learn, work, shop and play.
Play, huh? You mean download.

San Bruno rock!

NCdude

wait a minute, out of all the millions of ppl on charter cable such as me, in which i havent used kazaa for 3 months (!!! how come my friend isnt on there? his name is something like defaultuser, and he has 2500+ up for share....hmmm.....i sometimes wonder....

So IFEELFREE.....that racist article that was posted a while back might not be that far off. If they send PI's out to see what you are (if you fit their mold)It may not be quite racist but isn't that discrimination?

Move to Tennessee, it dont look like there are any subpoenas there. All they download is the theme from Deliverance. I guess their lawyers are afraid of having a pretty mouth.

AOL is getting it easy considering they are one of the largest. Does that mean the Warner devisions been diverting attention, or that they are willing to reveal identities withoug a subpoena?

isp-privacy:

It is discrimination but, if the RIAA doesn't admit to using PIs, doing background checks, etc., how do you prove it? If it were me, I'd want get one of the RIAA lawyers on the stand and ask him/her straight out how they decided which individuals to sue, if they employed PIs, what information they gathered, how it was used, etc. (They're not going to commit perjury so they have to answer truthfully.) There might be enough there for a counter-suit, or enough to force them to settle (in my favor) if I threatened to pursue that angle.

"[The RIAA] want[s] to determine that the defendant has a lot of piercings and a tattoo. Preferably unemployed, dropped out of college, has lice and bad beard maintenance,.." Doesn't that describe a lot of RIAA's best selling artists?

=>>>>===============|>
~code

I think I'm OK as far as the RIAA lawsuits go. Last time I checked, my lice problem was under control. *LOL*

Has anybody seen Ben Affleck's interview on www.Techtc.com yet? He downloads !

Im sorry it's techtv

roflmao@codewarrior

Of course they're using PIs. How else can they expect to exempt the congress's family members.

isp-privacy:

Good for Ben. We need more high-profile public personalities to speak out on behalf of file sharing.

To maddawg15
He is on there I saw it on the full list. TVTECH has it on their list. Check it out.

At least he admitted it THANK YOU BEN!

he also believes the industry is way behind!

Sorry thats TECHTV

Arkansas and North Dakota look good too!

He's not the only one that thinks the RIAA is out of line. Just wait. They're going to start coming out of the woodwork and stepping forward very, very soon.

Maybe before the end of the week, but definitely on Monday.

Big things are afoot. The clock is ticking and the RIAA is running out of time.

Hi Guys. Been a frequent visitor to this site the pass few weeks but finally decided to become a member.

IFeelFree, i was just wondering if it is really necessary to be checked out by PI's to be considered discrimination. According to them, an illegal act is an illegal act and ALL KNOWN offenders must be punished. And as such, one congressman, whom we know and (sarcastically) love so much, has admittedly downloaded music, an illegal act in itself. Should he be punished as well, and if not, could that be a form of favoritism? Just a thought.

By the way, I have no piercing and no tattoos. I am employed and am a college graduate. And I have no lice and no beard. Should I feel safe from the wrath of the RIAA now?

LOL!! THREEBEARS WELCOME!
Good to have you aboard! There are people from many walks of life here!

Regarding "selective prosecution", I gleaned this from the Dept. of Justice U.S. Attorney's Manual:

"In order to establish a prima facie case of selective prosecution, a defendant must show both '(1) that others similarly situated have not been prosecuted, and (2) that the prosecution is based on an impermissible motive, i.e. discriminatory purpose or intent.'"

In other words, for a criminal case, you'd have to show that discrimination actually occured and that it was intentional. Whether, or how, any of this would apply to civil cases, I have no idea.

Mediacom Communications (7)

This sucks, because this is the cable company. Makes me wonder if I actually should subscribe to the cable system, or just stick with dialup..

Hey ip-privately !

Did you get the info I sent on "BEATLES" ?

