Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Going After a 10-Year-Old Girl
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The latest target of the RIAA's ire is a 10-year-old girl in Oregon, who was 7 when the alleged infringement occurred, and whose disabled mother lives on Social Security. In Atlantic v. Andersen, an Oregon case that was widely reported in 2005 when the defendant counterclaimed against the RIAA under Oregon's RICO statute and other laws, the defendant's mother sought to limit the RIAA's deposition of the child to telephone or video-conference. The RIAA has refused, insisting on being able to grill the little girl in person. Here are court documents (PDF)."
Nobody's prosecuting her and she hasn't been accused of any crimes (copyright infringement CAN be a criminal matter in some circumstances, but such has not been alleged here). She's just being sued, that's all. I can't see how it would make any sense to sue her parents instead. If the facts of the case all revolve around her actions then she would still need to be questioned to exactly the same degree, just with a different name on the court dockets.
um.... read at least a single document from the case. the defendent is the mother of the child. They have the right to request deposition of the child. A deposition is just taking someone's testimony (I believe under oath).
of course, with respect to the lunacy of your last line, its very simple why they should be old enough to be put on trial: The moral obligations of a person in most societies is taught and understood at a much younger age than anything you mentioned. The mental maturity to consume alcohol in a manner that does not molest or harm others is generally lacking even in people older than 21 in the US, but more pervasively lacking in children. Cigarette smoke has been shown to be detrimental to development of the human body and laws regulating its use are generally in place to attempt to remove smoking completely as it creates a large financial burden on society. Sex with a girl/boyfriend is not illegal if the age difference is small enough. too large, it becomes statutory rape.
on the other hand, do not steal or hurt someone else are ideas that are taught at very young ages and are internalized at a very young age and even at the age of 12, the willful breaking of these laws is seen as disregard for known laws, not ignorance of a more subtle connection with society.
keep in mind I did not refer to copyright infringement. For a 7 year old, its hard to explain why its illegal to borrow a friend's video game and put it on their computer(or download music in this case) and as such, should be relegated to seeing a 9 year old driving a car: an unfortunate incident of a parent not being able to control every minor thing their child does, followed by a punishment in line with the damages(in the case of the car, a bit of a scolding from the officer that sees it, in the case of copy right infringement, maybe 2$ per track downloaded(assuming a 10 track, 20 dollar cd which is way over priced). the parent can then easily discipline the child by making them work this money off.
Now, the way these cases are being handled is actually , I think, an artifact of it being a civil matter and not a criminal one.
I feel in some ways our criminal system is becoming flawed with 14 year olds treated as complete adults, but then again, the crimes are generally not of a complex nature. Killing someone is wrong and if you are trying to argue that someone shouldn't' be tried for murder just because they haven't quite made it to 18, you'd have to defend to me why such a blanket exoneration should be given (as compared to the current method in the US where it is taken case by case and the mental state of the child is first determined before a judge orders the type of trial to be held).
This case (Atlantic vs. Andersen) is a civil case, not a criminal one. So strictly speaking, the child isn't being prosecuted; she's being called to testify. IANAL but I do know that children under a certain age (which I believe varies from state to state) can't be sued in the U.S.. However their parents can be held liable for their actions, which is what appears to be the case here. The U.S. does have a system whereby children can be prosecuted for crimes but it's done in special juvenile courts.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Everyone over 10 has realized that the RIAA is a decaying corpse and (I sincerely believe) would boycott them completely if it were made easy.
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
The way you put that makes it sound like the US keeps good company with non-Western nations. Even that is not true. The only other country that hasn't ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is Somalia (the US did sign under Clinton, but Bush has failed to ratify almost every international treaty that Clinton signed up to). In Somalia's case, they don't have a government to sign it.
s the front man for several big music companies and as long as their names (Sony, BMG, etc) are out of the headlines, it is doing its job.
... for...
Which is why we need to start putting these names in print! We need to start makeing the RIAA's image one and the same with its member organizations. If you want to restrict how they can behave that is the way. Obviously you should try and list the member owning the media the the suit is over but these articals should always mention the RIAA something like this.
The RIAA, an organization supported by members including EMI, Sony, Universal, Warner and others, is sueing
This is factually correct so I doubt the RIAA or the labels have any wiggle room to go after libel. Although IANAL. If we start assoicating the RIAAs actions with the names of the member companies in the publics eye the member companies will start to make the RIAA less off putting.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Actually, the Supreme Court addressed it in Missouri v. Holland, 252 US 416 (1920). Its pretty clear law that Congress can ratify a treaty, and it has the rule of law as long as it does not explicitly violate the Constitution, for instance by infringing on free speech. Infringing on States' rights are perfectly acceptable.
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
what has the mothers disability or income got to do witht he rights and wrongs of the story? Either they are guilty or not. disabled people can be guilty too. This is the worst example of tragic slashdot riaa bashing ive seen in a while.
grow up.
Yeah, because 10 year olds and their disabled parents on social security really deserve to be traumatized and possibly have their lives destroyed *for downloading a few friggin' tunes*. And yet you talk about ethics.
I sincerely hope you get busted and send to jail for jaywalking, copying your CD's to listen them in your car or accidentally downloading copyrighted material some day.
Wow, this is very disconcerting. Did you know that Warner was founded as a company to protect and provide employment for Jewish actors, cartoonists, and musicians in an era rampant with discrimination? In the 20s and 30s, Jewish cartoonists were refused work at Disney. I am Jewish and the actions of Warner against Schwartz and Scantlebury are unconscionable. It seems like humanity is constantly condemned to repeat history it has never learned. Jews have a specific duty, as I see it, to protect the downtrodden; especially after what we as a people have been through. The two lawsuits mentioned are an absolute abomination. Although, there may be another angle, albeit improbable, that the RIAA applied considerable pressure to bring these lawsuits and Warner capitulated.
