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.'"

10 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. Tomorrow's Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Tomorrow's headline will read:

    RIAA Sues Satan for Contract Violation
  2. Re:Why did it take this long? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For someone to get the balls to stand up to the RIAA? It's more a matter of "legal wherewithal" than "balls". This is one time when the RIAA found itself in court with its trousers down. Previous instances were either a) not egregious enough, or b) the suits were dropped too early to countersue successfully.
    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  3. Re:Why did it take this long? by beadfulthings · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  4. The RIAA has a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  5. Re:Why did it take this long? by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have the balls to stand up to the RIAA.

    The hundreds of thousands of dollars for legal feels and representation? Not so much.

  6. Re:Why did it take this long? by Elemenope · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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)
  7. Re:Do they... by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  8. government control by falconwolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!

    Falcon
  9. Re:You just haven't grown up yet by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Enjoy your life, because you are lucky to be American...Even an issue like global warming really has no practical impact on most people.

    tjstork, I bet you don't realize just how much of your little screed is actually the result of a message that is embedded in just about every bit of news and entertainment in the US Media. I've been hearing, more often of late, the so-called "smart people" in the media scoffing at problems like global warming, the US health care mess, the expanding divide between rich and the rest, and the growing environmental catastrophe, rolling their eyes at the silliness that any of these problems could actually cause a problem for any of us. These things, we are told, aren't really worth worrying about because they are either the natural order of things or completely fabricated by liberals who are somehow going to get rich by telling people the climate is changing. Just look at the way the everyone in the world is trying to get into the US. You don't see any Americans trying to leave do you?

    Well, yes in fact. Of course people who are starving in Columbia or Rwanda or whose lives are being threatened in Iraq or Rwanda or who can't feed their families in Mexico or Rwanda are desperate to get into the US. But you'll find a lot more Americans trying to move to Canada, Sweden, Finland or other "semi-socialist" countries than you'll find people from those places trying to get here. Recently, when I had to renew my Italian passport (I'm born an American citizen, but I got my Italian passport back in the '70s when I learned that I was eligible because of my ancestry), I was talking to the guy in the Italian embassy here in Chicago and he told me that the Italian government has been trying to streamline the procedure because so many Americans are trying to get EU passports. He said that he hears all the time from Americans who want to emigrate because of the far better civil services over there. Even formerly Soviet bloc countries are seeing large numbers of US citizens moving there, and not just the rich retirees, but regular working people who are concerned about the erosion of their standard of living. They are working harder, longer and living on less, he's told. Sure, unemployment rates are low, but how many people who a few years ago were making really good wages and benefits are now making 20 percent over the minimum wage in the "service" industry with no benefits or job security? Why do you think the elite want to open our borders to Mexico, and do you think that's going to improve our standard of living or just improve their bottom lines?

    How many people do you know who say they are working "just for the benefits"? How many would stand up for themselves to their boss or decide to make a bold change in their career except for the fact that they are held captive to the shrinking health care benefits that come when you have a decent job. Guess what? Those health care benefits are getting smaller and harder to get every year. Just a few minutes ago, I read an article at cnn.com about how they assigned a research team to test the assertions in Michael Moore's new movie "Sicko", and surprisingly (to anyone who listens to talk radio or watches Fox News), his facts were pretty much dead on right. But the media is extraordinarily effective at getting people to believe the way you do, tjstork, that we are "lucky to be American". Not "lucky to be living in a wealthy country" or "lucky to have a good job and good health", but "lucky to be American". I wonder if you realize just how much damage this kind of exceptionalism causes. There's this circular kind of reasoning that "The way we do things is the best because we're Americans and it's the way we do things".

    I love this country dearly. I love the people here, the stunning diversity of population, topography and climate. I especially love the virtues and values that the exceptional group of men who lived at the birth of the United States held and shared. Thomas Paine, Ben

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  10. Re:Wow. by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes indeed, Go Ms. Lindor! Does anyone know if or how a fellow could donate to her cause?

    1. To donate to defendants in RIAA cases, use this link.

    2. If you wish to earmark the contribution for this specific case indicate that it's for "UMG v. Lindor".

    3. Thank you. Bless you.
    --
    Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful