Slashdot Mirror
Lindor Attacks Record Company Copyright-Pooling
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Back in March, 2006, Marie Lindor called the record companies suing her a collusive cartel, and their joint agreement to pool their copyrights "copyright misuse" (pdf). A year and a half later, the RIAA apparently got nervous about that allegation and made a motion to strike the allegations. Ms. Lindor has struck back, pointing out to the Judge not only that the RIAA's arguments had no legal basis, but also that its brief was completely silent as to any justification for the record companies' copyright-pooling agreement. Such a justification would be necessary for it to pass muster under 'rule of reason' analysis mandated by the US Supreme Court. Ms. Lindor, a home health worker who has never even used a computer, let alone infringed anyone's copyrights with a p2p file sharing program, is the same defendant who exposed, with a little help from her friends, some of the weaknesses in the RIAA's expert testimony. She also obtained a ruling that the RIAA's $750-per-song file damages theory might be a wee bit unconstitutional."
Hope she wins and gets a couple of million from the RIAA (as well as setting a precedent)
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote
I can't think of a single song that is "worth" a 10th, nay a 100th of that value.
Can anyone think of one?
I really want to buy this woman (and her lawyers) a drink. They are probably doing more for our digital rights than any single group of people right now. I don't mean to discount the contributions of organizations such as the EFF (I have, in fact, contributed money in the past), but it's hard to root for a nameless, faceless group like that. This woman is fast becoming an icon for fighting the good fight against the frivilous lawsuits that the RIAA continues to file.
It may be a tad melodramatic to say this (especially now), but I certainly hope that she finds her place in the history books.
If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.
The RIAA bought and paid for elected representatives. Those representatives created laws which allow the RIAA to metaphorically rape anybody who has stepped out of line causing them the loss of any amount of potential revenue. The courts need to respect the laws that our corrupt politicians have put on the books.
If you can't hire corrupt politicians to make a mockery of the constitution at the expense of normal citizens then what can you do?
It should be as easy to buy judges as it is to buy congressmen.
The playground bully getting their ass kicked by a girl. lol.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
One of their own, Dr Dre, will have said it best: "We have your...record company surrounded. Put down the candy and let the little boy go."
Her arguements seem like the most systematic, potentially successful, and logical takedown of the riaa's tactics I've yet seen. Is there a legal fund we could donate to? Seems like it'd be some money well spent.
Better make that a non-alcoholic drink, because I can guarantee you the state will prosecute her just as maliciously as the RIAA has.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
I say! She's challenging the bedrock of modern law! It's all written and owned by the cartels, corporations, rich and poweful and they've earned it! They have worked very hard and at no little expsense to get those laws, buying representatives, influencing judge selections and so forth. How dare the little ordinary person challenge this status! This almost made the monocle pop right out of my eye! I shall have to see what I can do to prevent these common rabble from believing they were hah! created equal.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
We can also always count on the random A.C. who doesn't have even a smidgen of understanding to carry on about STEALING. There's this thing called "the Big Picture" which you are apparently failing to see. You had best understand that both sides in this conflict have rights under the law, but only one side is interested in removing the other side's rights ... permanently.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
a home health worker who has never even used a computer
Uhh... WHAT??
Seth, is that you? You still think SCO's code is in Linux? And you call /. people drones? Just look in the mirror. You will see a drone up close and personal.
Let's donate some money to her defense fund ... Too bad she doesn't have a website for that.
The Raven
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
"Ms. Lindor, a home health worker who has never even used a computer, let alone infringed anyone's copyrights with a p2p file sharing program, is the same defendant who exposed, with a little help from her friends, some of the weaknesses in the RIAA's expert testimony."
/. articles, I have to say I had no idea that most /.ers are such excellent lawyers.
Considering how all the links from this particular quote are to
wow, that amended filing answer was concise and elegant.
all of those who were ever sued by the riaa: turn around and sue the riaa in class action for malicious and frivolous prosecution
some group of lawyers can spearhead the process. it doesn't require grassroots action. if lawyers can smell blood in the water over cigarettes, asbestos, etc., they can easily see the dollar signs they can bleed the riaa for here too, depending on the precedents this glorious woman sets
make them give back every $ they ever took and then some
bleed the fuckers dry
teach them you can't make up for the creeping irrelevancy of an anachronistic business model by sending your legal attack dogs to terrify little people
a toast, to this courageous woman and the torpedoing of the uss riaa
all hands abandon ship
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Hope she wins and gets a couple of million from the RIAA (as well as setting a precedent)
I hope she wins and the RIAA members effectively lose the copyrights to every song involved in these suits.
That's the point of the "copyright misuse" claim: Part of the penalty for misuse of a copyright is the loss of the ability to enforce it at all.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
It was only a matter of time before someone managed to use Slashdot for it's ability to harness ideas and viewpoints. Usually it's just spitting into the wind with no one making any effort to record the good ideas that do pop up.
