Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Sues Woman Who Has Never Used a Computer
boarder8925 writes "Marie Lindor, a home health aide who has never bought, used, or even turned on a computer in her life, was sued by the RIAA in Brooklyn federal court for using an 'online distribution system' to 'download, distribute, and/or make available for distribution' plaintiff's music files. She has requested a pre-motion conference in anticipation of making a summary judgment motion dismissing the complaint and awarding her attorneys fees under the Copyright Act."
Punitive Damages !!!!
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I mean she's NEVER used a computer?
How they managed to find this woman and sue her is beyond me... It just goes to show you that you can't get away from the RIAA even if you've never used a computer in your life. They managed to find one of only a handful of people who has never used a computer and sue her... I should be scared for my parents right now.
Looks like a nice steady income awaits Mr Morlan Rogers.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
And the RIAA executive thought he was just having another wet dream!
Doesn't this prove something about the RIAA's investigative methods? Let's assume that the woman is telling the truth, she has in fact never touched a computer in her life, therefore she has not downloaded the music in question. Meaning she has been FALSLY IDENTIFIED by the RIAA's investigative methods (whatever those may consist of).
My question is, now that this obvious inconsistency has been exposed, what does this mean to those that have already been convicted? Isn't it to say, if you incorrectly fingered this woman as a pirate, how can you prove that you accurately identified me as a pirate?
"Wasn't this posted to digg a few hours ago with almost the same wording?"
So?
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Reminds me of a colleague back in the UK who was taken to court for not paying his TV license fee - when asked what his defence was he responded "I don't own one".
Apparently the judge was not amused with the prosecution for not having bothered to do even this minimal check!
If this is the case (pardon the pun) with this action then I hope the RIAA get a really embarrasing and well publicised dressing down. Shame on them.
idiots...
i'm assuming she doesn't have broadband either. what ip address did they use to find her? just goes to show how stupid these lawsuits are.
Can this work? The entire request to dismiss the case was one paragraph, with only one sentence stating that the defendant never used a computer. Wouldn't some investigation or proof be required in order for a case to be dismissed?
She has never used a computer?
Does she have internet access?
How could she use the 'online distribution system'?
Questions over questions....
The only one who knows is RIAA.....
Must've been humming the tunes in her head - either that or she was talking on the phone while the radio was playing in the background, that's transmission of copyrighted material over a digital medium, string her up!
Maybe they use a special version of RARP reverse DNS or something.
L I N D O R
108-105-110-114
Nope cant be that.
uhm...
So if the lady has never used or purchased a pc, what grounds is the suit filed on again? I mean, what, was she pirating music the way it was done BEFORE the age of computers (namely with a boombox, a blank tape, and the trusty record button)?
oh wait...lemme guess...some kid next in the lane next to her at a red light was playing a burned cd full of pirated music at full volume and thus she's listening to pirated music? This is ridiculous...the RIAA has gone beyond the wildest stretches of "you gotta be f*cking kidding me" with this one.
Kinda makes me WANT to priate music, just so when they haul me into court I can look them in the eye, verbally crucify them, and then spit in said eye for wasting my time, the judges time, my lawyer's time, and tax dollars.
When the hell are all these companies going to learn that piracy isnt going away, EVER. I mean, they can complain about DVD piracy, but what about back before DVD's when all it took was 2 VCRs? or previously stated music piracy method?
I'm starting to think the pirates are viewing the way they RIAA has come down on piracy as just the music industry "thumbing their nose" at them.
This just goes to show you the great lengths to which the RIAA will go to protect their interests and punish those who violate the law.
The RIAA will not be distracted by 'facts' or other nonsense in its relentless pursuit of justice!
"customer": 'but I've never even used a computer!'
RIAA: 'la la la - I can't hear you!'
Steve
I'll believe anything the RIAA says before I believe a person could live a life without ever once using a computer.
I'm suing Slashdot for wasting wast quantities of my time for the past year.
CmdrTaco, you're goin' down.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
This woman does laundry a lot and has no dryer, so she hangs her clothes to dry. When the RIAA said she was using an "online distribution system" to make plaintiff's music files available, they were not referring to a computer; what they meant was that she is often heard whistling copyrighted songs while she hangs clothes on the line; hence, "online distribution system." Typical slashbots rush to this criminal's defense when it is clear she was openly and shamelessly stealing music and she was caught red-handed. Meanwhile, the RIAA music executives are being deprived of a living (or at least of a third yacht) thanks to the lawless actions of such criminals. Eventually this will kill music, as the RIAA warned us about home taping so long ago -- why would an artist bother creating or recording new songs when any old lady can just come by forty years later and whistle it without paying the company that distributes your cds a dime?
If her case is true, I hope that the RIAA is forced to explain or show HOW ON EARTH they were led to her.
but 3 albino kids soaking in water told the RIAA that this woman was planning on buying a computer to pirate music so they sent tom cruise after her. thank god for these pre-emptive lawsuits!
Yeah but when they come to break down your door they need a geographic address, not an IP address -- presumably the address you signed up for your ISP with. So most likely the actual pirate here signed up for an ISP using her home address and name.
Perhaps this is part of a campaign to instill fear in the hearts of the "guilty" by first stringing up a few obviously innocent people.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
How many times have they said "Well if you don't want to get sued, don't download music!" Explain that statement, in light of THIS!
I hope the court really slaps them one over this. It's clearly shown that they're not doing the most basic of fact-checking. (I mean, come on now, for godsakes, a dead woman, and now someone who's never used a computer at all?) Where did they pull the IP address out of -this- time? (Never mind, I don't want to know.) This is a massive waste of her time and that of the court, and I hope they get slapped with a good bit worse then attorney's fees. All their suits should be dismissed with prejudice after this garbage.
To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
This lawsuit must just be a mistake since the lady never used a computer. If that's the case, why is this even newsworthy? They probably just messed up. It happens. That's what independant judicial system is there for.
No Sigs!
Okay, did I read the correct story? So she may have never used a computer, but I assume she is paying for the cable or dsl service that is likely attached to her television or phone bill? Or a child used her credit card to open an AOL account... And that there is someone in her household who uses the internet she is paying for to share music on p2p? That happens all the time in these cases. A kid shares the music and the parent is blissfully ignorant. The way the blurb is phrased sounds like it was written by Pravda. Is there another article with more details?
Stop contributing to the problem by buying media distributed by evil corporations. Share all the music you already have with all your friends and then buy your new music from the artists themselves, or make your own and give it away or try to sell it. Promote it yourself online. We don't need record companies anymore.
it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
Luckily for the RIAA, they don't actually need evidence to prosecute.5 52240
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/27/1
Can others sued by them use this to show that the RIAA is suing people at random with allegations that are hard to disprove and no real evidence and get their cases dismissed?
Here is an article that describes recent news in that case:
http://www.forbes.com/business/energy/feeds/ap/20
However her defense has changed slightly:Ah, yes... the old "it's the fault of a file-sharing program for allowing them to do it" defense. I wonder how well that one will fly.
Apparently Santangelo is receiving all kinds of donations from big hearted Internet file traders but frankly it looks like money down the drain to me. There is no way she is going to win when she's already basically admitting that she failed to supervise her kids and their friends when they were using her computer.
As far as this new case, who wants to bet that it won't turn out the same way? The lady maybe never touched the computer, but what about the kids? She's responsible for their actions! Saying "I didn't do it" won't help if it's your kids, like what appears to be the case with Santangelo.