I have personally witnessed the sorry end to a scene where a seven year old boy was pounding a kitten to death with a wrench. Please describe in terms of "They really can't do stuff wrong".
Anyone who has raised kids or lived around them knows your view is naive at best, but plain wrong, period.
I agree with your last sentence.
well, normally such a question isn't even worth an answer. but in this case, i make an exception
no, he isn't right. the riaa at partly run by sony bmg, which is half japanese half german. while there are some jews in germany, they are pretty non-existent in japan. so his first claim is wrong.
there are kibbutz communities in israel, where jews actually do quite a lot of manual labour. so his second claims is wrong.
his other claims all base on these two wrong claims and thus are also wrong.
is your question answered now?
Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
RTFC - Article II, Section 2, "He [The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur"
So, you see, you are incorrect, as you apparently failed to read your own reference. The President can negotiate a treaty, but a 2/3rds vote of the Senate is required to ratify.
there is a reason for the United States' lack of participation in international agreements of this sort, and the reason is not (usually) a casual indifference to human rights. It has to do with the autonomous legal systems of the individual states, which are protected under the U.S. Constitution. So even if the U.S. were to sign a (perfectly reasonable) treaty restricting how its courts could operate, one could argue that the federal government lacks the authority to tell the state courts how to operate.
BS. If this were true then the US wouldn't be able to sign any international treaty at all. However I guess it's better to not sign a treaty than sign a treaty and ignore it... oh wait, nevermind...
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
If you read their expert witness's deposition you'll see why it happens; it's because their "investigations" are a sham. See also commentary on Slashdot and Groklaw.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Rape:Websters
4.an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
5.Archaic. the act of seizing and carrying off by force.
I am amazed there are not mass demonstrations and/or lynchings at every one of these trials.
COPA (the Child Online Protection Act) was overturned, not COPPA (the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act).
And neither should be confused with the Copa, Copacabana, the hottest spot north of Havana...
1) RIAA lawsuits are civil suits, not criminal, and therefore not prosecutions. Prosecutions of children for crimes or misdemeanors is severely limited with special rules and courts.
2) Even in civil suits, minors are legally incompetent to be parties to lawsuits. I'm sure that if you look a little closer, if the RIAA is suing a minor directly, then it can only be because they did not know the person's age. They will either have their case dismissed, or will amend their complaint to sue the child's parent, who would be vicariously liable.
That ended five years ago:
Mental Retardation and the Death Penalty. Atkins v. Virgina,Atkins v. Virginia
Texas, the state that gave us President George W. Bush, is especially fond of executing the young and mentally handicapped.
Of the 44 mentally retarded in the U.S. executed since 1976, nine were in Texas, five in Virgina, only four were executed in states outside the southern Confederacy in the American Civil War.
Defendants with Mental Retardation Executed in the United States
There have been 387 executions in Texas since December 1982. The youngest was 24 in 1985. 17 when he killed a clerk for a six-pack of beer in a convenience-store robbery. There has been almost nothing the like of that since. Executed Offenders
He was born in Connecticut, true. But he moved with his parents to Texas when he was two years old.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
> Missed the smiley there I see.
:-) This also means that many European Laws still mean squat.
Your smiley was there, I just felt obliged to mention it once again.
> Sweden doesn't use the Euro, Sweden also doesn't acknowledge the common European Law which is being setup by the European Parliament.
Er, the UK doesn't use the Euro. Neither does Denmark. As far as the European Constitution is concerned, France and the Netherlands (the latter of which I am a citizen) didn't acknowledge it either. Moreover they explicitly rejected it in a round of referendums.
> a few weeks ago a new European law was passed stating that it isn't illegal for their citizens. Its not merely a country policy anymore.
Currently, any country in the EU still has the autonomous power to put their own laws and constitution above EU law. This is the reason Sweden still has a state-monopoly on the sale of alcohol, Marijuana and prostitution are still legal in Holland, and the UK still uses the Imperial Measures
> I wouldn't be surprised if we'd get a USE sometimes.
Given the fact that any European country has a Veto-right in legislative matters, I sincerely doubt that for the coming years. Firstly it requires the Brits, French and zee Germans to agree on many things. Secondly, even countries that hitherto firmly believed in the principles of the EU project are seeing domestic support wane in the face of certain budgetary developments. Case in point being the Netherlands, which has clearly stated to Brussels that "we're paying too much and we want our cash back".
It may happen. But I think it's still a thing of the (distant) future.
In the UK you become criminally responsible at the age of 10.
You cannot be tried for anything that occurred when you were younger than 10.
Between 10 and 14, you can only be tried if there is evidence to show that you were aware that what you did was illegal, and not just 'naughty'.
14-18 you will be tried in a Young Offenders court, but the sentence is not designed to punish, but to educate and rehabilitate.
The exact quote is available from several sources online.
"The use-mention distinction" is not "enforced here."
Statement by Ambassador E. Michael Southwick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs, in the Preparatory Committee for the General Assembly Special Session on the Children's World Summit, February 1, 2001:
http://www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov/01_015.htm
It's bullshit that you can't look up something whose exact text you're given. Then again, I shouldn't be looking on Slashdot for reasoned argument, but I'll satisfy your demand anyway.
RIAA is not a separate entity. It's an organization of record companies. Right now, people think RIAA is evil but buy records from Sony... Sony, EMI, Universal and Warner IS the RIAA
l abels
Go after the record companies. Now they hide behind RIAA and people don't associate RIAA with them. Hurt their image, and perhaps they will stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_RIAA_member_
Also you happen to be offtopic. There isn't the slightest intimation that this child, who was 7 years old at the time of the alleged infringement, has any involvement whatsoever.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful