A national file-sharing frenzy has kept its stronghold on college campuses long after the recording industry forced the peer-to-peer superpower Napster to shut down. Other P2P programs like KaZaA and Morpheus have since emerged, proving to be practically invincible as far as liability is concerned. With the software programs’ roundabout operations — in which their own users act as the servers through which files are transferred — they have been deemed legally irreproachable for their customers’ misdoings.

Thus the media industries’ uphill battle to roadblock the illegal trading of copyrighted music, movies and games is far from over.

The Industry Takes Action
In the past, commercial Internet Service Providers and universities have been the target of the anti-piracy campaign, but now the entertainment industries, such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), are directing their fight against the file-swappers themselves. Last spring, several east coast college students involved in large-scale file sharing operations were forced to pay hefty settlements to the RIAA, slapping on another $12,000 to $17,000 to their parents’ bill of college expenses.

More recently, the RIAA filed 261 lawsuits on September 8 against people who were found sharing copyrighted music. The RIAA found its defendants by using simple search techniques that allow anyone using major file sharing services to see who else is

Electronic Frontier Foundation Provost’s campuswide letter about copyright infringement UC-wide Copyright Resources RIAA Web site KaZAA file sharing application Apple iTunes

online, making music available to others. In addition to the lawsuits, the RIAA has issued subpoenas for over a thousand names of file sharers detected on music-swapping sites, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

“ The media industries are opening up their gunfight very broadly,” says Robert Ono, UC Davis IT Security Coordinator.

How the UC is Responding
Closer to home, the RIAA recently issued subpoenas to UCLA and UC Berkeley in pursuit of copyright infringers’ identities. While in both cases the copyright infringing material was traced to hacked general use computers, the day is coming in which copyright violators on our campus and elsewhere will be identified and prosecuted, says Ono.

IT Policy Analyst Randy Moory says that while Davis campus officials

“The media industries are opening up their gunfight very broadly”

haven’t yet had to release any student names to the RIAA or the Motion Picture Association, they are carefully considering how they would respond to a request for violators’ names from one of these organizations. The UC Office of the President has already devised a legal plan just in case this occurs, according to Jan Carmikle, an attorney for the UC Davis Business Contracts office. “ If we are told we have to give up a person’s name, we will,” says Carmikle.

Heavy Abusers More Susceptible to Incrimination
In an article published last month by the Associated Press, the president of RIAA, Cary Sherman, insisted that the organization does not intend to file suit against any minor copyright abusers and is instead going after those who download a “substantial amount” of copyrighted music (although that definition wasn’t made clear).

As for the offenders who have yet to be penalized, the RIAA recently launched its Clean Slate program, which it claims offers amnesty for file sharers who turn themselves in before their names are requested for subpoena. Under the Clean Slate program, the people seeking amnesty must destroy files that they have downloaded and sign a notarized form pledging that they will never trade copyrighted works again. In response to the Clean Slate program, a lawsuit has already been filed by a private citizen, who is claiming the program does not actually provide legal amnesty to file swappers, since artists and RIAA members (individual record labels) can still file suit against individuals who signed up for the RIAA amnesty. Other groups, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have publicly criticized the Clean Slate program, claiming it deceives users, often young people, into admitting wrongdoing while making them even more susceptible to lawsuits.

“It’s not fair for us to scream that we want people to protect our copyrights if we don’t do the same for others.”

Ono recommends that people “do a little research” before turning themselves in. “Find out the pros and cons of the Clean Slate program so you can make an informed decision,” he urges.

UC Davis Warns and Punishes its Own File Swappers
According to Ono, the industry’s focus on heavy abusers, rather than minor offenders, may explain the significant decline in file sharing violations reported on campus, from 96 in April, 30 in May, and down to a mere 10 in June. However, Carmickle says UC Davis’s aggressive communication campaign is also helping drive down the stats. Last spring, for example, the Provost issued a campuswide letter warning the community about the dangers and consequences of copyright infringement. See http://provost.ucdavis.edu/ for a copy of the letter. An updated version of this letter will be re-issued in late September.

The UC Davis policy for handling campus copyright violations remains firm, with disciplinary action taken against every known offender. Student Judicial Affairs has broadened the scope of their copyright infringement investigations to include both students and staff. Though many are opposed to this policy, the University maintains its obligation to uphold the law. “As a research university, we create tons of copyrighted material by the minute,” says Carmickle. “It’s not fair for us to scream that we want people to protect our copyrights if we don’t do the same for others.”

File Sharing Alternatives for the Future
As many public interest groups advocate decriminalizing file sharing, universities brainstorm alternative ways to satisfy the craving for cheap, downloadable media. One college is considering implementing a service similar to that of Apple’s iTunes, in which users pay a license fee for the legal freedom to download copyrighted music. Other universities are also looking into it, and the option could eventually enter the UC Davis arena too, according to Randy Moory, IET Policy Analyst.

The success of this alternative, however, would depend on its price and restrictions. As is the case with commercial pay-to-play services, access to media wouldn’t be as plentiful as that of the free, “use-at-your-own-risk” P2P services. Ono says the commercial services must offer a broad range of music, minimize the restrictions on moving music between computer and MP3 devices, and be reasonably priced to be an attractive alternative for students used to the luxury of a nearly-unlimited catalog of downloadable entertainment. Says Ono, “If you can replicate at minimal cost what people can get for free, then I think it’s possible.”

Many college students and staff continue to take advantage of unauthorized peer-to-peer file swapping, whether because of their perceived immunity to the penalties, their ideological resistance to the media business, or simply because of the convenience and thrift of it all. But for those who have paid high prices for their actions — losing everything from Internet privileges to college savings — online piracy is a risky game not worth playing. For more information on copyright laws visit the UC-wide Copyright Resources Web site.