Seriously, if she never used a computer then she didn't buy any media or software, so media producers lost profits. That's even worse than pirates 'cuz hardware manufacutrers lose profits either! Jail her now.
Since they first sued a dead woman for copyright infringement, and now they're suing a woman for the same thing that does not have a computer. I can put these facts together, and come up with this idea: The RIAA is really a ghost hunting organization. First the dead woman (a ghost!), and now a nonexistant computer (a ghost!). These clearly show their hidden agenda :)
I bet she also listens to her iPod with the volume up way too high.
...perhaps she's from Soviet Russia?
I don't get. They want legal system go down in smokes? It is total massive abuse of court system at it's best. Maybe we should start to sue everyone who breathes the air?
Gosh. Such shortsightness...
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Perhaps someone at the RIAA had just finished watching "Minority Report" and got a bit wide-eyed at all the money they could make by using that method with this? :)
I have never used a computer either. This woman is not guilty.
I remember an old Teddybears STHLM song that comes to mind.. Only In America.
Girls are strange. They don't come with a man page.
-- Michael Mattsson
And I never heard of the german equivalent making such "hunt". If they do , well, they are really bad at making themselves in the news.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Maybe the notorious GVU?
Regards,
-DBS
Sigs suck!
Re: The lady maybe never touched the computer, but what about the kids? She's responsible for their actions!
You sure? Marie Lindor and Patricia Santangelo both live in New York.
"Today, all States but New Hampshire and New York have provisions holding parents civilly responsible for youth crime, with an average maximum recovery amount of $4,100." - Parent Responsibity Laws.
IANAL
Reduce, reuse, cycle
That is what is really bad, because just about everyone violates copyright, from your parents down to your little kid brother. It is like arresting people for being terrorists because they had bomb making materials under their sink...as does just about every single person in America.
If we are going to have laws, the punishment should fit the crime, and getting 60,000.00 out of some poor sap for doing the same thing that every other person is doing is just wrong. If someone was printing up 10 thousand copies of a CD to sell at flee markets, that might be a reasonable fine (maybe).
What we need to do is have some good old fashioned Black Sabbath The Mob Rules...and run a few RIAA execs up on a tree with a rope. Maybe that would put into perspective for them the concept of punishment fitting the crime.
Usurper_ii
Ron Paul
- Hunter S. Thompson
Never try to beat a professional at his own game!
If you look at that page, there is more about the lawyers who are handling the case than about the case itself. There is even a sales pitch, and an attempt to solicit cases. I am against the RIAA as much as y'all, but the presentation of this story strikes me as funny ...
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html
REGISTRATION PROCEDURES
Original Registration
To register a work, send the following three elements in the same envelope or package to:
Library of Congress
Copyright Office
101 Independence Avenue, S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20559-6000
1. A properly completed application form.
2. A nonrefundable filing fee of $30 for each application.
NOTE: Copyright Office fees are subject to change. For current fees, please check the Copyright Office Website at www.copyright.gov, write the Copyright Office, or call (202) 707-3000.
3. A nonreturnable deposit of the work being registered. The deposit requirements vary in particular situations. The general requirements follow. Also note the information under "Special Deposit Requirements."
*
If the work was first published in the United States on or after January 1, 1978, two complete copies or phonorecords of the best edition.
*
If the work was first published in the United States before January 1, 1978, two complete copies or phonorecords of the work as first published.
*
If the work was first published outside the United States, one complete copy or phonorecord of the work as first published.
*
If sending multiple works, all applications, deposits, and fees should be sent in the same package. If possible, applications should be attached to the appropriate deposit. Whenever possible, number each package (e. g., 1 of 3, 2 of 4) to facilitate processing.
---------------
No wonder RIAA is kicking in their own shit pile. People like fuck nut Sonny "Bonehead" Bono made this possible.
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
I have a patent on using darts to decide who to sue.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
... that RIAA tactics are not taken on by other industries - cause otherwise we might end up being blamed and sued for illegally downloading and sharing music without using computers, speeding without driving a car, illegally migrating without crossing a border and doing oh-so-many things you can be blamed for without ever going anywhere near them.
Now I can sue my neighbour for war in Iraq, he doesn't have any tanks but who cares.
Isn't it obvious what is going on here? She is from the future. I mean, everybody know that people from the future do not need to use computer because they can simply plug the internet directly into their brain (of course an adapter is required to interface with the low-tech ethernet we have today). Actually, i was lying about that. she is not from the future. sorry to get you guys all excited and ready to "welcome our internet-teathered-brained overloards." What really happened, and in telling you this, i know i am risking the safety and well being of myself and my family, is the government, in association with the RIAA, implanted in her a computer that, when she thinks about a song, crosschecks against the music that she has legally purchased. If the song she is thinking of is a song she hasn't legally purchased, it is automaticly downloaded and stored on a hard drive located where one of her kidneys was removed. So this is a warning to you, and future generations: buy your music before you think of it or suffer the fate of this woman.
Dear Steve:
Greetings. I represent the RIAA. The song "la la la - I can't hear you!" is copyrighted by BMG, an RIAA member corporation. Your appropriation of the lyrics without permission of the copyright holder is in direct violation of Title 17 USC 101-810. Indeed, your transmission of said lyrics over the internet constitutes a distribution of copyrighted material, and your use of the "online distribution system" known as "slashdot" for your criminal activity amounts to conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. Moreover, the use of the "moderator" system to enhance the visibility and thus the distribution of our client's intellectual property multiplies the damages significantly. Please cease and desist in the use and distribution of our client's property or face legal action.
But I've never heard of a "summary judgement" motion being heard before discovery, much less what sounds like a standing, oral one. Seems like a motion to dismiss or motion for declaratory judgement is more appropriate if the complaint was just filed, and that's the impression I get in the letter from the defendant's attorneys
Hope they know what they're doing.
Apple is sued for hearing loss.
RIM gets sued by paper pushing company.
Rockstar gets sued for hot coffee.
Google gets sued by government for client confidentiality.
Microsoft sues Linus Torvalds for not having a windows license. (OK made this one up).
Anyone else see that there is no point in fighting the US, they are doing a perfect job of screwing themselves over...
karem
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
Let's imagine 2 things for a moment. First, that she's an old granny of 80something, and second, that her grandson bought her a computer so she could stay in touch with him via e-mail.
No, she didn't download. How could she? She has no idea how that machine works. All she knows is "click here, click there, write text, click here". But what do you think happens then?
Search warrant, all her neighbors watching, realizing that the police is hauling stuff from her home. A computer? Oh, kiddy porn. After all, that's what you get to see on TV when they haul computers out of homes.
Granny dealing in kiddy porn? How could she? But then, she's always been the quiet one... you know, gotta watch those creepy quiet ones...
That lady better be VERY glad she doesn't have a computer! Own a computer, hook it to the 'net and you're already with one foot in the prison. But nobody cares when you own 10 guns and an artillery piece...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So I woke up this morning, radio was blaring.
:(
Terrible music - crappy DJ just general RIAA crap.
walked downstairs turned on the tv.
More shitty music videos blaring blaring.
Get in my car tuned to 103. Roll down the windows as happy as can be.
Blasting my eardrums - its Britney this time.
I need more, time for 102 - dance and hardcore - woohoooooo
Arrive at work to start streaming.
Radio 1 from the ip nice and loud
Turning it louder to drown out colleagues - might finally get some work done.
