Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Wants Agreements to Stay Secret
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA is opposing Ms. Lindor's request for discovery into the agreements among the record company competitors by which they have agreed to settle and prosecute their cases together, by which she seeks to support her Fourth Affirmative Defense (pdf) alleging that 'The plaintiffs, who are competitors, are a cartel acting collusively in violation of the antitrust laws and of public policy, by tying their copyrights to each other, collusively litigating and settling all cases together, and by entering into an unlawful agreement among themselves to prosecute and to dispose of all cases in accordance with a uniform agreement, and through common lawyers, thus overreaching the bounds and scope of whatever copyrights they might have. ...As such, they are guilty of misuse of their copyrights.'"
Go Ms. Lindor!
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
On our side, we want the lawsuits to be secret. No one will ever know. How about that.
Kinda makes the effort worthless, doesn't it.
Doing PR by lawsuit. It'll remain in history, and our grandchildren will be reading about what the RIAA used to do in our days in attempt to keep Earth from spinning.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I think there are quite a few factors at work:
1) It takes either lots of money or a civic-minded attorney to put up a fight. Many good fights don't get fought because they're too expensive.
2) When taken at face value, a lot of what the RIAA says it stands for can look very acceptable to people who aren't thinking critically. That includes colleges and universities who deem it appropriate to give up their students; mainstream newspapers and other media in a lot of places; and anybody else who doesn't take the time to think clearly. I learned from a local news outlet just yesterday that the RIAA is fighting against drug money, illegal gun money, and even "terrorism." So even the news outlets aren't taking the time to observe and evaluate.
3) People are just flat-out terrified when they find they're being sued by such a massive organization.
People who read Slashdot, and other people who've taken the time to think this through, are scandalized by what RIAA is getting away with. We've all seen and read about their abuse of elderly people, single mothers, recent orphans, and children, and that's had an obvious impact. It's going to take something truly spectacular that is widely reported out there in the mainstream before the general public wakes up.
"Here's what's happening. You're starting to drive like your Dad..." - Red Green
The RIAA's strength is spin control. The whole industry is one massive PR machine. In fact, it's the only thing it knows how to do anymore. It's no surprise they're taking the same approach to their legal strategy. Promote pro-RIAA messages and actions as much as possible, suppress anything that's negative. Rinse, repeat.
Something off topic, but worth mentioning: I appreciate the various members of the legal profession who take the time to breakdown and explain legal cases such as this, people such as Ray Beckermann, PJ from Groklaw, et al... Not only do I have a better understanding of what goes on in the legal world, but I have a little bit better respect for the people and procedures involved. Thanks..!
Shameless plug for my photos on Flickr
The RIAA has to hope they can get the judge to ignore the Amurao case. Good luck.
The RIAA says discovery is over. The problem here is that counterclaims can arise as a result of discovery. In that case, it would be unfair to limit discovery to that of the original case. As an example, consider the SCO v. the rest of the world case. SCO was given extremely generous discovery in spite of the fact that they had produced zero evidence. It seems, on its face, that the record companies seem to be acting as a cartel. My wag is that the judge will decide that there is enough smoke to justify the conclusion that there may be fire.
I have the balls to stand up to the RIAA.
The hundreds of thousands of dollars for legal feels and representation? Not so much.
By spectacular I think you mean "The RIAA will have to start killing copyright violators indiscriminately". Otherwise, I wouldn't hold my breath. After all, we just had a Vice-president assert that his authority lies beyond the reach of law, logic, common sense, and the Constitution of the United States, and there was no call for impeachment from the masses, but rather only vaguely cranky inane ineffectual grumbling. If people aren't aroused to action by that sort of outrage, I don't think random little folk getting legally pummeled by the RIAA, for using software that most older people don't even comprehend much less use, is gonna get people rowdy.
But I could be wrong.
All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
In simple terms, maybe.
The Court could very well hand down an abrogation of the protections afforded to the works because
they misused their position in this way. If the Court hands that down as the punishment/remedy,
the decision and the penalty would have stand upon appeal- which you KNOW they would immediately
do if they got handed a decision like that. If it stands upon appeal, they may still be stupid
enough to try to get the Supreme Court of the US to listen to an appeal of the whole thing- IF
the SCOTUS decides to listen to the whole thing, they still have to convince the Justices that
it's a bad decision, RICO's Unconstitutional, etc. or they lose hard.
Even if it does happen, it'll take years for 'em to lose the rights protections.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Those of us who are working stiffs with a wife and kids are too old and too occupied to give a shit about whatever Kos or Moveon or Rush says. We've been through all of the self indulgent political wars already and see it for what it is.
See, here's the thing. You think the average man should be outraged because of something you read from your political propaganda site. You read all this stuff, spoon fed to you designed so that you will at least give them your vote but more likely, just more money, and really, its no different from watching advertisements. Rush, Kos, Right, Left, all these guys are out there stoking whatever political fire they can invent so they can cash in on your civic mindedness. Protesting Carter, supporting Gary Hart, early horror and then staunch support for Reagan, the Culture Wars of the early 1990s, Clinton vs Gingrich, really, been there, done that, and every step along the way, there's been someone getting rich in the name of some cause, be it a liberal author or artist, or, a right wing radio host.
