RIAA Wants to Depose Dead Defendant's Children

Exchange writes "In Michigan, in Warner Bros. v. Scantlebury, after learning that the defendant had passed away, the RIAA made a motion to stay the case for 60 days in order to allow the family time to "grieve", after which time they want to start taking depositions of the late Mr. Scantlebury's children. Recording Industry vs The People have more details"

Comments

Grieving Time?

[Anonymous Coward]

In Michigan, in Warner Bros. v. Scantlebury, after learning that the defendant had passed away, the RIAA made a motion to stay the case for 60 days in order to allow the family time to "grieve", after which time they want to start taking depositions of the late Mr. Scantlebury's children.

These lawyers get softer every day! Pretty soon they're going to stop suing people for every penny they have and settle for only every nickel!

Re:Grieving Time?

[cp.tar]

The idea that there is anyone out there - anyone at all - who considers this "reasonable" (presumably at least one lawyer does) convinces me that the person in question must have had their soul surgically removed shortly after birth.

How did you think you get lawyers?

Where is Haley Joel Osment for the film portrayal?

[shadwwulf]

He'd be perfect as the young RIAA lawyer saying the line: "I sue dead people."

Thanks, I'll be here all night, please try the fish, it's great tonight.

Re:separation

[kfg]

RIAA and listeners : till death do us part. . .

. . .but your estate are belong to us. You have already failed to survive. Set us up the corpse for great justice. We get stay. Make your filing.

KFG

Re:Why?

[fat man with a monke]

..have moved on to dragging it through low-grade manure.

Low grade manure? Why, the RIAA has some of the most impressive bullshit I've seen in years!

In defence of the lawyers

[DCFC]

The lawyers are only "obeying orders", and am disappointed by the fact that so many people here blame them for simply carrying out a difficult job in difficult circumstances, for what I am sure is only modest financial reward from those fine defenders of probity, the RIAA.

In particular I gain the impression that some here are thinking of taking direct action of some kind against these kindly, well intentioned folks.
I would urge you not to do this.

I note that the links lead to the application by the lawyers, who helpfully include their email address.

We should treat this information with the respect it deserves and should not cause them to receive any spam, and we should not put matthew@srkllp.com in the email field of every popup window that offers up free porn, Viagra, or free Ipods. Signing them up for services is malicious and may be for all I know, illegal.

Also, the huge numbers of Slashdot readers should not send him or his firm emails, because that would be a bad thing, and might upset their email service.

The fact that their Managing Partner (dick@srkllp.com) likes to be referred to as a "Dick" should be treated as a personal choice, and in the spirit of
a diverse and respectful society, I urge all you all to refrain from sending him jokes about his name.
He's probably heard them all before.
Except of course if he's deaf.
Deaf Dick lawyers have feelings too, be kind.

I call upon everyone here to respect the good intentions of the undoubtedly excellent and obviously totally ethical firm of Soble Rowe Krichbaum LLP

I note that their firm specialises in "Complex cases" and "mediation". Perhaps if there is a legitimate criticism of these fine men (and possibly a female secretary), is that
their obvious talents are being wasted. Whatever view you have of current affairs in the Middle East, might it not be resolved with less pain if these fine men (and the lady who makes them coffee) were instead to use their obvious talents on a global scale ?