 |
|
Ted Bridis/AP says Music Industry to Unveil Amnesty Offer. If you've already been subpoenaed, you're out of luck. But if not, you can swear on your notarized statement to delete everything, and never file share again. Absolution and a pat on the head. Course, the RIAA doesn't represent everybody, so you might still get sued by the remaining non-RIAA-member recording companies. Coming forward may not be the smartest course of action. Check with your lawyer.
Is this going to be like the 70's, post Vietnam? Where first the government gave amnesty to those conscientious objectors who filed all the paperwork and got all the way through the DOD hearing process, but were denied CO status, and then still dodged the draft? And then after those guys, the government gave amnesty to those who got part way through the process, and then after a while to everyone else who just didn't show up at all? Then again, the RIAA is probably tougher than the DOD. Best not to count those chickens before they hatch. Or some such cliché.
Update 9/5/03: Slashdot discussion here. Also, Jon Healy/LATimes say in Record Labels to Offer Amnesty to File Sharers, With Conditions (htm):
The labels' trade association is ready to grant music downloaders amnesty -- provided they put their names, and possibly their faces, into a database. Is that like being convicted and punished, without a trial? Just admit your guilt and then be tracked privately by a trade association?
And then of course there are the privacy implications of such a database:
Under the program, which was first reported by Billboard Bulletin, applying for amnesty carries a risk: Those who renege on their pledges to honor copyrights would face much more severe penalties if they were targeted in a later round of lawsuits.
Given that, the RIAA might demand a copy of a photo ID from amnesty seekers to protect people against being placed in the database fraudulently without their knowledge, a music industry source said. But McGuire said, "I'd want to know how that information is going to be protected."
Where is the judicial review for this? And the oversight for maintaining the database of confessed file sharers with photos and other personal information?
Some kind of licensing scheme, compulsory or otherwise, seems vastly more reasonable than this!
Posted by Mary Hodder at September 04, 2003 07:28 PMIf you request amnesty the RIAA might not sue you, as they say, but what's to stop them from turning the information over to the Dept of Justice so that the government could pursue a criminal case against you under the NET act? (The NET act requires the target to some receive financial gain but the downloading of copyrighted material is considered a financial gain.) A conviction under the NET act can get you up to 3 years in prison.
Posted by: Amanda Gerrish on September 5, 2003 11:45 AMThis kind of sounds like SCO offering licenses to people to avoid being a target of the Boies legal team.... I guess, at least, the RIAA isn't asking for $699 per PC. (Although the RIAA/SCO ilk are some particularly cheeky monkeys, aren't they!?!?)
Posted by: joe on September 5, 2003 06:52 PMSure request amnesty but at what cost? Amanda's comment about the Net Act is right on. And why wouldn't they pursue someone who has basically already confessed?
Posted by: Alex on September 7, 2003 08:12 PM