Music Group Won't Sue Small Downloaders

Aug 18, 6:31 PM (ET)

By FREDERIC J. FROMMER

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Recording Industry Association of America says it will
not
go after small violators when it sues people who illegally share songs on
the
Internet.

The assurance came in a written response to questions by Minnesota Sen. Norm
Coleman, chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs' Permanent Subcommittee
on
Investigations. Coleman plans to hold hearings on the RIAA's campaign, which
he
has labeled "excessive."

"RIAA is in no way targeting 'de minimis' users," wrote Cary Sherman, the
group's president, in a letter the subcommittee released Monday. "RIAA is
gathering evidence and preparing lawsuits only against individual computer
users
who are illegally distributing a substantial amount of copyrighted music."

Sherman added that his group "does not condone any illegal copying and does
not
want anyone to think that even a little illegal activity is acceptable."

Sherman did not specify how much illegal distribution constituted "a
substantial
amount," and an RIAA spokesman declined to quantify the phrase.

Coleman, a Minnesota Republican and former '60s rock roadie, says he fears
that
legal penalties for downloading songs don't fit the crime. Copyright laws
allow
for damages of $750 to $150,000 for each song. The RIAA announced plans in
June
to file several hundred lawsuits against people suspected of illegally
sharing
songs on the Internet.

The RIAA said that while it has not yet filed lawsuits in its current
campaign,
"we assure you that we will approach these suits in a fair and equitable
manner."

Sherman said that in cases it brought last year against college students who
were illegally distributing tens of thousands of songs, the RIAA settled
cases
for $12,500 to $17,000 each.

In a telephone interview Monday, Coleman said the RIAA has been cooperative
but
that he remains concerned the industry is "overreaching."

Coleman is a former prosecutor who has used the Web site Napster to download
music.

"Barry Delfino" <bdelfino@comcast.net> wrote in news:_--dnTca0_KVF9-iU-
KYgw@comcast.com:

except that they explicitly refuse to define "small" when asked to.

On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 01:36:12 -0000, Theo <no@email.org> wrote:

And I believe it was "uploaders" they were really after, anyway.



Leigh

--
Consequences, shmonsequences, as long as I'm rich. - D. Duck

No, it's defined. Same standard used by the Amusement Park Industry
Association of America: you must be *this* tall to be sued by the RIAA.

BogAl

Leigh Melton <leigh@nbi.com> wrote in message



Does this mean that people can download but not upload. What
happen if most of the uploads were from outside of the United States
??

"Jim Higgins" <UseAddressBelow@pandora.orbl.org> wrote

Yup, that's right. As you say, "illegally mass manufactured". These
are people that make, as you say, "zillions", and then sell them
in stores and on the street.

At the rate they are going, maybe one day, a million years from now,
they will start thinking about going after people doing that on a
small scale, not for profit.