Mix-Tape SWAT Raid Based On Non-Copyright State Copyright Law

from the your-tax-dollars-at-work dept

You might remember the story from a few weeks ago about how the RIAA had a SWAT team raid an Atlanta hip-hop mix-tape producer. The situation surrounding the raid -- in particular how the RIAA gets a public law-enforcement SWAT team to do its dirty work -- was already quite murky, but as the EFF's Fred von Lohmann notes, things aren't getting any clearer. While the mainstream media interest in the case has waned, some bloggers have stayed on top of the story, pointing out that this is not a copyright case. The SWAT team was from local authorities, not federal agents who enforce copyright law, because the DJs aren't charged with breaking copyright laws. Instead, they're being hit with state racketeering charges, with the apparent underlying law Georgia's "true names" statute. These sorts of laws were pushed through state legislatures by entertainment industry lobbyists, and require audiovisual recordings to carry the real name of their producer -- basically giving the RIAA and MPAA a way to get local cops to bust vendors selling pirated material, without having to go to the trouble of involving federal authorities.

Things start to get a little shifty with these true names laws, as there's some question as to whether or not they illegally pre-empt federal copyright laws. The analoghole blog has done a pretty great job of delving into this issue, noting that the Georgia law's attempt to make the distribution of unauthorized audiovisual works illegal would certainly appear to step on the toes of federal laws. The Georgia Supreme Court has ruled that it does not, while a similar law in California also stood up to a legal challenge. It seems like the effort has been made to really make an end run around copyright law, as the Georgia law says that owners of the "master copy" of a recording determine what's authorized and unauthorized distribution -- not the copyright holder, meaning even if an artist holds the copyright to their music, but their record label owns the master tapes, they're not the ones making the call. While the law, and this case, isn't very clear, one thing is: the RIAA has again used the legislative system and public law enforcement as a servant to protect its outdated business model. While there's enough question surrounding these true names laws to warrant further examination of them by a higher court, we're once again left wondering why state legislators and police have seen fit to do the entertainment industry's dirty work.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    dorpus, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 10:53am

    Flimsy Evidence

    We notice the last article on this topic quoted a communist-anarchist "news" site, and this time it is just quoting the same sort of partisan blogs.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Booger, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 11:40am

    Hoods

    I'm betting that the RIAA is getting ready to bite off more than it can chew once it starts bustin' down the doors of Rap artists and the like. They're running around popping caps in each other's *sses all day as it is. Won't be long before those RIAA execs step out their front doors to a hail of gunfire and we're free of them.

    Poor Dorpus... he'll end up taking a head shot when the hoods start popping caps in RIAA *asses.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    JM, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 12:16pm

    Not Rocket Science

    ...we're once again left wondering why state legislators and police have seen fit to do the entertainment industry's dirty work.



    Simple answer to a simple question. Because they're dirty.



    If the public doesn't stand up and protest loudly to this kind of abuse by corporations of our political system it will only increase.



    Asking the same obvious questions repeatedly seems pretty pointless. Loudly calling for protest against these practices is what we need more of.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Bumbling old fool, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 12:17pm

    Re: Hoods

    Was there a negative in that?

    How can I help us reach that end faster?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Erv Server, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 12:28pm

    When I first read this story I had thoughts of NAZI POLICE, the RIAA is using brute force tactics and this will backfire on them big time. Crime bosses once ruled this way, they are now all dead or in prison

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    billy, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 12:40pm

    I could've sworn that the MAFIAA was meant to protect the interests of the artists. How can that be so if the MAFIAA decides who gets to use their mostly crappy recordings and when?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Betaflame, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 1:02pm

    Re:

    You're partly right about the MAFIAA. But you have to pay them to protect you. Or else they'll come into you're place and rough you up and Take you're payment from you.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    hexjones, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 1:06pm

    "we're once again left wondering why state legislators and police have seen fit to do the entertainment industry's dirty work."

    That's easy! Everyone loves a big raid!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    ScytheNoire, Jan 30th, 2007 @ 11:39pm

    so if the RIAA are violating the law, once again, i have to ask why are RIAA executives not being arrested? this seems like they misused the law and violated it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    battery, Jun 19th, 2008 @ 8:20pm

    Re: tape

    [...]tape drive[...]

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This