INTERS COPE RECORDS.

a California general partnership; CAROLINE

--

F l'
~ rE.~ ;.'1

r:=-

UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT ORLANDO DIVISION (,. MmDLEDISTRICTOFFLORID

~
.
.

'...~D
17 to" .J'

,. LJ

,.,

!

CaseNo.: 19:01c-C~-~'~T'..ofli~\~;JS

RECORDS.INC., aNew York corporation;CAPITOL RECORDS, INC.. a Delawarecorporation; MA VERICK RECORDING COMPANY. a Californiajoint venture; WARNER BROS.RECORDSINC., a Delawarecorporation;LONDON-SIRE RECORDSINC.. a Delaware .' corporation;UMG RECORDINGS, INC.. a Delawarecorporation;SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC.. a Delawarecorporation;MOTOWN RECORDCOMPANY. L.P.. a California limited partnership; ARISTA RECORDS.INC.. a Delaware corporation;FONOVISA. INC.. a California corporation;BMG MUSIC. a New York generalpartnership; ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION.a Delaware corporation;ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUPINC.. a Delawarecorporation;PRIORITY RECORDSLLC. a California limited liability company;andVIRGIN RECORDSAMERICA. INC., a California corporation. Plaintiffs, v.
DOES 1 - 25. Defendants. DECLARATION MOTION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' -= PARTE OF JONATHAN WHITEHEAD IMMEDIATE DISCOVERY ~ -----

EX

I. Jonathan Whitehead, havepersonal knowledgeof the factsstated below and. underpenaltyof perjury. herebydeclare:

k .

1.

--

I am Vice President Counselfor OnlineCopyrightProtectionfor the and

RecordingIndustryAssociationof America,Inc. ("RIAA "), whereI havebeenemployedfor over 6 years. My office is locatedat 1330Connecticut Avenue,N.W., Washington, DC 20036. I submitthis declaration supportof Plaintiffs' Ex ParteMotion for Leaveto TakeImmediate in Discovery . 2. This declaration based my personal is on knowledge, if calleduponto and

do so, I would be prepared testify asto its truth andaccuracy. to

The RIAA's Role in Protecting Its Member Recording Industry CompaniesFrom Copyright Infringement 3. The RlAA is a not-for-profittradeassociation whosemember record

companies create, manufacture, and/ordistributeapproximately ninety percentof all legitimate soundrecordings producedandsold in the United States.The RIAA's memberrecord companies comprisethe mostvibrant nationalmusicindustryin the world. A critical part of the RIAA's missionis to assistits membercompanies protectingtheir intellectualpropertyin the in United States in fighting againstonline andotherformsof piracy. All of the Plaintiffs in this and actionaremembers the RIAA. of 4. The RIAA investigates unauthorized the reproduction distributionof and

copyrightedsoundrecordings online. As Vice President Counselfor Online Copyright and Protection,I am responsible formulatingandimplementing for online strategies the RIAA, for including investigations into the online infringement copyrighted of soundrecordings all of kinds.

.

2

I

""~~"~U~~

The Internet and Music Piracy 5.

"-"

The Internetis a vastcollectionof interconnected computers computer and

networksthat communicate with eachother. It allowshundreds millions of peoplearoundthe of world to communicate freely andeasilyandto exchange ideasandinformation,including academic research, literary works,financialdata,music,movies,graphics, an unendingand' and ever-changing arrayof otherdata. Unfortunately, Internetalsohasaffordedopportunities the for the wide-scale piracy of copyrightedsoundrecordings musicalcompositions.Oncea sound and recordinghasbeentransformed into anunsecured digital format,it canbe copiedfurther and distributedan unlimited numberof timesoverthe Internet,without significantdegradation in soundquality. 6. Much of the unlawful distributionof copyrightedsoundrecordings over

the Internetoccursvia "peer-to-peer" ("P2P") file copyingnetworksor so-called online media distribution systems.The mostnotoriousexampleof sucha system Napster,which hasbeen is enjoinedby a federalcourt. In addition,therearemanyotherP2Pnetworks,includingKaZaA, iMesh, Grokster,and Gnutella,that continueto operate to facilitate widespread and copyright piracy. The major recordingcompanies currentlyengaged litigation againstKaZaA, are in Grokster,andiMesh. At any givenmoment,millions of peopleillegally useonline media distributionssystems uploador downloadcopyrighted to material. 7. P2Pnetworks,at leastin their mostpopularform, referto computer

systems processes enableInternetusers (1) makefiles (includingaudiorecordings) or that to: storedon a computeravailablefor copyingby otherusers;(2) search files storedon other for users'computers; (3) transferexactcopiesof files from onecomputer another the and to via Internet. P2Pnetworksenableuserswho otherwise would haveno connection with, or

3 ~. ~~

~

" ""~ ..,

~"'cr

downloading,andto providea means effectingdownloads. of 8.

