For those who want more information on what the Court said, there is a pdf document located at :
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200312/03-7015a.pdf

No. 03-7015
RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC.,
APPELLEE
v.
VERIZON INTERNET SERVICES, INC.,
APPELLANT

~Code

From the decision :
"The plight of copyright
holders must be addressed in the first instance by the Congress;
only the ‘‘Congress has the constitutional authority
and the institutional ability to accommodate fully the varied
permutations of competing interests that are inevitably implicated
by such new technology.’’ See Sony Corp. v. Universal
City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 431 (1984).

This argument borders upon the silly. The details of this
argument need not burden the Federal Reporter, for the
specific provisions of § 512(h), which we have just rehearsed,
make clear that however broadly ‘‘[internet] service provider’’
is defined in § 512(k)(1)(B), a subpoena may issue to an ISP
only under the prescribed conditions regarding notification.
Define all the world as an ISP if you like, the validity of a
§ 512(h) subpoena still depends upon the copyright holder
having given the ISP, however defined, a notification effective
under § 512(c)(3)(A). And as we have seen, any notice to an
ISP concerning its activity as a mere conduit does not satisfy
the condition of § 512(c)(3)(A)(iii) and is therefore ineffective.

The argument was so bad, they don't even wanna report it ha ha ha ha

So, are they going to have to go about getting subpoenas again? And if so, would it be worth doing this again?

Hopefully they just give up and focus all their attention to their new "services". It would be better for them.

Do you want a revolution WHOOP WHOOP!

About f'n time that we got a court to actually think about this legally instead of just with the monies they were paid off with. TWO POINTS for our side. This is of course headed for the supreme court as we all know the RIAA will try to tie the issue up behind smoke and mirrors. Lets hope the supreme court will force them to spend a few hundred million more lobbying congress for another law that will sadly be tossed away by the new congress we are going to vote in. Its time for a change to the madness and for the courts to realise that mp3 is inferior and therefore is not copywrite infringement. Hey Cary....Suck on deez nuts!

POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!

w00t there going down

They will be back to congress after the Christmas break to get laws passed that'll plug the holes. We need to be vigilant and defeat these attempts before they go too far

want to know something funny? I just visited the RIAA website and obviously there's no mention of their big LOSS under "Latest NEWS".

Someone should send an email/fax to Cary Sue making them aware of the "Latest News" .

The judge's reasoning for denying the subpoenas is simple: 512(h) subpoenas can only be applied to ISPs who are actively storing copyrighted materials for distribution on their own servers. This court shot down the RIAA interpretation. Since ISPs are "conduits" for transmission, and don't store any copyrighted material on their servers, they cannot be subpoenaed under 512(h). The judge goes on to add, though, that congress has the power to draft and enact new legislation that will give the entertainment industry broad power to subpoena anyone and everyone.

Compmore is right- congress will try to plug the holes. They'll hope that nobody is paying attention to pending legislation. Now is the time that we must be vigilant and keep a close eye on all proposed bills.

Today marks a huge victory for the privacy of internet users, and a huge loss to the overzealous RIAA. The war is not over, but we have reason to be very optimistic for the future.

Sherman already has made a statement. this is from CBS news site and Fox news as well

Cary Sherman, president of the recording industry group, said the ruling “unfortunately means we can no longer notify illegal file sharers before we file lawsuits against them to offer the opportunity to settle outside of litigation.”
Sherman promised to “continue to defend our rights online on behalf of artists, songwriters and countless others involved in bringing music to the public.”

No you stupid example for a human being mister Cary Sherman. You can't subpeona the ISPs, you can't obtain private information about users. You have no authority, should have no authority, and thus have no right to file lawsuits against anyone. Go wipe your ass with your record contracts, then have a taste.

don't worry kats im still going to be working the databases and make sure that we have every ip address that the riaa/mpaa and any other company has in order to totally ban and block them

How does effect the lawsuits in the pieline?

Cary Sherman is so damn stupid. If you needed to subpoena the ISPs first in order to get the information, wouldn't they have to give up all the information they obtained while doing so? If not, then this decision only helps the possible future candidates for a lawsuit. As far as I can remember, they only needed the subpoenas to find out who they were, not to find out where they live to notify them... stupid ass.

fjones:
The RIAA can still sue individuals, they simply can't subpeona ISPs for the identity of a target until a "John Doe" lawsuit is filed. They will have to file lawsuits blindly, not knowing who they are suing. They will have to tread more lightly now, because without knowing the identity of a target, they might end up suing a Senator's child...or worse yet, one of their own.

I'd just like to say thank you to the court for having a brain and making the right decision and giving cary sue the bitch slap backhand he deserves. and for all those people who participated in the riaa's amnesty program-- how does it feel to be stupid?