You just have to let it go and look at your life and assess how things are based on people around. I guarantee that 95% of your problems are yours, and not the governments, fault. Right now, taxes are pretty low, the economy is ok, and it really has been for the last 30 years, save for a few hiccups. Bottom line is that Reaganomics worked and socialism is largely discredited, and that's that. If you choose a life where you say you don't value money, don't come crying to your political masters 20 years down the road for not having any. IT's pretty cut and dry. You need to manage your life so that it is profitable, so that you can support the ones you love, including yourself. Even an issue like global warming really has no practical impact on most people. Even if the worst comes true, and sea levels rise 100 feet, most people will just move further inland and life will go on. Support politicians that support your causes, yes, but don't let it become your life! Instead of spending so much time worrying about what Dick Cheney or Hillary Clinton are doing, worry about your own life. Then, if you do run into a government law that genuinely has an immediate impact on you. If they raise taxes, or do something stupid and get the price of fuel up to $7 / gallon, then yes, riot. If interest rates hit 15-20%, then, yes, riot. If unemployment hits 20-40%, then yes, riot. But, the bottom line, is none of those things have happened. In the grand scheme of things, we're extremely fortunate to have what we have and the rest of the world only wishes they could have our petty troubles.
Enjoy your life, because you are lucky to be American.
This is my sig.
Seriously, we could have any legally binding contract go into a public database on the internet, which could be viewed by anyone.
Why? Aside from that being completely impractical and ultimately fruitless (when secret contracts are outlawed, only outlaws will have secret contracts), what business is it of yours what contracts anyone else signs? If you have a good legal reason to know, then you'll get it through legal action. If not, just because you want to know other people's business doesn't mean you get to.
what business is it of yours what contracts anyone else signs
Because a free market requires total transparency in order to make decisions that provide the maximum benefit to the parties involved.\
Why do you hate the free market?!!
Scenario: your child has a problem for which requires a stay in a 24-hour care facility. The paperwork they have you sign is a contract and it is with a corporation. Therefore, by your rules this contract should be public so the world will know what your child is being treated for and thousands of other little facts you might want to keep private.
Still sounds like a good idea?
Oh, maybe you meant just contracts between two corporations? Well, obviously that loophole would be exploited to the hilt, rendering the entire idea pointless.
If you choose a life where you say you don't value money, don't come crying to your political masters 20 years down the road for not having any.
If you choose a life where you don't value your rights, don't come crying to me when 20 years down the road you don't have any.
When I look at my life I look beyond the end of my street, and I don't like what I see. An issue like global warming won't have a practical impact on you, but you grand children are going to be killed by it. The won't be able to "just move inland" because everyone else from all the most populous places on earth will all be doing the same. Once everyone gets there, the fresh water supplies will fail because the overcrowding on top of the lack of infrastructure. So now you have hundreds of millions of displaced people worldwide, a potable water shortage, and guess what pops up everytime you have widespread conditions like that? Disease. So no you personally might not be effected, but your grandchildren and great grand children will die most misreable deaths because you refuse to take resposibility for anything past the end of your driveway. Don't confuse money with respect, freedom, or responsibility. Some actions have effects beyond making or losing a dollar, maybe when you grow up you'll see that.
We are all just people.
How does the government really control all aspects of my life? Does the government stop me from any of the following:
a) starting a business
It depends on what business you want to start. Depending on what the business is government can make it harder to start. For instance my sister started trading, buying and selling on eBay. However in North Dakota the legislature has a law that require auctioneers to spend a lot of money to be licensed as an auctioneer. For those who are poor yet have the skills to sell on eBay this could prevent them from doing so, as least doing it legally.
b) selling a product
Same as above.
d) expressing myself however I want
I guess you didn't try to attend any of Bush's campaign stops in 2006 wearing a tshirt that wasn't approved. Even Bush supporters were turned out when they appeared with tickets to events where Bush was. And it's not just Bush, both the Democratic and Republican Parties were able to get law enforcement where they had their conventions to setup "free speach zones" away from the conventions.
e) buying anything I want
Government prevent you from buying many thing legally. There's this fake "Drug War" going on which deprives people of liberty.
f) eating however much I want, when I want, where I want
If you live in New York, or a number of other cities, yes. NYC has banned trans fats.
The answer is really no.
As listed above, the answer is YES! Just because it's not as bad in the US as it is in most other countries it doesn't mean there isn't any restrictions on liberty in the US as well.
Do I like the USA PATRIOT ACT? No, I don't. However, I've not seen the Democrats do anything to even try to repeal it.
Of course, Democrats supported the PATROIT Act as much as the Republicans did. Not only that but as President Clinton tried to get many of the same powers. Only two congressmen voted against the Act, one from Wisconson though I don't recall his name, and Rep Ron Paul (R) of Texas. And the thing is is none of them read the whole thing!
FalconShould there be a Law?