Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Wants Student Deposed On School Day
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In a Houston, Texas, case, UMG v. Hightower, the RIAA has served a subpoena on the defendant's son, a high school student, on one day's notice, telling him to be at a lawyer's office at 9:00 a.m. the next day, a school day, for a deposition. The defendant's lawyer objected (PDF)."
Uhh, I hate to even sound like I'm agreeing with the MAFIAA on anything, but when exactly are they supposed to depose him if not on a school day? The school week and the work week are pretty well aligned, and forcing them to either work on a weekend or wait until he's on vacation is stretching things. Their actions are certainly deplorable, especially giving a one-day notice, but doing it on a school day isn't one of those deplorable actions.
RIAA is basically becoming an automated bot nowadays, anyway. I'd be surprised if they don't show up in court as robots with brief cases as well.
Someone needs to start doing something about RIAA's boundaries and arrogance, considering they're getting so careless with who they're attacking nowadays. How long will it be, before Judges and courtrooms are sick of these petty charges, and start only allowing the larger criminals who actually sell and distribute?
Right now, you're paying less when distributing marijuana or posessing cocaine, than you are to host MP3's.. EVEN if you're a child!
There HAS to be a line drawn somewhere.
"Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
RIAA is realy getting out of hand with their bullying. It's good to hear news about their losses, but their abviosly winning enough to keep harassing.
With their own lawyer and without giving enough time to prepare anything. There is only one possible explanation: what they really want is an intimidation session.
Since he would not be facing a policeman but the opposition lawyer, can he simply walk away anytime he wants or refuse to sign anything?
Also, I just realized '9:00 am the next day' was two days ago, so...what happened?
The fact that it's scheduled on a school day is no big deal. I've never seen a depo scheduled on a weekend.
One day notice is pretty weird, though. Traditionally you clear dates with opposing counsel as professional courtesy, or you at least set it far enough in advance to work things out.
Lawyers work weekends as a matter of course. Asking them to put off the deposition till a mutually useful time is no injustice - giving 24hrs notice is.
-GiH
But holy crap, is it really possible to be that optimistic, and if so, where can I get some of what you're on?
The RIAA lawyers are doing really inflammatory things because it keeps the issue of copyright infringement in the news. It's to intimidate those who might consider downloading some music instead of being good little consumers and spending $15 at the record store.
Also, it's billable hours -- and when legal actions are contested, it leads to more billable hours. So unless they are working completely off retainer, or a percentage of settlements, it makes good financial sense for lawyers to occasionally take action that they know will be contested, or at least require additional time to deal with. This holds as long as the client doesn't get pissed off, and I'm guessing that the RIAA is not unhappy with the results so far (various pending disputes notwithstanding).
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
The defendent's attorney said:
The subpoena is being used for patently improper purpose, namely as a fishing expedition by plaintiffs'
That sums up the RIAA's entire strategy.
I think any legal proceedings trump private life regardless of whether you agree with the instigators of said proceedings. That's just the way it works. The only exception I can see is jury duty, where they allow you to miss out if you're in college. Usually.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
...if the kid just ignored the order? Would the RIAA have the cops come and drag him out of his house in cuffs? What if news cameras were there? There needs to be a revelation of this crap to the wider public. Just ponderin'...
Say your lawyer is busy. You are entitled to your choice of legal representative.
Serving a notice for a sworn deposition on one day's notice is contrary to the rules of professional conduct, and can (and should) result in penalties against the lawyers' clients in court, as well as with with the lawyer regulatory disciplinary authority.
1. Quit downloading RIAA music
2. Do not share RIAA music (help prevent the spread of mindshare) (ugh, I hate buzzwords)
3. Do not buy RIAA music (or if you do, stick to back catalogues from USED CD/record stores)
4. Do not tune to new RIAA music on the radio so you can avoid being tempted to buy new product from RIAA
By doing so, RIAA members will eventually either go broke or go independent, and the independent labels will rise in popularity as their buying power increases beyond that of the dying RIAA cartel.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
If the kid's under 18, he should just tell them to f-off.
5. Rip 5 copies of your favorite RIAA-produced CD (or song collection from various CDs)
6. Add a track with the following (more or less): "If you enjoy the music on this CD, please make it a point to compensate the artists, but not by buying the CD from which this track came." And add a small explanation for the boycott. Then: "Please make five copies of this CD and distribute randomly, including this track."
7. Place your 5 copies in random yet conspicuous places, with only the phrase "Take me to your CD player" on the front of the disc. Leave them on park benches, in restrooms, on buses, wherever.
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
You weren't being serious, were you?