Until the RIAA can pass a new copyright law, I would not be surprised if they decide to make an example of somebody by trying to sue a so-called 'major uploader' of copyrighted songs for major bucks (not the usual 2 - 7 grand settlement).

Couldn't someone just come up with software that makes it rotate with fake IP addresses? just wondering anyway this is one small leap forward one small win and more ground to cover keep vigilant keep your eyes on current news and laws they will try to pass and most of all tell ten people and they will tell ten people and so on and so on to boycott the RIAA all the way.

P.S.
keep the Christmas spirit, and help some of the less fortunate have some joy this holiday.

Nite: No. You need to understand a few things about networking to know why, but basicly its very difficult to fake an IP address. The only way to fake it on a TCP connection is to proxy through a third system, and that doubles the resource requirements for a p2p network.

Passing new legislation would be difficult. Its not like 98 now. People care about the internet, and the geeks will gossip. The old technique of keeping a bill out the news until its passed, as loved by the MPAA, wouldn't be as easy now.

Ah, soon we can all hop in the tank and tear the statue of Sherman down. Then I will proudly be the first to take a dump on Sherman's likeness.

K, Ive read the full document in legalese now. I conclude that logic and lawyers are mutually exclusive, but it arrives at the right decision even if it is by a route that makes my maths homework look conventional by comparison

Yes, goldenpi, lawyers and logic are mutually exclusive - and not just with regards to copyright law & file sharing.

Now I have a question for legal experts or any one who wants to speculate, What about SBC's case? The case's venue was changed to D.C., is there a possibility it may receive the same judge? Also... would the Verizon decision set any precedent? What if the judge for SBC rules against it? Would that negate this decision?

Suikio

Usually in this type of ruling other courts and judges tend to follow the lead of the higher court. Not always, but most of the time.

All it takes to make a change is one person. One person, trying, and then because of that, another person changing for the better. The only way to change the world is to begin with one person. One will become two, which will become three, and so on. That’s the only way to affect a major change. We can all do this at the ballot box. Pass the word, get involved...seek out candidates that will fight for us...not huge corporations or lobby groups that represent them. Write members of congress....www.congress.org is a good place to start. Check out your congressional members BIO there and check out their PAC contributions! Especially Orin hatch! You'll be amazed at what you find. This is how we begin to get them out of office and win this battle, which is still not quite over yet. This is a big win for us, but we all need to head the RIAA off at the pass.....and that pass is congress.

Suiko -- Just speculation...

The SBC cause could conceivably get the same judge.

The Verizon ruling could definitely be seen as a precedent, especially if the RIAA was making the same argument about the same situation.

If there is a different judge that rules in favor of the RIAA, in a different case, it wouldn't negate the Verizon decision. What's done is done.

It would however, make it more likely that the RIAA would appeal the Verizon case to the Supreme Court and probably prompt SBC to do the same.

That's where this will be ultimately decided. Not by us, not by the RIAA, not by the media or even Congress.

This is a somewhat wonderful Christmas and New Years Present ))))))))) Thank god the music industry can't buy off everyone! )))))))))) I keep praying that next year will be even better )))) They can't sue people if they don't have their identities! Plain and simple! No Name to contact no lawsuit! I can't believe he put out such a stupid remark like this: “unfortunately means we can no longer notify illegal file sharers before we file lawsuits against them to offer the opportunity to settle outside of litigation! As I said if you can't get their private info you have nothing Cary so why did you let everyone know how unintelligent you are??? LOL ~~~~~

regarding Suikiogiaz ? about the sbc case sbc will just withdraw the case why contine it they already won and if they did there is always a chance a new judge would decied it in the riaas favor and sbc won't risk that

nitedreamerxp-
"P.S.
keep the Christmas spirit, and help some of the less fortunate have some joy this holiday."

Right on! Wish I had said that....we need to keep our focus right.

It would however, make it more likely that the RIAA would appeal the Verizon case to the Supreme Court and probably prompt SBC to do the same.

The Supreme Court has so many potentially landmark cases on its docket right now that I doubt they will take this case. Many of the cases they have agreed to hear concern terrorism and people being jailed.

If they do, I would be very surprised. The RIAA's best hope is Congress. No lawmaker will pass a law against consumers in an election year...BELIEVE ME, lawmakers may not care about the people, BUT THEY SURE DO CARE ABOUT REELECTION. It would have to be done in 2005. Then it could get tied up...and so on, and so on.

The RIAA has lost this battle, and it will, in the end, lose the war. Because let's face it. It's them in their New York/Tokyo/Berlin/London offices against US. The consumers of America, of the world.

Before now, we had been spreading the plague around...to Canada and Europe. Let consumers there take heart from our victory here. Recording labels engaged in anti-consumer efforts worldwide....consider yourself warned.

:-:~ Phantom

Codewarrior-
Right on! wish I had said that....We need to keep our focus right.


Thanks it's just as well we both have said it I share with everybody Merry Crhistmas.