Interesting People mailing list archives
more on who is to blame -- riaa
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 14:43:08 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Brad Templeton <btm () templetons com> Date: August 19, 2006 1:59:57 PM EDT To: David Farber <dave () farber net> Cc: ealmasy () axisdata com, spl () ncmir ucsd edu Subject: Re: [IP] more on who is to blame -- riaa On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 11:40:43AM -0400, David Farber wrote:
From: Edward Almasy <ealmasy () axisdata com> Date: August 19, 2006 11:38:34 AM EDT To: Steve Lamont <spl () ncmir ucsd edu> Cc: David Farber <dave () farber net> Subject: Re: [IP] more on who is to blame -- riaa The reprehensible conduct isn't the RIAA and company going through legal channels to defend their property rights; it's the RIAA using their size and bankroll to intimidate people into capitulating to their demands without a legal fight.
The RIAA strategy is an example of a new legal phenomenon that I have dubbed "spamigation" -- bulk litigation that's only become practical due to the economies of scale of the computer era. We see spamigation when a firm uses automation to send out thousands of cease and disist letters threatening legal action. We saw it when DirecTV took the customer database for a vendor of smartcard programmers and bulk-litigated almost everybody in it. Economies of scale and automation are not necessarily evil, but they do change the balance. The balance of the law was set when legal action didn't scale well. The RIAA uses systems to gather lists of alleged infringers, and bulk-sues them. It has set a price that seems to be profitable for it, while being low enough that it is not profitable for the accused to mount a defence, as they do not get the economies of scale involved. If the above sentence doesn't scare you, we also have the issue that for the big player, a few mistakes are tolerable noise in the system. For the target of a mistake, such as a person whose wireless network was used by a neighbour, or a completely innocent person caught in an ordinary error, we see no solution -- pay a settlement of several thousands, or spend far more to fight in court. We will need to adjust the legal system to deal with spamigation. Mistakes in any bulk use of the law must be punish, I suspect, with high penalties which eliminate the economies of scale. Ie. if you threaten 100, and 1 defends and wins, penalties must exceed the settlements of the entire 100, perhaps. And something must exist to assure the innocent will defend themselves -- the potential for punative damages may be insufficient. ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on who is to blame -- riaa David Farber (Aug 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- more on who is to blame -- riaa David Farber (Aug 19)
- more on who is to blame -- riaa David Farber (Aug 19)