|
|
|
![]()
San Francisco - In a hearing Friday, Pacific Bell Internet Services defended the privacy of its Internet service customers in the wake of legal threats by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).
EFF, the ACLU, and 15 other consumer, child safety, and privacy organizations filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of PacBell in its struggle to protect users' privacy after the RIAA issued non-judicial subpoenas under section 512(h) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). These subpoenas require no judicial oversight or lawsuit before an Internet user's name, address and phone number are turned over to anyone claiming to be a copyright holder.
"PacBell has resisted the RIAA's reckless subpoenas because they have a legitimate interest in protecting their customers' privacy," said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn.
The ACLU/EFF brief argues that, in addition to the problems raised by PacBell, section 512(h) does not provide sufficient due process for Internet users.
"This provision is so devoid of procedural protections that it is an invitation to mistake and abuse," the brief asserts.
Full Media Advisory
ACLU/EFF amicus brief in PacBell case ( Adobe PDF format)
EFF "RIAA v. the People" archive of litigation spawned by RIAA attacks on Internet users
|
|
User Comments
 compmore
|
Date: November 23, 2003 @ 3:30 PM
any word on when the ruling is suposed to come down?
|
 Bill43
|
Date: November 23, 2003 @ 6:46 PM
I sure hope they can win this battle. I still have a hard time believing that my privacy can be violated so easily.
|
 Bufo
|
Date: November 23, 2003 @ 7:29 PM
Even if PacBell loses this case, the RIAA should at least be required to issue a cease and desist order (and perhaps be allowed to impose a modest fine to cover enforcement cost) before filing lawsuits. This is necessary since it is possible (and very probable) that some folks targeted may not realize they were sharing songs, or that their computer was used by another family member to share songs.
|
 MrDude
|
Date: November 23, 2003 @ 8:03 PM
The California courts are the best venue for getting a favorable result. They are the most liberal of the courts (look at the Pledge issue, among others) and the RIAA is big business and trample on individual rights all the way. I am keeping my fingers crossed on this one.
|
In-Flames
|
Date: November 23, 2003 @ 9:25 PM
i just pray for the day when a senator's kid or an actor gets subpoened by the RIAA. it's gotta happen.
|
purfus
|
Date: November 23, 2003 @ 11:20 PM
It is also the home of holywood and a lot of rich pricks that would have an interest in cashing in on the DMCA.
|
Bufo
|
Date: November 24, 2003 @ 6:39 AM
Good point, purfus. Not all 'liberals' are against the RIAA, especially in California.
|
 independentm...
|
Date: November 24, 2003 @ 9:33 AM
Most of the "liberals" in our government are NOT really liberals... they are what the conservatives have seized upon to make "liberal" into a dirty word that is no better to say than "conservative."
Throw em all out, start over!
Shmoo
|
purfus
|
Date: November 24, 2003 @ 9:56 AM
Yeah well I think the use of these labels to describe groups of individuals in our government is alittle out dated. About the only thing one can say is each partty hates the other, but not if it is profitable to cooperate. I don't think we need to promote the myopia of predejucial thought in our government. The only reason they get away with such segregation is because each group keeps an acceptable level of minorities.
|
mtekk
|
Date: November 24, 2003 @ 5:50 PM
California courts, are the most libral (usually not good), and are the easiest to bribe (RIAA does it), I really think unless a good judge oversees this, they have no hope (pasific bell) i hate to be negative but it's the truth.  I hope they win though. |
You must be logged in to post replies to news articles.
Log in or register with the form at the top of the page.
|
|
