Today saw an article in the news about MIT and Boston College refusing to comply with RIAA-issued subpoenas for private information, although on a matter of legal procedure, not principle. A counter-tactic occurred to me.
RIAA is currently using bait servers and mp3s to track the identities of people who are downloading mp3s. They log the userids and IPs of people who download from their bait servers and use that information to prosecute the downloader.
One little problem: downloading an mp3 isn’t a commission of theft or piracy itself. Downloading an mp3 of music you don’t own is, but RIAA has no way of knowing what cds you own and what you don’t.
The counter-attack then, is obvious. It would require thousands of people to participate, but it would completely shut down RIAA’s current method of identifying people to harass. The tactic? Download music you have media for.
I should be able to download all the U2 mp3s I want to - I own every cd they’ve put out. If I download a bait U2 mp3 from a RIAA server, and end up getting a subpoena accusing me of piracy, guess what: they’ve just wasted resources trying to prosecute me, as I’ve committed no crime.
If thousands of people were to do this, and subsequently RIAA ended up trying to sue all of them for downloading music they already own, it would have a couple of beneficial effects. First, it would waste millions of RIAA’s dollars. Second, the courts should realize after a handful of such cases that just because someone downloads an mp3, they aren’t necessarily committing theft or piracy. RIAA would have to prove that the downloader didn’t have media for that particular song, which fortunately is flat out impossible.
Tactic extension: if you get a subpoena accusing you of downloading an mp3, just go out and buy the cd - use cash. RIAA will have no way of proving you didn’t already have it.