Q: Where were the lawsuits formally filed? Did that happen today?
A: The lawsuits were filed in the closest federal district court to the internet service provider yesterday, August 8, 2007.
Q: How much was the offer for original settlement? One student paper reported the amount was as high as $5,000. Why so much?
A: Because these are private settlement agreements, we will decline – as we have always done – to disclose such figures. Suffice to say, though, as a general rule, the earlier an individual settles in the process, the better the proposed settlement. The later someone settles – for example, after we have filed a “Doe” suit or the next step – against the individual as a named defendant – the settlement offers incrementally increase. However, keep in mind that this amount is still far, far less than what the law allows.
Q: There were 17 UO students originally notified of pending litigation, and the new release says 17 UO network users are subject to the lawsuit filed today. Did any of the students attempt to contact you?
A: We do not publicly release that information. However, while we request that universities forward our pre-litigation letters to their students and strongly encourage schools to do so, it is up to school officials to determine their compliance.
Q: Is RIAA hoping all those involved in the lawsuits will just settle out of court?
A: The pre-settlement letters that we send to universities with the request that they will forward them on to the appropriate network user allow students the opportunity to settle at a substantially discounted rate, while also avoiding a mark on their public record. As always, we encourage anyone who faces a suit to seek legal advice. We created the website www.p2plawsuits.com to serve as an informational tool for the recipients of our letters. On the site you can see a list of some of the most frequently asked questions posed by those involved in a copyright infringement suit and our answers. You can also find settlement information.
Taking a step back… During the past 6 years, the industry has experienced a dramatic decline due in part to music theft. That has translated into thousands of layoffs and closings. Fewer bands signed and many dropped from label rosters. The theft of music has comprised the industry’s ability to invest in the new bands of tomorrow. We are trying to do all we can – most important, offer exciting legal options – to encourage fans to enjoy music legally. It’s ultimately about creating a level playing field for the online marketplace. Piracy will never go away but we need to bring it under sufficient control where the legal services can reach their full potential and the industry can invest in the new bands of tomorrow.
Additionally, the problem of illegal file-sharing is most acute amongst the college demographic. In fact, a 2006 survey by Student Monitor found that more than half of college students download music and movies illegally, and according to market research firm NPD, college students alone accounted for more than 1.3 billion illegal music downloads in 2006. Additionally, every student in the country has access to affordable, legal music through innovative music industry-supported models like that offered through Ruckus.
What about federal privacy protections for students under the FERPA law? http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html. Will RIAA extend any understanding to students if they were not notified due to the fact information cannot be released until a subpoena is received?
Again, we encourage universities to forward the letters to the appropriate users so that the individuals can take full advantage of a discounted offer and avoid a lawsuit. Schools that do not forward the letters are essentially depriving their students of this opportunity to settle the matter at a lesser rate.
We do not request any user information from a school until a subpoena has been filed. It is important to note that after we subpoena the school for the individual’s identity, we send another letter to the individual directly, offering a second opportunity to settle before a lawsuit is filed in their name. As previously mentioned, this second settlement offer is not as discounted as the first, but still represents a sum substantially less than what copyright law allows.