ACLU Steps Into DMCA Subpoena Controversy

[papau]

http://dc.internet.com/news/article.php/3085201

ACLU Steps Into DMCA Subpoena Controversy
By Roy Mark September 30, 2003

WASHINGTON -- While a Senate subcommittee prepares to hear testimony Tuesday from LL Cool J and Chuck D on the merits of the subpoena provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and a Boston law firm went to court Monday questioning the constitutionality of the controversial power of the DMCA.Representing a Boston college student, the ACLU claims the music labels should not have the authority to strip Internet users of anonymity without allowing them to challenge the order in court. "We're not saying the recording industry shouldn't go after file sharers, only that they must do so in a way that's fair," said Christopher Hansen, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU, which filed the lawsuit together with the ACLU of Massachusetts and the Boston law firm Prince, Lobel, Glovsky & Tye.
On Sept. 8, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed 261 infringement suits with all of the names obtained through more than 1,600 DMCA subpoenas issued by the RIAA, which allow copyright holders to issue subpoenas to Internet service providers (ISPs) demanding the name, address and telephone numbers of ISP subscribers suspected of illegally downloading copyrighted material.
Unlike usual subpoenas, DMCA subpoenas can be filed prior to any charges of infringement, are not subject to a review by a judge, and requires no notice to, or opportunity to be heard by, the alleged infringer. "There are lots of reasons why people need anonymity online and why it should not be so easy to lose," Hansen said. "If the recording industry can uncover your identity simply by claiming that a copyright violation has occurred, then the Chinese government can use the same tool to find out the name of a dissident, and a batterer can use it to find out the address of a domestic violence shelter." The ACLU's lawsuit http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=13791&c=251 says the DMCA subpoena provision is "totally lacking in procedural protections," making it "an invitation to mistake and misuse." David Plotkin, an attorney with Prince, Lobel, Glovsky & Tye, said, "The recording industry cannot simply demand our client's identity without first complying with constitutional requirements. Our system mandates that people accused of wrongdoing, be it criminal violations or copyright infringement, be provided due process of law. That is all our client seeks here." <snip>

Additionally, P2P United called on Congress to appeal the DMCA subpoena power. "It's long past time for the 'Tyrannosaurical' recording industry to stop blaming -- and suing -- its customers to cover up the industry's own glaring failure to adapt yet again to a new technology -- one that should already have been making millions for it and for the average artist whom it still hypocritically claims to speak for," said Adam Eisgrau, P2P United's executive director. <snip>

[drfemoe]

1. Don't chat with Milwaukee Journal either

"Prosecutors also cited an online chat hosted by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in which Chong was asked how he felt about the feds targeting pot smokers. He jokingly replied, "I feel pretty bad, but it seems to be the only weapons of mass destruction they've found this year." "

http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,12485,00.html

This is all scary stuff. We need to do everything we can to protect our privacy online.

[Sephirstein]

2. Don't look for help from the Dems...

This is one area where they're extremely weak.

[shirlden]

3. And companies like Diebold

can use this to take down our website.

:kick: