tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
 ·Comcast
1 edit | reply to Matt
Re: It was a Linux ISO right?
said by Matt  : Regardless, I do think this process needs transparency and I don't think the copyright holders nor the service providers should be responsible for determining who has actually committed a violation. Actually the copyright holders are the ones to determine who MAY have violated their IP. and if they should defend their copyright.
(here's where the current process goes wrong
They should request user info from the ISP (who should refuse, due to customer privacy rights). The copyright holders then should begin a discovery process ( seek a "john Doe" warrant from a court to compel the ISP to release the info, as well as documentation/proof That the account holder was in fact in possession and control of the equipment at the time. The ISP could then release the info, and notify the customer that they had done so under court order.
The alternative would be for the copyright holders to provide a cease and desist letter which the ISP should be obligated to pass on Anonymously ie copyright holders do not receive customer info (According to the RIAA's most users if guilty, would stop at this point, no need to pursue it further)
All of this at the copyright holders expense (including court costs, comcast's expenses for forwarding the letter or providing documentation for any court processes) .
Only then could they return to civil court to pursue the ALLEGED violator.
The should not have any special power of subpoena, special rules of discovery, or other rights over and above those of a normal business pursuing a person who had in some way damaged/ misused, or misappropriated goods or services of that company.
Failures or errors in the discovery process, would of course open the way for countersuits againist the copyright holders and/or the ISP depending on where the error lay.
repeated abuse of the court process could open the way for fines againist those parties. |