~

knowledgeof, eachotherto offer to eachotherfor distributionandcopyingfiles off of their PCs, to provide a sophisticated search mechanism which userscanlocatethesefiles for by

The major recordcompanies generallyhavenot authorized their

copyrightedsoundrecordings be copiedor distributedin unsecured to formatsby means ofP2P networks. Thus,the vast majority of the contentthat is copiedanddistributedon P2Pnetworks is unauthorized the copyrightowner- that is, the distributionviolatesthe copyrightlaws. by 9. The scopeof online piracy of copyrighted works cannotbe

underestimated. Retail sales the principal revenue source mostrecordcompanies for declined7% in 2000, 10%in 2001,and 11 in 2002. TheRIAA membercompanies % lose significantrevenues an annualbasisdueto the millions of unauthorized on downloads and uploadsof well-known recordings aremadeavailableon the Internetby infringerswho, in that virtually all cases, havethe ability to maintaintheir anonymityto all but the InternetService Provider("ISP") they useto supplythemwith access the Internet. to 1O. In contrast the terrible harmto copyrightowners,ISPslikely benefit to

from P2Pnetworks. Thosewho would unlawfully uploadanddownloadcopyrighted music often uselargeamounts bandwidth(because of musicfiles areso large). The infringersthustend to subscribe services, to suchasDSL andcablemodems, arefar moreexpensive that than ordinarytelephone services.Onepublicationrecentlyestimated 50-70percentof the that bandwidthof cablebroadband networkwasbeingusedfor P2Pfile copying. ~ Alan Brezneck,"ServiceControl Vendorsvie for MSO Business," CableDatacomNews(March 1t 2003).

4

I

11

11.

---

The persons who commit infringements usingthe P2Pnetworksare,by by

and large,anonymous Plaintiffs. A personwho logson to a P2Pnetworkis freeto useany to alias(or computername)whatsoever, without revealinghis or her true identity to otherusers. Thus,Plaintiffs canobserve infringement the occurringon the Internet,but do not know the true names mailing addresses thoseindividualswho arecommittingthe infringement. or of

The RIAA '5 Identification of Copyright Infringers 12. In orderto assistits members combating in copyrightpiracy, the RIAA

conductssearches the Internet,aswell asfile-copyingservices, infringing copiesof sound of for recordings whosecopyrightsareownedby RIAA members.A search be assimpleas can logging onto a P2Pnetworkandexaminingwhat files arebeingofferedby othersloggedonto the network. Thesesearches generallyresultin the identificationof specificInternetProtocol("IP") addresses from which infringersaremakingunauthorized copiesof soundrecordings availableto the public. An IP address a uniqueidentifier that,alongwith the dateandtime, specifically is identifiesa particularcomputeror serverusingthe Internet. An IP address allowsthe RIAA also to usepublicly availabledatabases ascertain, general to in terms,the ISPthat providesthe infringer with access the Internet. to 13. The RIAA engages a painstaking in process determine to whethera person

is infringing. That process relies on humanreview of evidence supporting allegationof the infringement. For eachsuspected infringer,the RIAA reviewsa listing of the musicfiles that the userhasofferedfor uploadby othersfrom his or her computer orderto determine in whether they appear be copyrightedsoundrecordings.The RIAA alsodownloads sampleof songs to a from eachuserandlistensto themin orderto confirm that they are,indeed,illegal copiesof soundrecordings whosecopyrightsareownedby RIAA members.The RIAA alsodownloads ," 5

-

I

11-

_.

--"'-'-

demonstrates the useris engaged copyrightinfringement. that in 14.

---

and stores otherevidence, asmeta~ata such accompanying file beingdisseminated each that

J

The RIAA frequentlyhasusedthe subpoena processes FederalRule of of

Civil Procedure andthe Digital Millennium CopyrightAct ("DMCA ") to obtainthe names 45 of infringersfrom ISPs. (Individualsonly cangain access the Internetafter settingup an account to with, or subscribing an ISP.) The RIAA typically hasincludedin their subpoenas ISPsan to, to IP address a dateandtime on which the RIAA observed of the IP address connection and use in with allegedlyinfringing activity. In someinstances, providingthe IP address aloneto the ISP hasbeenenoughto enablethe ISP to identify the infringer. Providingthe dateandtime further assists someISPsin identifying infringers,especially ISPsthat use"dynamicIP addressing" suchthat a singlecomputermay be assigned differentIP addresses differenttimes,including, at for example,eachtime it logs into the Internet.6Onceprovidedwith the IP address, the date plus andtime of the infringing activity, the infringer'sISP quickly andeasilycanidentify the computerfrom which the infringementoccurred(andthe nameandaddress the subscriber of that controlsthat computer),sometimes within a matterof minutes. 15. Since1998,the RIAA andothershaveusedsubpoenas thousands times of