To any one who can answer :

I'm trying to understand how a monetary award can be awarded to the RIAA or plaintiffs(should someone decide to fight rather than settle) and who it is that determines the amount.

Judge,Jury,Panel? Who would the burden fall on (if a decision was found in the plaintiffs favor)to determine an award ,if any , and what amount?

I have, what I believe to be, a valid argument to deny an award. However ,if it isn't a jury deciding then the point would be moot.

I've only been involved in a handful of civil cases concerning monetary awards and damages, in which the jury was given specific criteria for determing amounts.

In a case like these , who would be the decision makers?

Great question , Rightoshare , and I'm sorry that I don't have an answer for you . But I will try to look it up .

lol I live in Tennessee and the songs from Deliverance isn't what I download, infact my ISP isn't even listed there. The RIAA knows that if they ever got a redneck in court either A). The southern charm would tear them a new asshole B). The redneckw ould whip out a boomstick or C). the KKK would stop being racist against minorities, and start being racist against the RIAA. which im sure everyone would be in aggreement with.

How about boycotting ISPs that gave in to RIAA's pressure tactics and revealed names of downloaders without any fight to preserve their privacy. Personally, I am going to call my ISP (SBCglobal.net) and tell them that I will no longer use their services if in fact they decide not to protect their customers identities.

"[The RIAA] want[s] to determine that the defendant has a lot of piercings and a tattoo. Preferably unemployed, dropped out of college, has lice and bad beard maintenance, and he's somehow using the MIT broadband network to distribute this to pirates in the Pacific Rim. That would be the perfect RIAA defendant."

Damn! Looks like I need to get my lice under control...but what's wrong with my beard???

...all this blunderbustin goin' on..I have yet to see those @$$ holes in court!! No court case has been started in this yet, has there? Seems to me that riaa has a weak, weak, case...

So how much money can you get out of somebody that's unemployed ??

RE: this article-http://news.com.com/2010-1071_3-5067473.html

Even the RIAA now admits (among themselves anyway) that P2P use has become so prevalent that millions of ordinary law-abiding citizens are using P2P clients for personal use. It is, in fact, now ENTRENCHED in our very culture.

I have read in other posts where people here who have talked to your average run-of-the-mill college students say that they show no or little concern (or even laugh) about the RIAA. They wonder if they may know something we don't. This just might be it. The worldwide use of P2P where anyone from a children's ward cancer patient to a member of the RIAA's own family or a clergy-member or active-duty military or maybe one of the President's twin daughters could be downloading.

In other words, the students already know, P2P is here to stay. The RIAA is looking to make an example of someone who fits their "profile" in a last ditch effort to turn the tide.

They may catch their fish, but lookout, their boat is sinking.

I think the RIAA is bluffing - they can not prove the IP addresses in question belonged to the defendants.

Verizon does not keep accurate enough logs of their constantly changing IP addresses. From experience, I can tell you that in a DHCP environment with constantly changing IPS, the chances of these ISPs keeping records is null. If no crimes were reported and no federal investigation started - the ISP would probally just clear the log.

This creates reasonable doubt. Therefore the information that the RIAA is forcing any of these ISPs to provide can be falsified or plain wrong or non-existant.

Also these ISPs are going to start getting hacked and these alleged "IP lists" are going to be deleted. Or worms will probally start circulating that will be sharing and stealing mp3s. Just a hunch...

First of all, a big welcome to the new posters. Glad to see the crusade is increasing in size.

As for the lack of AOL subpoenas, the answer is a simple two-part response: 1) AOL is merely a dial-up provider, thus p2p use is not as prevalent (and if you're thinking, "but I've seen AOL for broadband commericals", the physical broadband connection is via comcast, charter, cox, etc. AOL does not provide broadband direct). 2) Time warner cable is a subsidary of AOL Time Warner (duh), an RIAA member with a huge stake in recording labels. So, no, there is NO discrimination in the RIAA subpoenas- RIAA and non RIAA ISPs are being targeted.

gdZ said "Big things are afoot. The clock is ticking and the RIAA is running out of time." How true. The lack of news since the subpoenas started flying is only the calm before the storm. The real interesting and monumental events are about to unfold: the actual court cases.