Speaking as someone who grew annoyed with Slashdot's flaws and stopped using it for quite a while, Digg made me appreciate it a whole lot more. The amount of "noise" in the stories (i.e. what GP is complaining about here) is orders of magnitudes higher than on Slashdot, the groupthink is an order of magnitude worse, the comments an order of magnitude more vapid, and... oh, sod it, just read this.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
No it doesn't. Read it again. It says that people who acknowledge the existence of a supreme being are not subject to any other religious requirements. It doesn't say anything about people who do not acknowledge the existence of a supreme being.
It's a statement restricting what the government can demand of public officials who believe in a deity. It's practically the opposite of a requirement to hold office — it's a loophole, not a demand.
It's a stupid law alright, but it doesn't forbid atheists from holding office per se, it just doesn't give them the same loophole as everybody else.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
And as the mods have already pointed out, what does this have to do with this article?
Right, wrong, left, right, it doesn't matter. The kid was told to show up in court under penalty of law with a 24 hour notice, on a school day, that was a state exame day required for graduation.
If that isn't unreasonable, I dont know what is. This kid hasn't been shown to be guilty of anything, thats what the court is trying to do. Is it right to yank kids out of school on VERY important days, because someone believes he, or someone he's closly related to, MAY have POSSIBLY violated a CIVIL law, and isn't by the very nature of the beast, a criminal act?
Should they be allowed to strongarm people, and scare them into settling out of court for outrageous fees and fines, without being given enough time to even have a laywer review the damn situation? Should this kid, who again, is not yet proven to be guilty of anything, have his future jepordized by missing quite easily one of the most vital days of the school year, because some multi-billion dollar company thinks he might have copied that floppy?
There's your damn wild west.
Then he should be able to say, "No, I can't meet you then. I have class. I can meet you between the hours of (blahblah) on (blahblah) days."
Why the hell is this even news. This is about scheduling a fucking meeting.
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
There are nuts everywhere. Most don't become too nutty until you start pointing out things that are wrong and differences that nobody noticed before.
The Texas constitution was made a long time ago by the people of the time. So were the original designs for US currency, and protocol for swearing on a bible before testifying in court. Do people look at currency and think, "Gee golly, it's right! In God I trust!"? Do they swear on the bible and actually feel compelled to tell the truth more so than otherwise? No.
Most nonsense that people complain about is left over tradition. Yes, sometimes tradition has to go. Other times, it doesn't, as it really means nothing to the people anymore. The moment someone complains about something like the Texas constitution, it starts a shoving battle between people who feel like their culture is being attacked and people who feel the need to fix something that isn't broken. IMO, in some cases it's better to let tradition and culture, remnants of the past, fade out silently than to attack them and renew interest in them.
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
The constitution - or, for that matter, any (written) law - is not going to fade out of existence just because people ignore it, though. If Texas doesn't enforce this clause because they know it'd just be struck down eventually, you might conclude that nothing's actually wrong, but if I was from Texas, I'd still petition for it to be abolished. Not necessarily by raising a big stink in public, but I still think it'd be an important gesture if it was removed - a sign that "separation of church and state" is not just an empty, hollow term, but that rather, it actually means something.
butter the donkey
What you are saying is precisely my point. To use your example, Alex the Atheist may be barred from public office: that's what the Texas Constitution says. Plain and simple. Undeniably. You won't need another law, the governor or whomever is responsible for this just needs to point to the Texas Constitution and say, "Hey, Alex the Atheist, you don't believe a Supreme Being, so I'm going to stop you from holding another office." Kind of like we don't need a law to enforce freedom of speech, we can just point to the Constitution. However, as is the case today, nobody points this out and if Alex the Atheist won an election, he could become governor, legislator, or whatever with no problem.
"All you need is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure." -- Mark Twain
You're absolutely right. He was accused - innocent until proven guilty.
On the other hand, "violent criminal" fits since he *shot her in the face with the intent to kill her*, which isn't altogether a "sane" or "rational" reaction for an innocent person.
On the other hand, rhetorically speaking of course, of all the innocent people, who should be held in an over-crowded detention center vs. sent home - innocent "accused rapist" or innocent "accused pot head"?
I agree with your assertion that accusations of rape are sometimes unfounded and unfair - Duke comes to mind - but when it comes down to brass tacks, I'd rather see the non-violent, and/or non-personal crime perpetrators go free when a decision like that has to be made. Of course, if petty crimes like marijuana possession weren't pursued as vigorously as rape and attempted murder one could argue that the detention center wouldn't have been full in the first place.
I'm not now, nor have I ever been a drug user... well, alcohol.... lots of alcohol.... caffeine too...., but I think the war on drugs, among other things, is a terrible tragic disaster for our country and economy.
If you do what you always did, you get what you always got.