to learnthe names, addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses infringersfor the and of purposeof bringing legal actionsagainst thoseinfringers. During a recentlitigation with Verizon (an ISP) relatingto the DMCA subpoena process, Verizonconceded that, asan alternativeto the DMCA process, Plaintiffs could file" JohnDoe" lawsuitsandissueRule 45 subpoenas ISPsto obtainthe true identitiesof infringing subscribers. to

6

ISPsownor areassigned certain blocks ranges or ofIP addresses. ISPassigns particular An a

IP address its block or rangeto a subscriber in whenthat subscriber goes"online."

6
: !

I

!',

.1111.
16.

1

c, 11_':.';';:
, 01"

--

-

The RIAA's Identification of the Infringers in This Case In the ordinarycourse investigating of online copyrightinfringement,the

RIAA became awarethat Defendants wereoffering files for downloadon variousP2Pnetworks. The user-defined authorandtitle of the files offeredfor downloadby eachDefendant suggested that manywere copyrightedsoundrecordings beingdisseminated without the authorization of the copyrightowners. The RIAA downloaded listenedto a sample the musicfiles being and of offeredfor downloadby eachDefendant wasableto confirm that the files eachDefendant and wasoffering for distributionwere illegal copiesof soundrecordings whosecopyrightsareowned by RIAA members.The RlAA alsorecorded time anddateat which the infringing activity the wasobserved the IP address and assigned eachdefendant the time. .5g ComplaintExhibit to at A. The RIAA could not, however,determine physicallocationof the usersor their identities. the The RIAA could determine that the Defendants wereusingBright House'sserviceto distribute and makeavailablefor distributionthe copyrighted files. 17. The RIAA alsohascollectedfor eachDefendant list of the files each a

Defendant madeavailablefor distributionto the public. Exhibit 1 to this Declaration has containssuchlists for the first threeDefendants referredto in the Complaint. Theselists often showthousands files, manyof which aresoundrecording(MP3) files that areownedby, or of exclusivelylicensedto, Plaintiffs. Because the voluminousnatureof the lists, andin an effort of not to overburden Court with paper;' havenot attached this Declaration lists for all the I to the Defendants.Suchlists will be madeavailableto the Courtuponrequest.

The Importance of ExpeditedDiscoveryin This Case 18. Obtainingthe identity of copyrightinfringerson an expedited basisis

critical to stoppingthe piracy of RIA A members'copyrighted works. 7

-

-. -

-

---

-

--

-

'-'

19.

First, everyday that copyrighted materialis disseminated without the

authorization the copyrightowner,the copyrightowneris economically of harmed. Prompt identificationof infringersis necessary orderfor copyrightownersto takequick actionto stop in unlawful dissemination their works andminimizetheir economic of losses. 20. Second, infringel,tlent often occurswith respect soundrecordings to that

havenot yet beendistributedpublicly. Suchinfringement inflicts greatharmon the initial marketfor new works. New recordings generallyearna significantportion of their revenue whenthey are first released, copyrightpiracy duringa recording'spre-release early and or release periodthereforedeprivescopyrightownersof an importantopportunityto reapthe benefitsof their labor. 21. Third, without expedited discoveryPlaintiffs haveno way of serving

Defendants with the complaintandswnmonsin this case.Plaintiffs do not havethe Defendants' names addresses, do they havean e-mailaddress Defendants. or nor for 22. Fourth,andperhaps mostcritically, serviceprovidershavedifferent

policiespertainingto the lengthof time they preserve "logs" which identify their users. ISPs
keep log files of their user activities for only limited periods of time - sometimes as little as

weeksor evendaysbeforeerasing datathey contain. If an ISP doesnot respond the expeditiouslyto a discoveryrequest, identificationinformationin the ISP's logs may be the erased, making it impossiblefor the ISPto determine identity of the infringer andeliminating the the copyrightowner's ability to takeactionto stopthe infringement.

8 .

I

1\

-- .

--

--

I declareunderpenaltyof perjury underthe lawsof the United States the foregoingis that
true and correct. .'

Executedon February~,

2004,in

.

I

(1

-

--

--

-

DOCUMENT
_r~_()~I

SCANNED
Exceedsscanner's page limit Physical exhibit prevents scanning
)l..

Other:

81

--

.

. .. .. --I

**REFER TO COURT FILE**

Revised 8/11/99

"
I II!

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful