[IP] Record Industry May Not Subpoena Providers
Delivered-To: dfarber+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 13:04:23 -0500
From: Barry Ritholtz <britholtz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Record Industry May Not Subpoena Providers
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Dave,
For IP: Breaking news re: Record Industry May Not Subpoena Providers
Barry L. Ritholtz
Market Strategist
Maxim Group
405 Lexington Avenue,
New York, NY 10174
(212) 895-3614
(800) 724-0761
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Big Picture:
http://bigpicture.typepad.com
Record Industry May Not Subpoena Providers
Dec 19, 10:44 AM (ET)
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20031219/D7VHHPHO0.html
By TED BRIDIS
WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal appeals court on Friday rejected efforts by the
recording industry to compel the nation's Internet providers to identify
subscribers accused of illegally distributing music online.
In a substantial setback for the industry's controversial anti-piracy
campaign, the three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia overturned a ruling by the trial judge to enforce a
copyright subpoena.
U.S. District Judge John D. Bates had approved use of the subpoenas,
forcing Verizon Communications Inc. to turn over names and addresses for at
least four Internet subscribers. Since then, Verizon has identified dozens
of its other subscribers to music industry lawyers.
The appeals court said one of the arguments by the Recording Industry
Association of America "borders upon the silly," rejecting the trade
group's claims that Verizon was responsible for downloaded music because
such data files traverse its network.
Verizon had challenged the constitutionality of the subpoenas under the
1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
The law, passed years before downloading music over peer-to-peer Internet
services became popular, compels Internet providers to turn over the names
of suspected pirates upon subpoena from any U.S. District Court clerk's
office. A judge's signature is not required. Critics contend judges ought
to be more directly involved.
Verizon had argued at its trial that Internet providers should only be
compelled to respond to such subpoenas when pirated music is stored on
computers that providers directly control, such as a Web site, rather than
on a subscriber's personal computer.
In his ruling, the trial judge wrote that Verizon's interpretation "makes
little sense from a policy standpoint," and warned that it "would create a
huge loophole in Congress' effort to prevent copyright infringement on the
Internet."
Barry L. Ritholtz
Market Strategist
Maxim Group
405 Lexington Avenue,
New York, NY 10174
(212) 895-3614
(800) 724-0761
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Volatility and Risk Management during Wartime:
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B51CB3218%2D1F2C%2D4157%2D95A9%2D93A0C81CD5FB%7D&;
**********************************************************************
This message is intended only for use by the intended party and may contain
information that is privileged and/or confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient, then any review, dissemination, replication or
distribution of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and
delete this message and all attachments.
Electronic communications routed to any employee of Maxim Group LLC
("Maxim") are for business purposes only. While messages are confidential,
authorized management, legal and compliance personnel may review
electronic messages. Electronic messages are also retained and would be
provided upon request to an authorized regulatory body.
Do not use email or instant messaging to request, authorize or effect the
purchase or sale of any security, to send fund transfer instructions or to
effect any other transactions. Maxim does not accept responsibility for
transmission via electronic means of trade orders. No guarantee can be made
by Maxim of timely execution of any trade order transmitted via electronic
means including email and instant messaging.
Information included in this email does not constitute a trade confirmation
or an offer or solicitation of an offer to buy/sell securities. Past
performance is not indicative of future returns.
**********************************************************************
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/