[Infowarrior] - RIAA told to show cause why .edu subpoenas shouldn't be quashed

[Richard Forno]

RIAA told to show cause why .edu subpoenas shouldn't be quashed

By Eric Bangeman | Published: November 18, 2007 - 10:49PM CT

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071118-riaa-told-to-show-cause-why-ed
u-subpoenas-shouldnt-be-quashed.html

A federal judge in Washington, DC, has handed the RIAA another setback in
its campaign against on-campus file-sharing. In Arista v. Does 1-19, a case
brought against 19 George Washington University students by the Big Four
record labels, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has ordered the RIAA to show
cause why the ex parte subpoenas issued to GWU shouldn't be quashed.

Judge Kollar-Kotelly's order comes in response to a motion filed by Doe
number three last week. In that motion, the unnamed student asked the judge
to quash the subpoena, arguing that the RIAA was relying on the wrong law to
obtain the subpoena, and furthermore, that there was no applicable law that
authorized the issue of ex parte subpoenas to colleges and universities.

The RIAA typically relies on the Cable Communications Policy Act to obtain
the names and addresses of suspected file-sharers in its lawsuits. Doe three
argued that, since GWU is a university and not a cable provider, the CCPA
could not be used to authorize a subpoena.

Doe three's argument followed a ruling in Interscope v. Does 1-7, a case
brought against seven students at the College of William and Mary. The judge
in that case told the RIAA that the CCPA wasn't applicable, and that the
only avenue available to it was the DMCA. One problem: the RIAA never issued
any takedown notices, which are required by the DMCA before a lawsuit can be
filed. And it looks like there's no way a DMCA notice could be issued in a
campus file-sharing case. Only entities that host, cache, or transmit
infringing content can be served with DMCA takedown notices, and GWU did
none of the above. As a result, Doe three argues, the RIAA should be unable
to obtain the subpoenas at all.

Judge Kollar-Kotelly has apparently found the student's argument compelling.
Her Order to Show Cause (available from the Recording Industry vs The
People), directs the RIAA to submit a motion to convince her why she
shouldn't quash all 19 of the subpoenas. The judge notes the opinion in
Interscope v. Does 1-7, also mentioning a ruling in RIAA v. Verizon in which
the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled that the DMCA was not
applicable to file-sharing cases.

With few exceptions, the music industry has largely had its way in court
with its over 25,000 file-sharing lawsuits. Colleges have been a different
matter entirely, however, and if judges in the various on-campus
file-sharing cases find the arguments made in Arista v. Does 1-19 and
Interscope v. Does 1-7 convincing, it could have the effect of putting the
brakes on the RIAA's lawsuits against college students.