« Government seeks Summary Judgment in Golan v. Ashcroft case challenging copyright restoration |
Main
| Ashcroft to Brewster Kahle: Get Lost »
June 24, 2004
Playing RIAA Attorney for a Day
Posted by Jason Schultz
With the growing concern over Senator Hatch's Inducing Infringement of Copyrights Act introduced this week, EFF decided to take the debate up a notch today by drafting a mock complaint against one of the most egregious "inducers" -- Apple's iPod music player.
The Complaint, alleged inducement against Apple, Toshina (who supplied the iPod's hard drive), and CNET (who provided a review of the iPod including instructions on how to move musc files between it and multiple computers), lays out exactly how easy it would be to sue a company for inducement on any of their flagship computer products. We tried to make the complaint as simple as possible but at the same time, substantive enough that it would be difficiult for Apple or any other company to dismiss the case before trial. [For all you lawyers out there, try to think of how you could succeed on a 12(b)(6) or Rule 56 motion].
It's often hard to conceive the potential damage Congress can inflict upon us until too long after the fact (e.g. DMCA), so we hope this will help focus the issue.
Comments (5)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: IP Abuse
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Oh and by the Way
- › Tor Sees No Increase In Illegal Copies After One Year DRM-Free
- › Free Publication on "Seismic Shift" in CA Copyright Law
- › EFF Challenges Bad Patent Filings - But There's a Bigger Issue
- › Video Game Development Game Ironic Piracy
- › British Photo Copyright Orphans' Concern
- › Mike Masnick Curb-Stomps Jaron Lanier
- › Microsoft Appears Ready to Relent on Xbox DRM
1. Mike liveright on June 24, 2004 7:55 PM writes...
Also see: http://news.com.com/Senate+bill+bans+P2P+networks/2100-1027_3-5244796.html?tag=nefd.pop
My comment was: http://news.com.com/5208-1027-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=1120&messageID=5096&start=-1
Thus I will suggest that the law be "re-written" to define "intentionally induces any violation" as providing a resource that is primarelly used for violation...
Permalink to Comment2. Brad Hutchings on June 24, 2004 8:33 PM writes...
In the immortal words of Ronald Reagan, "Facts are stupid things." According to Wikipedia, in January of this year, Steve Jobs announced that one person has purshed USD$29,5000 of tunes from iTMS. Item 13 of your complaint is bogus.
Permalink to Comment3. Don Sagner on June 24, 2004 10:14 PM writes...
What Steve failed to mention was that the user is actually a company.
I don't know which company, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same music company which buys songs from iTMS and then decrypts them (see hymn forums).
$29500 worth of tunes won't fit on a 40GB iPod.
Item 13 is bogus? Your argument is bogus.
Permalink to Comment4. Brad Hutchings on June 24, 2004 10:31 PM writes...
Reference Don??
Here is a quote from the iTMS TOS:
Usage Rules.
Your use of the Products is conditioned upon your prior acceptance of the terms of this Agreement.
You shall be authorized to use the Products only for personal, noncommercial use.
You shall be entitled to export, burn or copy Products solely for personal, noncommercial use.
Permalink to Comment5. Jon Lech Johansen on June 30, 2004 10:02 PM writes...
I wrote up this blog entry on what I think Don was referring to:
Permalink to Commenthttp://nanocrew.net/blog/apple/warnerchappell.html