• Communication
• Legal Business
• Real Estate
• Wealth Management

An evil lawsuit?

December 4, 2008

As we stagger onward into the 21st century the tension between rights holders and consumers grows by the day. The former cling to antiquated, 300-year-old notions of copyright while the latter, taking advantage of technology that couldn’t even have been imagined when copyright came into being, believe that the phrase ‘rights holder’ means that everyone has the right to download whatever music, literature or art they like.

IP lawyers are similarly divided. Some believe that copyright is outmoded and that beyond certain fundamental restrictions, rights holders should look to the free, revenue-from-advertising model (cf., YouTube) as the way forward. Others are only too happy to wade in with the full battery of laws honed over the last 300 years and litigate opponents into the ground.

Click here to read of one such example from across the pond. A 19-year-old disabled woman, currently in hospital with pancreatitis and awaiting a transplant, was sued by the music industry for illegally downloading music from the Internet. It appears that Ciara Sauro didn’t answer, still less understand, legal documents sent to her by lawyers acting for the Recording Industry Association of America, who promptly entered judgment in default. She denies ever having illegally downloaded music but now faces a bill of some $8,000.

Nice work by the lawyers, but only in America? Er, no. There are plenty of UK law firms happy to take a similarly Draconian stance on behalf of their clients. Blade suspects that within 20 years their advice will be worthless, for copyright cannot but change. In the meantime, though, they will no doubt continue to milk the copyright law gravy train and grind miscreant downloaders into submission. A nice, cheery thought, we think you’ll agree.