Time for the weekend - have lots of fun.
Out to the club - blasting my eardrums
Back at the house - Barry white's on the turntable.
Sat in the cafe soothing my hangover - chillout tunes all through my head.
Go to the park, find some band playing - oh no it hurts my head.
Sat at the comp - readin slashdot, hear about an artist and see where they are.
Yayyy kazaa has got one, time to start. Downloading all well listens so fine.
Think to myself - I like this artist I'll go buy his album.
Wake up on Monday happy as can be - set to go CD shopping as quickly as can be.
Finds a letter - its addressed to me - the RIAA are suing me
It seems I did something wrong - I shouldv been more careful.
The bastards they heard me and started to rant.
Now I have to get a lawyer or I can't pay the rent.
All because I whistled to Britney at a public event.
The moral of this tale is that music is everywhere in our lives.
We listen for free day in and day out and have it everywhere.
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
and more grrrrrrrrr @ the stupid bastards
liqbase
Why would the RIAA actually bother to investigate what songs are downloaded and by whom? Too much trouble for them! Everyone has illegally downloaded before, right? So no one will ever notice if you just ...
...
1. pick up the phone book and choose your victims at random.
2. pick a few popular songs that everyone must have downloaded anyway
3.
4. profit!
'Frivolous' lawsuits like this - facilitated by the system - are a clear sign of the fascism that is developing alarmingly fast in American society. Very scary!
For some reason, I think the defendant in this case is full of shit. First, what does she do? She is a home health aid, sometime in the course of her training she has used a computer and if she is so old that she didnt have computer training and she still works in the field I wouldnt want her as my home health aid. Also, home health aids are normally given a laptop to store their clients information. Very rarely and Im talking only bumfukt Egypt do they use paper anymore. I live in the very redneck part of North Carolina where they cant even spell 'computer' and they have computers
Whether this story is made up, or she is just trying a new innovative defense I find it very hard to believe as would any judge. The only way she is going to get this thrown out is if she can show massive identity theft and be able to prove it.
looks like RIAA really frecked up (again)
Let's all e-mail her to let her know she has our support!
Pseudo code for dealing with the RIAA:
do while number of RIAA Lawyers > 0
select RIAA Lawyer
execute RIAA Lawyer (no one will miss it)
loop
But also Bill Gates is due his $300 - $400 dollars for a computer operating system and a full office suite (plus anti-virus software) she should be using. What a thoughtless woman. She and her kind are resposibible for holding back the economy. Think of the starving Chinese children turning out computer boards and peripherals that are being denied their daily bowl of rice. Oh, the humanilty! Think of all those pimple faced kids in their first job at the local appliance stores being deprived of ales. And the ISPs not getting their share.
What a shame. This woman and her kind are criminals. Let's round them up and send them all to re-education camps and force feed them computer classes until they change their anti-social behaviors.
Too lazy to create a sig...
Parents are liable for the behavior of their minor children. In your strawman case, the parents can, in fact, be sued for negligence.
Clear, Dark Skies
Both parties sued in your example were women.
Does RIAA hate women ? Does RIAA discriminate against them ?
I smell a class-action suit coming their way with 50% of the world's population participating in it !
I know... like, how the hell does she pirate music and have meaningless arguments with strangers?
You join either the Democrat or Republican parties and attend the party congress. You will get into plenty of meaningless arguments although some say the the patriotic music offered at these events tends to be a bit cheesy. If you want to get serious about meaningless arguments you can also run for the Senate. Be warned it is an expensive hobby and you have to have your moral backbone and conscience surgically removed.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
A farmer from Wiltshire got a penalty notice accusing him of doing 85mph on his tractor in south Wales.
His tractor, however, has a top speed of 26mph and has never been to Wales. Simple case of mistaken identity: automatic numberplate reader gets the plate wrong.
The farmer's quote:
"It's a good tractor, but not that good."
Does anyone have a link to the actual article, instead of somebody's blog?
how, tell me, how?
Here are some more facts about the person sued by the RIAA:
* She has been dead since 1983
* Is on the terrorist watch list
* Was recorded by Diebold as having cast three votes for President Bush in the 2004 Ohio general election
* Lost her life savings when the buggy whip industry unexpectedly collapsed
* Is blind and deaf
* Is named in legal documents as the Principal on 35 offshore Enron subsidiaries
* Has been the subject of NSA wiretaps and was recently classified as "a clear and present danger" in a Presidential daily security memo after an alleged meeting with several Quakers and other terrorists
* When recently sued by the MPAA for downloading a copy of Backdoor Adventures of Butthead and Beaver, her successful defense was that the bulb in her movie projector burned out in the early 1960s and was never replaced
In capitalist west music industry notes ip's when you share recording.
In Soviet Union music industry shares recording of YOU with KGB.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Good illustration with the pipe bomb example.
:)
:)
The only thing I disagree with is the lynch mob because we simply don't need it, society already does something much more effective: blatantly ignoring misconstrued laws. It's not even civil disobedience simply the aggregate of common sense. Imho RIAA lost close to a decade ago and have since been involved in a protracted harakiri as they continue to sue willy-nilly while not managing to follow their own rules and seeing major artists publicly state their support for ordinary filesharing.
I know it's little comfort for those unlucky enough to be affected by the death throes of RIAA. I know the justice system and most politicians are lagging at least 20 years behind society but that has always been the case and isn't any kind of surprise. If one tries to speed things up one should be very wary of doing more harm than good.
Rant warning!
RIAA really had/has no reason to fear individuals filesharing and should have jumped at this gratis opportunity for broad artist exposure and recognize the market for high-quality reasonably priced unobstructive digital formats. Instead of their centralized campaigns for a handful of artists they could have taken advantage of everyone promoting everyone for free and let the naturally popular artists rise instead of trying to manufacture them. If they had any business sense they would be actively promoting filesharing, making it easy for fans and casual listeners alike to support & pay those they enjoy, making it easy for artists and consumers alike to find each other and create communities. If they did all that they would be doing their job which boils down to having a living thriving music industry, as it is they're doing the opposite. They could still change course but they wont because they do not understand anything about their customers or the market. Businesses that have no clue about their own market disappear over time, I doubt the RIAA will exist in their present form come 2016.
Wow I've got to add a rant warning at the beginning lol
MPAA has tried to learn from RIAAs fiasco but the whole bizarre strategy of DRM, DCMA etc. is so fundamentally flawed that they can't have learned much. At the least they have not understood that the only people they punish with such strategies are their lawabiding customers and as such they're in practice fighting for "piracy" even if that's not their intent.
RIAA & MPAA shooting themselves in the foot is too much of a mild description; they're repeatedly stabbing themselves in the chest and have been doing so for years -- noone survives that but luckily it has nothing to do with the continued existense of great music and movies as eventually the cash flows will just end up being rerouted around them.
I'm eagerly avaiting the day a senators or congressmembers child/familymember is hauled in to court by the RIAA or MPAA, they share too. Hell, I'm pro-Bush but I'm sure there's at least one track on his beloved iPod that's "pirated" lol
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
I think she should countersue the RIAA for the price-fixing scheme for CDs she never even bought.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
If, indeed, she doesn't use a computer, then she should be safe from the lawsuit. If she has a relative/friend that is using a computer on her internet connectiton that did indeed deal with lots of music sharing, then she's going to have some issues.
