Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Backtracks After Embarrassing P2P Defendant
Harmony writes "When the RIAA sued Sgt. Nicholas Paternoster, it included a screenshot of a shared folder with over 4,600 files — some of which were pornographic images unrelated to the case. Last week, the RIAA got permission from a judge to, as a 'professional courtesy,' swap out the original exhibit for one with only the 350+ songs the defendant is accused of sharing on Kazaa. The RIAA's carelessness may come back to haunt it, however: 'After the suit was filed — and the exhibit made public — Sgt. Paternoster decided to fight back, filing a counterclaim accusing the RIAA of violating his privacy and seeking to "shame Counter-Plaintiff... into giving in to their unreasonable demands regarding their copyrighted materials."'"
He should also go after Mediasentry if they were responsible for obtaining his information and dishing it off to the US Department of RIAA
Infiltrated dot Net
From the more detailed article:
"Paternoster was unaware that the Kazaa software was installed on his computer. While on a tour of duty in Germany from 2004 to 2005, the document says, another soldier downloaded the software and set up a Kazaa account under Paternoster's name. Last summer Paternoster discovered the software and 'thousands of files downloaded on his computer by the soldiers he housed,' and he uninstalled the software and deleted the files, according to the document."
So, is unknowing possession a crime in this case? Let the poor analogies begin...
I hope Paternoster's lawyers force the judge and the RIAA to go on record as violating evidence rules, and show damages for those porno files that are not evidence of any crime.
The RIAA, and any other complainant (like you or me, if we file a complaint) has to identify the "stolen" property in specific detail, and the police must seize only that property under a specific court order.
The police state tyranny of extorting suspects by confiscating all their property they need to live and work was already in violation of our rights protected by the Fourth Amendment. Corporations using the police as a mercenary army is fascism: government by, for, but not of, corporations. Using coercion and intimidation as the fear to enforce corporate government "discipline".
--
make install -not war
Hopefully he'll get a nice fat settlement. I mean the RIAA was expecting it out of him just for downloading some songs..what if he had exposed some of their embarassing info? They'd be wanting his head on a stick.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
He was in GERMANY when this happened? I know he's a US citizen, downloading RIAA "protected" songs, and probably in US territory (i.e. bases) when this happened but...come on. The fact he was in Germany should mean SOMETHING to the case.
Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
RIAA just proved how easy it is to manipulate the screenshots. It doesn't matter if they blurred or cropped the image, it should now be crystal clear even to most tech illiterate judge how easy it is to tamper the screenshots they are proposing to use as evidence.
-- Reality checks don't bounce.
Another interresting choice of words : not the artist, but "the industry"
Funny : the captcha is "embezzle"
The RIAA doesn't want to be in court. In court, their claims could be debunked, while in a settlement, where you pretty much plead guilty, they don't have to prove nothing. Even innocent people would rather go and settle for 2k bucks if they can't afford a 10k lawsuit battle.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Huh! Not a good analogy. Your analogy implies that they presented completely wrong evidence. They did not. But they did include along with the valid evidence, other stuff that may damage the defendant. And RIAA may further argue that the folder was presumably willingly made public by the user (who they they at that time did not know was different from the defendant) and therefore could not assume that the constituted private information.
Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
The RIAA is like the mob, in that they are a criminal syndicate. Unlike the mob however, they are bad at what they do and are losing money.
How ya like dat?
I still say it's bad.
Even if, for the sake of argument, we ignore the fact that there will be several witnesses testifying against Vick, I still say it's a bad analogy.
On the one hand, we have a Sergeant, and some people who lived with him asked to use his computer. This is a routine request, and he had no reason to think that his computer would be used to commit massive copyright infringement.
On the other hand, we have Vick, whose cousin asked for a large sum of money. I realize that Michael Vick has a lot of money, but he also probably gets thousands of such requests, so he's got to learn to say no.
To illustrate my point, take a stab at estimating Vick's net worth, and estimate how much that property must have cost and how much it cost to finance the dogfighting league. Next, scale it down (or up, I suppose) to your own net worth to see how meaningful of a request that would be for you. Now if a distant, hoodlum cousin asked you for that much money, would you at least want to know "why?"
My guess is you'd ask an awful lot of questions, and I'm sure Vick did, as well. Or at the very least, asked more questions than the Sergeant asked when someone wanted to use his PC.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
It says that you go online for porn.
I put the 't' in electrical engineering.
Then you have it on your browser's cache.
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all