Headline News

MAJOR VICTORY – ISPs MUST COMPLY

A federal appeals court has ruled that record labels have the right to demand that ISPs (Internet service providers) hand over the identities of individuals illegally downloading copyrighted music.

On May 3, 2010, a three-judge panel in the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that a group of record labels’ right to enforce their copyrights superseded an Internet user’s right to remain anonymous. The anonymous defendant “Doe 3” argued on appeal that the allegations in the complaint were not sufficient to overcome his First Amendment right of anonymity. The panel found “no merit in Doe 3’s contentions.”

Arista Records LLC, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Virgin Records America Inc., Warner Bros. Records Inc. and other major labels filed the original suit in 2008, alleging that 16 individuals known only by their IP (Internet Protocol) addresses had infringed their copyrights. The anonymous defendants downloaded or distributed to the public various music recordings via online file-sharing networks. The labels sought damages and an injunction against further infringement. They also sought authorization to serve a subpoena on the defendants’ ISP, the State University of New York at Albany, in an effort to identify the defendants.

Doe 3 moved to quash the subpoena, saying the First Amendment affords a qualified right to use the Internet anonymously. A magistrate judge denied the motion to quash, and the district judge then rejected Doe 3’s contentions to the contrary as well. According to the ruling, the judges saw “no abuse of discretion in the refusal to quash the subpoena. The First Amendment does not provide a license for copyright infringement.”

“Given the factual detail in the complaint and its exhibit, plaintiffs’ pleading plainly states copyright infringement claims that are plausible,” the panel ruled.

Jennifer Pariser, Senior Vice President of litigation and legal affairs at the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) commented on the decision:

“We’re pleased that this decision reaffirms what we’ve known all along: Our process is sound and arguments to the contrary – especially the use of the First Amendment defense to sanitize blatantly illegal activity – have no merit.”

Law 360, May 3, 2010 (Christopher Norton) Christopher Norton
Read The Press Release: Click Here
Read the Decision: Click Here