Seriously, the way that the industry's lawsuits are going, they're going to sue themselves out of business. Public relations nightmares like this are bad news for the white-hat artists, labels, and outfits. NOISE(like this lawsuit) gets in the way of providing MUSIC for FANS and keeping artists CREATIVE and focused on the FANS.
I have strong opinions about the rights of creative people's productions, but I have even stronger opinions about mis-guided, money-focused individuals who do not place appropriate value on the FANS and the CREATIVE process.
[operator_voice]We're sorry, the music fans you have reached are no longer in service or are no longer interested. Please make a note of it.[/operator_voice]
A Passionate Independent Musician
Are you calling me color blind?
SearchIRC - Now with live chat directory!
"Marie Lindor, a home health aide who has never bought, used, or even turned on a computer in her life,"
If she DOESN'T even OWN a computer, WHY WOULD SHE HAVE AN INTERNET CONNECTION?
"Read the f****** article", people!
"Money is truthful. If a man speaks of his honor, make him pay cash." Notebooks of Lazarus Long, Robert A. Heinlein
Spelling... eye dough kneed dispel chequer...
A Passionate Independent Musician
The Computerized Accounting class in Rogers High School, of Rogers, Arkansas, did not even have or use computers in any of it's lessons until a few years ago.
That was an interesting class.
And educators around the state keep asking themselves what they need to do to bring our educational system up to par with the rest of the country. Pfft.
It happens often that someone gets confused about where "Marie Lindor" lives. Now if I could only make a joke out of this, I could get modded higher.
"If all the American people want is security, let them live in prisons." Eisenhower
Well well.... here we are again. The decaying corpse of a business model that the RIAA upholds persists in its campaign to put out an inferno with lighter fluid. The tone of that sentence alone tells you how much I begrudge the wasted efforts in this field as opposed to appropriate market adaptations. .... but I applaud Marie being sued by the RIAA.
How in the world does one maintain such an untenable position? It's simple, really. The more truly innocent people the RIAA sics their dogs on, the less credibility they have when they lie about losing their money to unscrupulous thieves. I want the RIAA to go after Jane Doe who never touched a PC, or any other John Q. Public who never uses a computer. I want the toxicity level in the music consumer's blood to rise to the point of doing what should have been done a while ago: permitting market forces to crush competitors who do not innovate.
I will always feel for the artist who needs to get by on the $0.17 an album they may get from the big label pigs, but I will feel a lot better with the RIAA beaten from this current path, and P2P philosophy finally hitting music production.
The Crimson Dragon
I advise that we send her ass to GitMo or Area 49 (used for cyborgs, not aliens, located in California, of course) for some serious probing- let Congressmen Conyers and Sensenbrenner plug her analog hole for a little while!
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.-TJ
Anyway, Junior went bankrupt due to some bad business decisions, and suddenly John Senior found himself not being able to use his credit cards anymore. He only managed to get them back after several heated phone calls...
You think that's bad... just wait until the companies have an even more shared databasing system. It's hard enough getting your name out of one database, but when it's ditributed over 50 of them and they all cite the others when asked for the authenticity of the source of their data, things can get pretty ugly.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
Maybe the law the RIAA is using to sue people needs to start being reviewed like the Patriot Act.
There was some debate here, so thanks for clearing up that it is a computer.
I guess this OT here, and should go in as an Ask/. but any help would be appreciated.
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
Come back to us when you've got uuencoded jpg's on your 'fridge using those magnetic letters...
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
How does she check her email?
I'm starting to think the RIAA "investigators" pick people at random from the phone book or something and the only reason there aren't more cases like this is because almost everybody is using P2P.
No sig today...
I heard of a guy this same sort of thing happened to. He got a picture of his car speeding. So he took a picture of $100 and sent it back. The Police must have been in a good mood, because they sent him annother letter with a picture of handcuffs in it. The guy paid his bill
Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.
While I want to agree with you, I'm going to have to call you on that. I suspect they make a lot more money by grooming particular artists and therefore knowing where their money will be coming from. To use an analogy, look at the state of animal husbandry. In medieval times, it was not uncommon to let your pig or cow free range for food. It was considered cheaper than providing for feed. Nowadays, I'm sure people would argue that it provides for a survival of the fittest, much as you state your idea regarding music. However, what typically happened was that there was little control over your animal and its productiveness. Your cow might be stolen by bandits. It might be shot by an errant poacher (or an earnest one). Even when it survived, you had no idea what it had been eating and who it was breeding with. And average production for those cows was small. With modern animal husbandry techniques, we now keep the naimals penned and well fed, control their breeding, and we wind up with cows who have easily 50 times the milk production of medieval cows. Right now, the RIAA has those penned and bred cows. They know they can milk those cows and be assured of a rich bounty because they bred them that way. And you're asking them to free range their artists? It's just not a smart move for them.
I'm eagerly avaiting the day a senators or congressmembers child/familymember is hauled in to court by the RIAA or MPAA, they share too. Hell, I'm pro-Bush but I'm sure there's at least one track on his beloved iPod that's "pirated" lol :)
Feh! Do you think their lawyers would let them get that far? I would not be surprised if they have a database of names which they automatically remove from consideration. At that, they probably do make a non-token effort to ascertain who's actually pirating out of the people they prosecute. It's only due to volume that we're getting these "never touched the Internet" people. If the RIAA were at all smart, they'd come out publically and state that this person was all a mistake and award her $500 worth of music from RIAA artists. It would be good publicity, the "we made a mistake and are making up for it" kind, plus it will cost them all of $5 plus shipping to do so, since they own the CDs.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
Let me clarify your post:
:)
1. Rip pages out of telephone directory
2. Pin to wall as darts target
3. Throw dart
4. Sue all those that weren't hit by dart
5. Profit!!!
(6. Repeat)
Any technology distinguishable from magic, is insufficiently advanced.
As far as I can tell, this entire hullabaloo is based on a three-sentence letter allegedly posted by the defendent's lawyer, an Inquirer article about as long and detail-rich as as the back of my cerial box, and a blog entry taken almost word-for-word from that article.
What and where are the sources? The the lawyers just call the Inquirer and tell them that they have a story? How 'bout we do some source checking before we post inflamatory articles to slashdo?
So the RIAA is sending the strong and unmistakeable message that the safest place to hide is out in the open. They sue parents because of what their children do, sue a guy who wiped his hard drive, sue a woman who has never used a computer. The only safe thing to do is BE A PIRATE because they're the ONE GROUP NO ONE IS SUING!!! Fire up WinMX - er, BearShare now - and get to work being very OPEN about BLATANT DISSIMENATION OF COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. That's the only way to avoid the RIAA. (And you have to wonder what the POINT of all this is, since it has zero effect on any sort of file sharing.)
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
I have to admit. The fuckers are winning somewhat. My gf is extremely afraid of them and therefore does not download music. We've talked about it and I'm like, "nah, no big deal. Just do it." "But won't they catch me?" "Nah," I say, "how they gonna catch you?..."
/.
This is some story where they're suing the lady who has never powered up nor touched a computer in her life. Funny as shit some of the comments. Gotta love
But worrying about the RIAA, it all reminds me of this biker I spoke to once who was talking about buying a stolen harley. I was like, "but won't you get busted some day riding it?" He was like, "how they gonna do that?" I was like, "well, serial numbers?" And he proceeded to give me the future conversation between himself and an officer:
Him: Is there a problem officer?
Officer: Yea, where'd you get the bike?
Him: I bought it off a guy.
Officer: Who?