A lot of folks are entering school now, so for you students out there: spread the word on campus. Let your peers know that they're being targeted. Organize informational meetings. Scatter leaflets all over the place. The students being sued today will run the corporations of tomorrow, and the more angry and upset they get today means big changes in the not too distant future.

Wait a second, I use Qwest (Dial-Up) for my ISP. They haven't had any subpoenas?!?! I'm actually safe?!? Actually, I'm not too worried any longer. I have this incredibly good streak going for me, I seem to not exist at all. At a former place of employment they were supposed to take my parking payments directly out of my check. They did for the first year, but not the 2 years after that. I only realized that after I quit working there and went thru all my old check stubs. I still receive a monthly magazine (for 5 years now) that I only paid for a 2 year subscription. And to top it off, I do seem to have "disappeared" from my ISP. We had them set up 2 separate accounts in the same household and they told us we would be charged for 2 accounts, but we've only ever been charged for one. I don't know if they realized that since it was the same phone line they shouldn't charge or if they overlooked it, but I'm not saying anything.

Come try and take my machine. I've got a baseball bat right next to the computer that says that you won't.

...all this blunderbustin goin' on..I have yet to see those @$$ holes in court!!

Jazzmary2U, I seriously doubt you'll see many if any cases going to court because first they know thier case is weak and secondly as they've (RIAA) stated all along they are willing to work with induviduals and settle out of court I.E. 15,000 dollars versus 150,000 per song they are using intimidation tactics on most of these people saying, "Look people you can't win, you are wrong and going to court would cost you more than just settling with us becuase we'd win and then charge you 150,000 PER SONG versus just ginving us 15,000 dollars to settle"

Its too pathetic our courts are there to supposedly protect us from these types of acts but only the people with the most amount of money can afford to use it.

Whatever happened to the notion of everyone being given the right to defend themselves? IF your poor and I mean REALLY poor you can get free legal counsil and if you're rich you can afford it. Its all of us middle class section that are screwed, I'm not poor enough to qualify for free advice yet not rich enough to afford a lawyer at 300 dollars an hour. So we're screwed we settle or loose everything.

I live in the Deep South and haven't heard of anybody in our area getting one of these subpoenas....does anybody here know if they've actually subpoena'd anybody from Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, or any of the other southern states, or are they concentrating on the north and the west coast?

uncut beards and lice? sounds like they are describing tree monkeys not downloaders....or are these their immediate family members? and what is the deal with all these purported suits they were throwing around? cant get your ducks in a row RIAA?

The huge costs involved in the US civil legal system are infamous worldwide, but nothing seems to be done about them. You can tell the situations bad when people routinely settle for $15,000 because it would be cheaper than going to court even if they won. Part of it is because of the appeal process. Go to court, one side wins and the other immediately appeals. More costs, another ruleing and yet another appeal.

Ben Affleck is a fucking piece of shit... comes out with commercials against "piracy and downloading" , then does it himself.. i bet he got paid dearly to appear on tv with that public service announcement.. then after gigli shits the bed he turns around and says he file shares... hippocritical fuck!!

PS, Hillary Rosen can choke on my cock and swallow my load while i'm listening to music i downloaded off of the internet on my brand new MP3 player!! BITCH!!

uhhh... suck it bitch, don't bite it!

Justin - People on this site keep saying "Fuck the RIAA." Looks like we finally found the guy to get the job done. Load 'er up and bang away!

This is what im talking about when I refer to the constantly lowering standards of posts on this site.

shut the fuck up and get a sense of humor goldenpi...

uuuuuhhhhhhh.... suck it don't biiiiite it golden pi.... oooh yeah

still waiting to see AOL/Time on the list....