More curious details on RIAA's "graduated response"

Last Friday the RIAA earned a bit of goodwill by announcing it would no longer pursue individual lawsuits against suspected file-sharers, instead focusing on a strategy of working with ISPs to enforce copyright laws, warn infringers, and ultimately terminate service to those who are illegally sharing music.

But early reports were woefully lacking in details about how this would all work. Over the weekend, new information has emerged, which I've digested below.

> First off, if you've already been sued by the RIAA, it looks like those existing lawsuits will not be suddenly dropped. One of the most visible current cases, the RIAA vs. Joel Tenenbaum, is proceeding according to plan -- as is Tenenbaum's broad counterclaim against the RIAA, which will be heard on January 22.

> According to one story, the RIAA's claim that it had not filed any new lawsuits against individuals "for months" is false, with evidence that it had filed claims as recently as December 15, just four days before the new plan was announced.

> Ars Technica published a Q&A with RIAA president Cary Sherman last night with numerous, more detailed questions about the program. Among his comments: There is no time frame for when the new scheme will actually go into effect, the technology for identifying file sharers is "essentially the same" as the old sue-'em-all method, and the RIAA has no plan in place for dealing with ISPs that refuse to comply with the new requests. (Most ISPs aren't commenting, but Verizon has said it is not taking part in the plan, at least for now.) Also a mystery: What happens to users who don't comply with ISP demands.

Ultimately the announcement raises more questions than it answers. Stay tuned and we'll try to make sense of it all, but don't expect much in the way of insight into the issue until well into 2009.