Him: Dunno, never got his name, paid cash.
Officer: Why are the serial numbers filed off?
Him: Dunno, I guess the guy didn't like 'em....
But on the other side, though he succeded, he "only" requested every defendant to pay the 30-40 Euros the game was initially sold for.
Unless there's some degree of "cost of court" added to that, I'd think that's a nice way to win yourself out of business. Even if he only did this with people who admitted their guilt, the costs are likely to add up to more than the margin on his game. Then again, that does mean that he's got some publicity both from his altruistic bent and from several thousands copies of his game as running advertisement for other people to buy it.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
I wonder if this case could be referrenced as proof that the RIAA "evidence" is false.
After all, how correct could it be if they are suing a woman who has not, and does not own a computer?
Seems like it would be built in doubt for all cases past, present, and future.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Every one will be famous 15 minutes in his life. I guess it was the time for her.
Million Dollar Screenshot
it doesn't matter.
RIAA doesn't sue people for the money.
It doesn't even sue people to get them to stop doing whatever they are supposedly doing.
They sue them for the publicity.
This is worse than mere barratry: the more outrageous the abuse of the legal system, the more it suits there purpose. They'd send a spurious C&D to a deaf vegan paraplegic nun who runs a homeless shelter, if they could find one. In fact, brazenly baseless accusations are better than substantive ones; it gets the point across without the expense of a trial.
They're trying to establish a reputation like the La Cosa Nostra. And they want to use that reputation exactly the same way: to create de facto privileges that do not exist de jure, e.g. "You don't want to park there, that's Vinnie the Hatchet's spot."
And you can't call them to task for their misappropriation of state machinery to despoil private individuals of their fundamental human right to be left alone; not without talking about it, which is exactly what they want you to do.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Lawyer: "When's the last time you used a computer?"
Ms. Lindor: "Actually, I've never used one in my life."
RIAA Lawyer: "OBJECTION, relevance!"
When out in public how can you tell a Grammar Nazi by just looking at them?
Simple, look for an adhesive label on their lapel with an upsidedown lower case 'e' on it.
By their schwa-stickers ye shall know them.
"Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
Kind of like the old adage that goes something like "Discipline your child often. Even if you don't know what they did, they do." And no, I have no children. Yet. But it would seem clear that the RIAA really needs to look over their methods for collecting evidence. Didn't they end up suing a supposedly innocent Mac-user once, because they didn't realize that on a DSL or Cable subscription, you have dynamic IP? Maybe they need to be taught that *everybody* do not have computers, and *everybody* with computers are not using them to l33ch mp3s.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
In the old days people had a way of dealing with people like the RIAA execs. They grabbed them, stripped them, beat them, coated them in tar and feathers. In other words they made a public example of them to discourage other similar-thinking assholes from doing the same thing. Are we too civilized for that today?
That's an old classic joke. I've seen it make the email rounds several times...
Is there anyone else?
So, just out of curiosity, how much IS a tv license fee in the UK?
"The TV business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs."
Oh, and the title of the chapter is, "Where Thieves and Pimps Run Free."
I also checked Wikiquote, and the parent's quote is up there. However, it's only in the "attributed" section.
..they'd do a quick background check on all potential defendants, costing them thousands but saving them millions worth of bad PR. Idiots.
-Copyright law #69:Whenever Mickey Mouse is about to enter the public domain,copyrights get extended by 25 years.
Thank you for making me laugh out loud on a Friday that feels like a Monday.
Mainly because this poor woman (note: making the assumption of total innocence) is going to have to hire a lawyer, deal with this crap on her offtime or maybe even take off time from work in order to deal with this crap.
I hope she files suit against the RIAA and sues them for her lawyer fees, etc.
this is just the ISP's playing games with the RIAA.
RIAA: Give us the user of this IP address!!!
ISP: Why?
RIAA: We have the right to commit murder to prevent copying of our intellectual property under the DMCA! This IP was trading files! Give us the name or we'll kill you!
ISP: [flips through phonebook.....] Ok, Ok...it was....Joe Schlabotnick, of 123 Main Street, Fukyusville, Montana.
RIAA: Thank you. Well...not really. You should consider yourselves honoured to give us the information of your cruminal customer scum!
ISP: Oh, we are....we are... [giggling in background]
RIAA: SUESUESUESUESUESUE!!!! [Calls Joe Schlabotnick]
Joe: Hello?
RIAA: We know you are stealing our music using Napster! [whispering in background...What?...that's legal now....ok, then what's still illegal?......] using KaZaA, eMule, LimeWire, and Bearshare, all at once! You have no chance to survive make your time!
Joe Schlabotnick: Huh? It couldn't have been me. I don't even own a computer.
RIAA: What happen? Someone set us up the bomb!
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
how long will it be until the RIAA has plain-clothes agents wandering the streets of major cities, harassing everyone they see, with those too-familiar white earbuds, about how they acquired their music, and can they produce doccumented proof on the spot...
now is the winter of our discotheque
A good, old fashioned tarring and feathering???!!!
You sir are my temporary hero! Outstanding idea!
"Are we too civilized for that today?"
from what I see on the news and read in the papers, no, we are not too civilized for this, but we sure like to delude ourselves we are!
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
I, for one, cannot *wait* until the day comes when the RIAA sues a legitimate businessman from a respectable family, if you know what I mean. What's that old saying? Don't ask for more money that it would cost to have you whacked ;-)
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
of a computer is no excuse...
There are always two sides to a story - how did her name get into the system after all, but it sure sounds even more hokey than radar speed fines.
Oh well, what the hell...
If the RIAA were even modestly cautious (and I'm not gonna mention how), they'd be far less defective. Then their suits would be far less ridiculous, better received and they'd win. Judges may not be able to acknowledge they read the newspapers, but they sure as H3ll can pay close attention to all court rulings. They don't like paperhangers.
How would you prove you are a victim of an identity thief? How could you have prevented the theft from happening in the first place?
Remember, if you have a debit or credit card, you are using computers. Your data gets transferred online between computes, over the phone lines, over the Internet, over the USPS, UPS, FedEx, in tapes, DVD-ROMs, CD-ROMs, etc. Then the courier agent loses your tapes (Read, someone stole them).
I'm starting to think the RIAA "investigators" pick people at random from the phone book ...
Indeed, and once we see a lawsuit against Navin R. Johnson, well know for sure.
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
It wouldn't get the exec whacked though. He'd suddenly have union troubles and every last thing he'd ever done that was remotely illegal would have local cops investigating it. It'll all go away when he drops the suit AND pays a handsome penalty.
A bigger truism is don't whack a guy when you can extort him for some cash.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Isn't the RIAA's action's considered harrassment in this case? I mean they are sueing a woman who never even turned on a computer in her life. What data could they possibly have had to have justification for this acusation? I just think the RIAA is getting out of hand.
You're all overreacting. You have no understanding of the complex issues involved. Clearly this was an entirely justified preemptive strike by the RIAA. They had intelligence from a reliable source, code named "Curve Ball", that this woman intended someday to use a computer and that she holds many of the same philosophies as those who have already infringed copyright. They even had specific intel showing exactly where she planned to set the computer up. It's a slam-dunk. Furthermore she is well known to have jaywalked several times and that she is not a pure free-market capitalist. It doesn't matter if she didn't intend someday to use a computer - the RIAA (as well as everyone else, by the way) believed that she would, and even if that is now known to be false, she is still a jaywalker who supports socialist programs like medicaid. This preemptive lawsuit was the right thing to do. It was never about copyright infringement, from the beginning of this post I have said it is about jaywalking and socialism. If the RIAA cuts and runs from this battle it will only provide aid and comfort to the enemy.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Just because someone is completely innocent doesn't mean you can't sue the pants off them.
