The New York Times reports that RIAA is about to launch a second wave of lawsuits against suspected music downloaders. This time however, letters have been sent out before the suits are filed, warning those who are due to be sued of this fact. RIAA President Cary Sherman has said that the aim of the warning letters is to enable those on the receiving end to negotiate a solution without going to court, adding:
"Our objective here is not to win lawsuits — it is to foster a business environment where legal online music services and bricks-and-mortar retail stores can flourish.”
The IPKat welcomes such an approach as long as (i) genuine efforts are made by RIAA to negotiate with the recipients of such letters and (ii) the letters are sent to people who are credibly downloaders. However, the IPKat will be disappointed if it transpires that this is just an attempt to get double the publicity for RIAA’s action against downloaders – one round of media coverage when the letters are sent out and a second round when papers are actually filed with the courts.
Inspired by RIAA’s example? Get to grips with letter-writing here, here, here and here
"Our objective here is not to win lawsuits — it is to foster a business environment where legal online music services and bricks-and-mortar retail stores can flourish.”
The IPKat welcomes such an approach as long as (i) genuine efforts are made by RIAA to negotiate with the recipients of such letters and (ii) the letters are sent to people who are credibly downloaders. However, the IPKat will be disappointed if it transpires that this is just an attempt to get double the publicity for RIAA’s action against downloaders – one round of media coverage when the letters are sent out and a second round when papers are actually filed with the courts.
Inspired by RIAA’s example? Get to grips with letter-writing here, here, here and here
RIAA PROVES THE ART OF LETTER-WRITING IS NOT DEAD
![<strong>RIAA PROVES THE ART OF LETTER-WRITING IS NOT DEAD</strong>]()
Reviewed by Anonymous
on
Sunday, October 19, 2003
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html