Though in recent weeks it has seemed to be a remarkably lopsided battle between the Recording Industry Association of America and the online file-sharing community, all is not lost for the little guys.
Even with the deluge of subpoenas from the RIAA seeking Internet user information about those it suspects of sharing copyrighted music, the apparent backing of the courts and the general compliance - albeit grudgingly - of major Internet Service Providers, there remains a glimmer of hope that Goliath might not be guaranteed victory.
This hope stems from two cases worth watching: one involving Verizon and the other SBC Communications, which are getting under way in earnest this week. Both cases have the potential to shape how Internet privacy is recognized legally with their outcomes.
The Verizon case, which began oral arguments yesterday, is an appeal to federal court in Washington, D.C., of the decision that effectively granted the RIAA blanket power to subpoena user information from ISPs without having those subpoenas be reviewed by a judge.
Verizon, it is worth noting, did acquiesce to RIAA requests to identify certain users following the initial decision earlier this year. With the floodgates open, other ISPs were subpoenaed and they, too, subsequently granted the recording industry user information it had requested.
The legality of the RIAA being granted subpoenas from any court clerk prior to filing a lawsuit comes from the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
While other major ISPs such as Earthlink and AOL have elected to go with the flow in releasing their customers' private information to the RIAA, SBC has stood its ground and declined to "name names," as it were.
In fact, SBC has filed suit in California to stop the RIAA subpoenas, citing constitutional grounds and the paramount issue of digital privacy for its customers.
The company's general counsel, James D. Ellis, was quoted in The New York Times as saying, "We are going to challenge every single one of these [subpoenas] that they file until we are told that our position is wrong as a matter of law." Ellis is expected to testify before the Senate Commerce Committee this week.
What the Verizon and SBC cases have in common are valid arguments over the sanctity of privacy and the responsibility an ISP has to protect its subscribers' information. Because these cases are being heard at a time when librarians are required by law to comply with FBI requests for patrons' reading habits without so much as probable cause, they strike a certain chord with many people - and a dissonant one at that.
For you ASU file-swappers out there wondering what the University's position on the matter of complying with RIAA subpoenas is, the official answer is it hasn't come up yet.
Whether you agree with the questionable ethics of sharing copyrighted intellectual property or not, the fact remains that Internet subscribers have a right to expect that their personal information, including usernames and IP addresses, remains confidential regardless of what they may place in their "share with others" folder.
Allowing the RIAA to circumvent due process with impunity and render subscriber privacy useless seems a far more egregious violation than copyright infringement, which is exactly why the Verizon and SBC cases this week have a reasonable chance of success.
Scott Phillips is a justice studies senior. Reach him at scott.phillips@asu.edu.