C'mon, give the RIAA a break. Haven't they suffered enough?
-... ---
Is he related to Mike Hunt?
I drank what? -- Socrates
Maybe the RIAA know something we all know as a rule of thumb. But maybe they've figured out that it's actually, literally true.
"Everyone downloads music. Everyone is guilty."
Once you realize that that statement is actually TRUE, then it doesn't matter whom you sue. Sue names out of the phonebook, and then listen as they protest, pulling a John Edwards based on their excuses with a high degree of accuracy, because THEY ARE GUILTY. EVERYONE ACTUALLY IS.
And exceptions like this woman are so rare it just doesn't matter.
Now for a second, imagine that that they screwed up on this woman. We don't know what their screw-up rate is, but they may be utterly wrong 10% of the time. They may get the wrong person one time out of 10, but nobody realizes because since everyone REALY IS GUILTY, the wrong people think "Oops. Ya got me." and fork over some cash.
Is anyone reading this completely innocent? Anyone?
(Except me, of course. I've never done it.)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Identity theft is also a possibility, as well as the ISP simpley makes a mistake when examining their logs.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
No, we've become pussies due to the political correctness police.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
She's never used a computer? Not even a calculator? COME ON!
For some reason the "You Win" in quotes made me think of SF2.
;)
So if the motion is granted, does the Judge call out "Finish Him!!!" where upon the Defendant's lawyer does a fatality on the plaintiff's?
... borrowed a DVD from a friend and watched it? ... made a mixed tape in the 80s from some songs your friends had? ... recorded songs on the radio and played them later?
To the **AA, these are all the same as "piracy" and "theft" too, and if they could they'd sue you for each of them.
"In the old days people had a way of dealing with people like the RIAA execs. They grabbed them, stripped them, beat them, coated them in tar and feathers. In other words they made a public example of them to discourage other similar-thinking assholes from doing the same thing. Are we too civilized for that today?"
It's for the same reason, we don't challenge them to a duel like men.
It's because they are pussies who hide behind lawyers, judges, lawsuits, attorneys and law enforcement agents.
IOW, they are cowards who can't fight their own battles man to man.
RIAA execs would be hiring goons to beat people to death (strike breakers and whatnot). We sometimes forget these people are our rulers and masters, because it's such a scary thought.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
.....run a few RIAA execs up on a tree with a rope.....
A better way would be to write your Congress and tell them they'll be out of office unless they change copyright law. Making copies without the copyright holders permission is illegal, but ONLY for the purpose of producing real money income. All non-profit copying is allowed. Others should not be allowed to PROFIT with real income from someone else's work.
However, if someone got a copy for free from someone, that does NOT mean that person might have gone and bought a copy, if they had not gotten the free copy. That person might really like the free song, like from the radio, and decided to see what else that artist had to sell. As a result, the artist might have sold several copies of other similar material.
Some artists, but not the **AAs have figured ou that this free copying is a good advertising system for them.
All theory is gray
RIAA Exec: "The new phone books are here! The new phone books are here!"
>> The cost that we are paying is that the human spirit, the soul, the whole reason humans make music in the first place is lost. In other words: the music supply is poisoned.
;)
I agree with you. Commercial and Pop music has long been known to emulsify the brain
A bar in my small town was hosting live bands. They were able to do this for a few months. I don't know exactly why they stopped as the manager's answer to my question was something along the lines of "never again". Could have been a bad experience with a band or two or could have been they didn't have enough draw to be economically viable (I'm guessing the latter as they were never really 'packed').
People expect a lot from live performances. All the lighting, all the effects, 'just like the record'. errr, CD...
I think the democratizing of music via indie bands available over the internet might serve to normalize the puplic's expectations and, perhaps, bring about a resurgence of live music.
Obviously, the record (err, CD) producers do not want that to happen. Not in a way they cannot control. I'm sure they recognize that it's the ONLY way "music" can survive as it gives rise to the new generation of musical expressionists and proponents. I suspect they'd rather the whole thing die than have it out of their control.
F*** the political correctness BS. That's probably the single biggest reason America is declining as much as it is today. If people would replace their PC attitude with some good old fashioned common sense (and the occasional tar-and-feathering of idiots who don't use common sense), this world would be a much better place.
I have known that what the RIAA was doing is morally wrong. However, I (ignorantly) believed that I was safe from their evil because I don't trade music online. I don't visit any peer to peer sites, and I have no peer to peer client software on my computer. I figured I just won't show up in their lists, and hence they wouldn't sue me.
I hoped that the possibility of my computer or IP address being hijacked by a trader were low, since I am pretty security-savvy, and have a good setup.
No dice. If they are suing people who don't even use a computer, then they could sue me, too. It could happen this very day. This would cost me a lot of money, time, and frustration. They would further present me with this difficult choice: maintain my right to privacy on principle and refuse to let them search my private computer (and risk loosing even though I am innocent) -or- roll over and expose my underbelly to the bigger dog.
I am not happy.
When we bought a house we had an escrow account set-up with the mortgage for paying things such as property taxes and home owners' insurance. Well it turns-out that the banks that do the mortgages often farm out the duty of handling escrow related matters. So the processing company that worked for our bank paid our property taxes for the first year. Unfortunately the company that handled the escrow accounts for another bank also did because someone at their company mis-entered some number in their system. Now the county returned the money once to the company for our bank and once to the company for the unrelated bank. Years later we get a bill for a couple thousand dollars plus.
By that time we no longer had the same bank for our mortgage and both companies that handled the escrow accounts had been absorbed by larger companies. This all was a large pain in the butt to work out. I actually had to pay a lawyer to look over the terms of a settlement between all of the parties in the end.
The worrisome aspect was that the county clerk told me that it is very common for this sort of mix-up to happen. You would think that if that was the fact the county would mail a letter to the homeowner on record if they got two checks for paying the property taxes as a heads-up, but no we don't get that sort of service even though it is our taxes that finance the county.
Ok, the article says nothing of the specific circumstances of the case. But unless this lady's children were on the streets of Bangkok (or wherever folks sell such things) selling thousands pirated copies of Britney Spear's latest album, I think the lawsuit totally overboard - even if the RIAA is in the right (which I don't concede). Children do stupid things. You don't see Nestle suing the parents of every kid who steals a candy bar from a 7-11.
For those of you who can read German (or don't fear babelfish):
http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/16/16269/1.htmlNavin R. Johnson [John Q Public]: "Good things are gonna start happening to me now. " [Sniper [RIAA] scrolls through a phone book] Sniper: "Navin R. Johnson ...... Sounds like a typical asshole. "
I wonder how many RIAA members have lent a book to someone, after all dont books have the same copyright laws as any other media?
If this were really happening, what would you think?
When I got my new laptop with wireless 802.11g I was shocked to not just find 15 wireless networks in my immediate vicinity, but that more than half of them were wide open.
Whilst using a neighbors connection until my WAP came in it occured to me that if I spoofed the MAC address on my laptop, and then connected and installed Kazaa or the like, it would mean the trail to me would be muddied. Good luck to the RIAA since the connection I was using belonged to a local business that sells car accessories, in essence a Ricer Shop. Imagine them telling the RIAA they weren't downloading music.
