Wired News: One file swapper, one lawsuit
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,62576,00.html
A federal judge ruled on Friday that the music industry cannot sue over 200 alleged file sharers in one swoop and that the companies must sue each defendant individually.
The Recording Industry Association of America grouped 203 so-called "John Doe" defendants -- "John Doe" because their identities are not yet known -- into one lawsuit when it sued them in federal court in Philadelphia last month. All of those sued use Comcast as their Internet service provider.
Since a federal court barred the RIAA from using the Digital Millenium Copyright Act to subpoena names of suspected copyright infringers in December, the recording industry has resorted to the "John Doe" method. The RIAA now must identify alleged file swappers by their Internet Protocol addresses, but does not know the individuals' names.
On Friday, Judge Clarence Newcomer authorized a subpoena in the case of John Doe No. 1, because the RIAA had submitted a detailed case against the individual. But the judge ordered the music industry to file separate suits against the remaining 202 alleged infringers.
Each of the lawsuits will be doled out to judges in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the RIAA will have to make separate requests to seek the identity of each alleged file sharer.
"We're glad the judge has recognized that the RIAA was trying to skirt around the regular rules for lawsuits by grouping over 200 individuals as a gang of file sharers," said Jason Schultz, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed an amicus brief in the case. "We think each individual who is being sued has a right to have their own trial and have their own privacy interests evaluated independently of anyone else who's being sued."
Schultz said that the order ensures that the judges assess the strength of the RIAA's case for each person.
The music trade group must pay court fees for each of these cases. Filing each lawsuit will cost $150 in court fees, for a total of over $30,000, according to the EFF.
The RIAA would not say what it plans to do.
"We are weighing our options," said RIAA spokeswoman Amanda Collins. She declined to elaborate.
One intellectual property attorney agreed with the judge's orders.
"It's not enough to say that each act of the defendant was an act of copyright infringement," said Scott Hervey, an attorney with Weintraub Genshlea Chediak Sproul. "That doesn't give the recording industry the right to sue them all as one big clump."
"I think the judge's ruling was procedurally correct."
A federal judge ruled on Friday that the music industry cannot sue over 200 alleged file sharers in one swoop and that the companies must sue each defendant individually.
The Recording Industry Association of America grouped 203 so-called "John Doe" defendants -- "John Doe" because their identities are not yet known -- into one lawsuit when it sued them in federal court in Philadelphia last month. All of those sued use Comcast as their Internet service provider.
Since a federal court barred the RIAA from using the Digital Millenium Copyright Act to subpoena names of suspected copyright infringers in December, the recording industry has resorted to the "John Doe" method. The RIAA now must identify alleged file swappers by their Internet Protocol addresses, but does not know the individuals' names.
On Friday, Judge Clarence Newcomer authorized a subpoena in the case of John Doe No. 1, because the RIAA had submitted a detailed case against the individual. But the judge ordered the music industry to file separate suits against the remaining 202 alleged infringers.
Each of the lawsuits will be doled out to judges in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the RIAA will have to make separate requests to seek the identity of each alleged file sharer.
"We're glad the judge has recognized that the RIAA was trying to skirt around the regular rules for lawsuits by grouping over 200 individuals as a gang of file sharers," said Jason Schultz, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed an amicus brief in the case. "We think each individual who is being sued has a right to have their own trial and have their own privacy interests evaluated independently of anyone else who's being sued."
Schultz said that the order ensures that the judges assess the strength of the RIAA's case for each person.
The music trade group must pay court fees for each of these cases. Filing each lawsuit will cost $150 in court fees, for a total of over $30,000, according to the EFF.
The RIAA would not say what it plans to do.
"We are weighing our options," said RIAA spokeswoman Amanda Collins. She declined to elaborate.
One intellectual property attorney agreed with the judge's orders.
"It's not enough to say that each act of the defendant was an act of copyright infringement," said Scott Hervey, an attorney with Weintraub Genshlea Chediak Sproul. "That doesn't give the recording industry the right to sue them all as one big clump."
"I think the judge's ruling was procedurally correct."
posted by ShadowHawk at 6:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home