Reps. defend RIAA ways, face criticism

College of Arts and Sciences sophomore Paul Sawiya created a Facebook application to allow students to add music to their pages, and later received a letter from the RIAA, forcing him to take down his application because it contained illegal files.

Sawiya said the files had been added by application users and were not his, but when he tried to talk to the RIAA to better explain his situation, the music industry organization ignored him.

Sawiya, along with about 60 other Boston University students, turned out to hear RIAA representatives explain the tactics the group uses to discourage copyright infringement and prosecute violators and field questions last night.

"So it seems the RIAA is not really interested in understanding any new business models," Sawiya told the representatives during the question-and-answer session.

Recording Industry Association of America representatives Mitch Glazier, executive vice president for government and industry relations, and Jonathan Lamy, senior vice president for communications, said they could not comment specifically on Sawiya's question because they were not familiar with his case since it technically concerns the illegal activities of a business, not an individual.

Sawiya said he was not satisfied with RIAA explanations, and he did not agree with its practices.

"Do you think people have rights when they are in fear?" Sawiya said after the representatives left. "They are using a legal instrument as a means of intimidation."

The panel discussion at the College of General Studies was hosted by the Student Union Technology Committee and the Dean of Students Office.

"It's good that students are asking questions to make sure that what the RIAA is doing is morally ethical at the same time that RIAA is trying to find out if what we're doing is morally ethical," Union Technology Committee Chairman Jonathan Pasquale said.

Pasquale said the representatives were knowledgeable about the company, but did not seem to be informed about certain questions about the accuracy and legality of its tracking methods.

"They were dodging some questions, no doubt," Pasquale said. "It's unethical to circumvent the legal system, and they have no real proof that the person is downloading illegally until they issue a subpoena."

Glazier and Lamy told attendees subpoenas are only issued after an individual fails to settle a lawsuit with a payment that is usually between $3,000 and $5,000.

Other student attendees said Glazier and Lamy seemed to avoid answering some more controversial questions about the effectiveness of RIAA practices as a deterrent to illegal downloading.

"I still don't think they gave good reasons that what they're doing is effective," Chris Jordan, a College of Communication junior, said. "I think it helps people in figuring out ways to go around it."

Glazier and Lamy said suing students does not benefit the RIAA financially, but maintained the practice will prevent a further increase in illegal downloading.

They also said the association does not target individuals in any specific network, such as colleges and organizations.

"It still seems like they are targeting, principally, university students," Jordan said.

Dean of Students Office research assistant Nathan Brenner shared the same skepticism because BU has accumulated so many lawsuits.

"It would make sense that, as a big school, BU would have more lawsuits," Brenner said. "But it just seems like it has been targeted."

Most students said rather than suing students, the RIAA would be more effective in reducing illegal downloading if it communicated more directly with students about their digital rights.

"The RIAA's current tactics aren't working," Union President-elect Matt Seidel, a Technology Committee member, said. "Students need to be made more aware through direct communication with the RIAA."

He said the RIAA, the Union and technology groups should raise awareness about digital rights because it should not fall upon students to research every downloading site before using it.