I would have been perfectly happy to use said connection but then I realized my hardware firewall wasn't doing me any good. All good things must come to an end.
1 - If this is a frivilous, baseless lawsuite in which the sued person is innocoent (extremely innocent, if one can use such a term), then how many other lawsuits, even those that have been extorted... urr... settled... were also made against innocent people?
For the U.S. (and probably oher) court system, this is the elephant in the middle of the room. There can be no justice so long as the courts allow situations to exist where going to court and being found not guilty is worse for you financially than just giving the plaintiff what they want without comment.
That the court system does allow it certainly does NOT let the RIAA and others off the hook. While an unjust and unethical practice is allowed under law, anyone who takes advantage of it is no less unethical.
I mean if they sued dead people or people with no computers doesn't that set precedence that their methodology for picking copyright infringers is not fullproof? CZ
These suits do nothing more than publicize the fact that you can download music illegally.
1. There is a difference between criminal law and civil law.
2. Parents are DEFINITELY liable for the actions of their children - which is one of the reasons theres a liability clause in most homeowner's insurance policies.
I know this first hand - when I was a kid I ran a red light on my bike and caused an auto accident. Completely my fault. My parents ended up paying for all the repairs.
Clear, Dark Skies
Multiple "john does"...CHECK
7 year old girl...CHECK
A mother of four...CHECK
Non computer users...CHECK
Nuns...
President bush...
Lars Ulrich...
Ourselves...
God...
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
It's "set up us the bomb". You'd think after it was plastered over the entire net, people could get it right.
I doubt the RIAA will exist in their present form come 2016.
;-)
Since the world is ending in 2012, I'd say that's a pretty safe bet.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
Indeed, and once we see a lawsuit against Navin R. Johnson, well know for sure.
Navin can countersue because he was not given proper artist credit for his smash hit "I'm Picking Out a Thermos For You."
In criminal law, you are correct - but for civil liability (such as downloading music) the parent can be held responsible, just as an employer can be held liable for sexual harassment committed by an employee.
Clear, Dark Skies
I'm not, but I'm a minority. The majority is something more than civilized, somewhere between hypnotized and lobotomized.
I'm sorry, but I have a hard time saying two people pointing guns at each other makes them "men". It makes them idiots.
You want to be really manly, and slightly less idiotic? Throw a punch. Using a gun is for pussies -- even more so than hiding behind a lawyer.
Here's why: It would be the first actual court judgement against the RIAA in these matters.
The RIAA would no longer be able to claim have sued thousands (a lie, most aren't sued) successfully and never lost. That is very big.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Pay the money you owe...
/.. Over 2000 slashdot comments posted, wow, time well spent; but money not earned or paid back to your creditors.
GET a real job rather than wasting your time here on
By the way she is using a computer... her brain by any definition is a computer... and she was booted once like most of us... most likely she's not only viewed porn but has been involved in it (at least in private)...
When music is listened to you are making a squishy analog copy of the digital music; therefor the RIAA has a right to sue.
A REAL JOB: Time Well Spent Earning Money for your creditors and the RIAA.
We prefer to be called Buccaneer-Americans.
Indeed, and once we see a lawsuit against Navin R. Johnson, well know for sure.
He hates these songs!!!
Great reference by the way.. that made my day. For those of you that didn't get the joke.
Of course, those work better when you are an immortal and, after your rival runs you through ten times without killing you, you can apologize for calling his wife a bloated warthog and bid him good day!
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Then it truly is "all over". *Starts digging hole for bomb shelter*
"Kind of like the old adage that goes something like "Discipline your child often."..."
OMG that is the most horrible piece of advice I have ever heard. I hope you were using it sarcastically, because if you actually did that to a child you would have the most horrible miserable child on the face of the planet.
Have you ever been punished for something you didn't do? You NEVER forget it, and you NEVER forgive either. It eats at you till you can find some way of revenge. I'll prove.... (most likely that I can do something really bad and get away with it, to balance out the unfair punishment.)
And even if they did do some minor thing, if you constantly discipline someone, they never learn to discipline themself. You never trust them, so they never trust anyone else, and they never learn to contain themself either.
At the most extreme you get kids like that elf on harry potter - they do something bad, and punish themself, then do something bad again. They never learn that it's bad to do something bad - all they learn is that if you get punished then the bad thing is neutralized.
-Ariel
Oh absolutely! I'm sorry - I figured that was such bad advice it would be obviously sarcastic...
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
I wonder why they bother with trying to get addresses of filesharers from the ISPs at all.
1) Open phonebook
2) Select people
3) Sue these people
4) Settle with these people
5) Collect revenue
Suddenly I realize it's becoming a good thing to be a crummy speller. My wife will be delighted!
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
They need to learn the hard way, you can't just legally bully innocent people and think you can continue to get away with it.
If we can't sue w/ the Police for this type of behaviour (unless it's on video), we can at least sue the RIAA! =p
Mental Anguish
Pain & Suffering
Character Defamation
etc. etc.
I wish I was a lawyer sometimes! =/
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
So how does the license,er licence or whatever, plate scheme work in the UK? I notice the newspapers are full of ads from people auctioning off their anagrammatic or otherwise cool plate numbers, like /. numbers, the lower the cooler. Is there no system in place to prevent duplicates?
In the US each state has its own system, numbers are assigned randomly, and the state plate are all different enough that there's no confusion. Of course you can get "vanity plates" of your own design but they can't be a sequence easilty confused with the normal random plates.
Of curse any system is subject to data entry errors.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
In the old days people had a way of dealing with people like the RIAA execs. They grabbed them, stripped them, beat them, coated them in tar and feathers.
As I understand it:
The tar, of course, was heated so it could be poured. This made it hot enough to burn them sufficiently that their skin fall off not long after. Unless, of course, they were lit off. Then the feathers served as wicks for the torch.
Tarring and feathering looks (in our sanitized history books) like extreme ridicule. But it was really death by torture.
It was the North American colonial version of the the modern African practice of "neclacing" - execution by hanging a tire around a person's torso, adding a bit of kerosene to get it started with rubber's slow burn, then letting them loose to struggle and run about as the toxic fumes and heat kills them, slowly and painfully.
In other words they made a public example of them to discourage other similar-thinking assholes from doing the same thing.
Yes, burning them alive, or covering them with a strong adhesive, hot enough to give them an all-over blister, so the skin comes off with it later, would definitely discourage similar behavior in others.
These days, with extreme medical treatment in a burn unit, some of them might even survive long enough to tell others what a bad idea it is to get people mad enough to do this to them.
Are we too civilized for that today?
I sure hope so.
It seems a bit extreme, even for RIAA execs.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
F*** the political correctness BS. That's probably the single biggest reason America is declining as much as it is today.
Oh No! The world is going to hell in a hand basket
I know EXACTLY what you are saying. Basically, the above is a recipe for sociopathic behavior. Having been in the wrong place at the wrong time, I got punished for things I never did and eventually I got really, really good at staying aware of what was going on so I wouldn't get in trouble AND doing really nasty things without being caught, repeatedly. Didn't make me a better person, made me a better "criminal" kinda like how putting marijuana dealers in maximum security makes them excellent murderers, thieves, rapists, etc.
0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
The IRS loves to pull that maneuver. They find a $50 mistake some sweet old grandma made, throw the book at her, and boast about it around the first of March.
rj
Oh like 'Common Sense' is even common anymore. The problem is natural selection is not happening anymore. How many people do you know that ten thousand years ago would have either walked off a cliff or been eaten by lions. Today not only do we protect the stupid, but they create a bunch of kids that have half of their genes.
I'll bet that you were one of those guys who got his ass kicked more than once a day as a child... am I right? Jesus, just buy the pocket protector and get it over with, would you?
You must be new here.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
I'm a QA employee at a very large bank.
For two customers with the same name and address to be automatically merged in our system, their social security numbers must only differ by one digit (indicating a typo.) The chances of that man and his nephew having SSNs that are off by that amount are astronomical... it just wouldn't happen here.
"Man sues greedy industry conglomerate that has never used a brain"
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
She's
(Allegedly a woman)
80 years old
(Allegedly),
PCs didn't become widespread (and ceratinly not practical) until she was about 60
(Allegedly he or she used a PC to distribute music. Could be she used a crude computer fashioned out of used pinball-machine parts.)
I know plenty of 80 year olds in nursing homes that still listen to the RADIO, because they prefer it to TV.
(No you don't. All old people like TV better. Its well-known fact to those who know it well.)
Not everyone is moving as rapidly into the "technology age" as Slashdot readers.
(Lies. Everyone reads Slashdot. People who don't aren't people.)
Clearly the 14 year old male who built an internet theft machine out of pinball machine parts is going to be going to jail for a long, long time.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
Of course that would require me to actually be apologetic, which, as an immortal, I am not.
Slashdot: Where anecdotes and generalizations can be freely substituted for facts, logic, or intelligence
Maybe they need to be taught that *everybody* do not have computers, and *everybody* with computers are not using them to l33ch mp3s.
Nonsense. To a crook, all people are crooks.
Therefore, to the RIAA, we're all MAFIA goombas.
Imagine what their children would look like!
Preach it my brother. I totally aggree.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Glad that the RIAA is over here on this side of the pond.
ab_iron
You are now my friend.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
pinball 2000 is a pc with custom pci cards
naw... it all depends on how much $$ you have and if you can get your case tried in California.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to govern any other" -John Ada
; )
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
The IP is translated into 127.0.0.1 I'm sure they are sharing music!!!
It was John Doe and John Smith, sue them!!!
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Tarring while bad, and painful, was not always a death sentience and living through that as long as that was worst of it, was very common.
My Gramps who died a few years back in his 80's had a few friends who survived a tarring. I even meet one, although I do not remember as I was younger than 10. I know this because my dad video taped his dad tell him him all the old stories of when he was growing up. Apparently it was a common thing to do to people who did not believe the same religion as you.
Also it was not usually poured over them, but painted on because it was to think to pore.(read: cooler than what you think, but plenty hot) Yes they where covered in 2/3 burns. But being able to walk a few days after was not rare.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
the RIAA should limit their lawsuits to pimple-faced nerds to avoid such motions to dismiss their suits.
LOL. Jokes like these make Slashdot addictive.
... and then one day the RIAA outnumbers you and does the same thing. Yea, I want to live in a society like that. Not.
the RIAA identified more than one "Marie Lindor". Or she was a victim of identity theft, but I think the first case is more likely. They filed suit against either just her, or all of them. And they will claim to their graves that their system of identifying users is flawless. "We can identify the user who is assigned to an IP address with 100% certainty!", they cry. Yeah, except when the person assigned to the IP address is the guy with the unsecured WiFi across the street from the person leeching off of it, who is doing the real downloading.
One of the engineers at work (Our supervisor actually) had a good penalty he prescribed for a supplier that made a pretty majour mistake on a piece of equipment they sent us.
"We'll nail his bag to a stump, then push him over backwards"
I have been laughing about that for 3 days now!
LOL!!!
;)
At one time (WAY long ago!) I might of thought all of this a bit extreme, but not anymore.
The stump you mention should be used after the fun of the tar and feather routine originally suggested- make it a reality show, and even the "politically correct" sheeple will embrace it!
Should we patent this?
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
"Kind of like the old adage that goes something like "Discipline your child often."..."
OMG that is the most horrible piece of advice I have ever heard. I hope you were using it sarcastically, because if you actually did that to a child you would have the most horrible miserable child on the face of the planet.
Have you ever been punished for something you didn't do? You NEVER forget it, and you NEVER forgive either
Good grief! Get a sense of humor, its a JOKE!
Self-censoring expletives is not political correctness, it's simply showing manners and respect for others. However, I have no respect for politically correct people, so fuck them - preferably using a mace or a rusty old railroad spike.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
lol, you're funny
give me a f'n break they sued a person a couple of months ago and that person was dead, lol not a couple of months dead years dead, they sued a skeleton,lol , so they don't know f'n shit man they're sources needed to lay off the drugs!!!!!!
because they're f'n up the riaa's works,lol
what a bunch of L-O-S-E-R-S
Unfortuanately, this production comes at a cost to those who consume it, as the cows are also often pumped full of steroids and other crap that a free-ranging cow would have no contact with. There are some remarkable similarities here, since RIAA artists tend to exhibit the same sense of "artificiality".
Before the chemicals and supplements, there were tremendous gains made through simple animal husbandry, breeding and managing the cows as dedicated producers, not as animals who you just harvested every once in a while.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
It would be the first actual court judgement against the RIAA
I never read anything about a court judgement against the RIAA. I thought this was a lawsuit filed by the RIAA against this women? It's not an abuse of process to make a mistake. They'd have to prove that the RIAA is randomly suing people. So, if that happens, fine. I guess I'd be ok with this post if we had some info from the RIAA or at least an attempt to contact them. Without even giving a single point from there side, this story is just not newsworthy in my opinion.
No Sigs!
In my nutty world my computer uses me.
One of the lawyers in the case has posted that
All they know, or have reason to believe, about Marie Lindor is that she was the person who signed the check paying for internet access through which the internet was accessed by an insecure wireless router in her house.
The router had been used by her adult children, but not at the time of the alleged screenshot, at which time there was no computer at all in the house.
Plaintiffs are completely aware that Marie Lindor herself did not infringe any copyrights. However, they refuse to drop the case against her, hoping to use the pressure on Ms. Lindor as a means of putting the squeeze on her family.
So this turns out to be another case of unsecured WAP mayhem. Perhaps the defense lawyers can convince the RIAA to sue the WAP vendor for negligence (shipping the WAP with encryption turned off) instead of their clueless client.
An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
She hasn't. She has also never owned a VCR, had cable, doesn't have long distance, or use her dishwasher. She didn't own a mircowave until 5 years ago.
She was raised in rural Mississippi. VERY rural.
Libertas in infinitum
there was a PDF of the letter sent by the attorney's of record in that case.
A couple of small problems arise though:
1. the case file ID does not match anything on record in the state of New york
2. the indicated case material is for health care litigation and recovery of fees.
I hate to say this folks, but someone put over a very good forgery on the blogs.
Understanding is much like a 3-edged-sword. in this: there are always 2 sides and the truth.
"Are we too civilized for that today?"
I think we've backslid to the point where we're not even civilized enough for that. All we're allowed to do now is hoot and throw rocks.
The way of the mafia (that's the family the PP was referring to... but I really should assume you knew that) is to extort the guy out of his money and then whacking him.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
I am sure there are lots of people like that out there, just that us geeks are not aways aware of them.
One word: Management.
*shudder*
Defining Statistics and Social Research