Our friend, the NewYorkCountryLawyer, has not only made Slashdot his personal soap box, what the Russians would call the 'Father of all soapboxes', but he has managed to harness all the good ideas generated from several Slashdot stories and put them to good use. Not only has he put these ideas to his own personal good use, he's doing good for society as a whole, and sticking it to the RIAA in the process.
Sir, I tip my hat to you. Keep up the good work.
Aero
Please stop hurting America -- Jon Stewart
Meanwhile, about that drink......
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Several years ago, a record company exec made a really good point. "File Sharing" isn't really "sharing" because when you share something with someone, you don't have it anymore.
But here's the obvious next logical step (which said executive of course failed to make): File sharing isn't really "stealing" either, because when you steal something from someone, they don't have it anymore.
File sharing is a violation of copyright. It's not sharing, it's not stealing, it's a copyright violation. And when it's put that way, if that doesn't sound as serious as stealing, maybe the people who make these ridiculous laws ought to take that into consideration.
You talk about the big picture, yet drag irrelivant information to make your point. Theft and copyright ingringement are diferent and one is actually relevant to this case.
To defend their rights together and gain bargaining power?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I know what you mean about one side trying to permanently remove the rights of the other.
I still can't believe the RIAA successfully lobbied congress to prevent Americans from being able to purchase Digitial Audio Tape machines in the 1980s. The sheer gall of using congress to shut down entire technologies just because you think they threaten a business model you've become accustomed to making a killing at.
Having our rights curtailing like that really stings. The RIAA really has it coming this time.
What part of "sinking ship" does the lawyers and/for the RIAA not quite understand???
You'd think that by now they'd realize that the fudge they were pushing would eventually catch up to them. This lady obviously either has some serious smarts, or has some very savvy counsel with her and I'd be surprised if there isn't someone in Washington helping this by looking up things at the Supreme courts too!
Eventually this will get overturned, and the floodgates will open to all involved with the RIAA and many of the record companies. What do you think their defense will be to the courts???
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
Well said. It should happen more often.
Got Trader Joe's? friendwich.com RSS feeds work now!
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
OK folks, I am pleased to announce that the PayPal account for Ms. Lindor's legal defense has been set up.
The email address is:
wraymond@hotmail.com
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
What's wrong with the RIAA? They don't typically want to pursue litigated cases to begin with, and they are now being hit with allegations that if nothing else, would potentially be a very expensive discovery process for their clients. Even the smallest discovery (and this is potentially much larger than small) for documents and interrogatories would be expensive in terms of executive time and pulling the information together, whether or not they are right. Then when you see the gaping holes in the RIAA's legal filings to strike, you almost have to question the competency of their counsel. That or the RIAA is pressing on in spite of legal opinion to the contrary? This is a losing proposition, even if they are right, and I'd be running to get out of this. So .... why aren't they?
Such a justification would be necessary for it to pass muster under 'rule of reason' analysis mandated by the US Supreme Court.
The RIAA has goofed big time on this one. What they were doing was marginal at best. Now with the litigation campaign and the examination of the law as a result is starting to bring down the house of cards. I think they goofed on the litigation campaign in hopes everyone would roll over and play dead. I don't think they expected a fight with intelligent people who could see the flaws in their assertions.
They played the lottery trying to get shady practices cemented as standard operating practices. They played the gamble that the defendants would fold as the cheap option. They gambled and stand a good chance of getting copyright law handed to them on a platter with shady practices exposed as a big RICO problem.
The truth shall set you free!
Hmmm.
I always wondered what happened to my recipe for making apple pie after I shared it with a friend.
I have a vague memory of telling someone how to program a VCR too-- now i realize when I shared those instructions with them, I forgot them myself.
It's amazing we can share any knowledge at all! I am sure one person.. somewhere in the world.. knows how we do it.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
If you share something with someone you don't have it anymore? What about sharing the love? Sharing your feelings? Sharing an experience? Sharing the benefits (non-physical)? Sharing the work? Sharing a moment? Sharing [insert anything non-physical]?
If you don't have it anymore, it is giving, not sharing.
Something I've wondered is, if I pay them the $750 for a song, does that mean that I actually can distribute it far and wide since I've already covered the damages? Not that I'd want to, but the whole 750 per song damage thing has me confused.
Sensei NewYorkCountryLawyer and others have been teaching her how to handle the bully, wonder how the RIAA is enjoying facing the new karate kid with her lawyers, Slashdot and others backing her. Let us hope she gets in the last kick and it is talked about for a long time.
I like what you do, but let's not get carried away here. That's like saying the GNAA trolls were originally hired by Microsoft in order to try to disrupt the conversations at slashdot so people can't spread anti-Microsoft discussions here. The more likely scenario is that people just enjoy trolling forums on their own and thus are doing so.
Using openSUSE instead of Windows since 9th of October, 2007 and liking it.
Isn't this exactly the same as the copyright pooling Lunix organizations are doing in an effort to browbeat companies into supporting FOSS?
I don't see how it's different: the RIAA is trying to get money, and teh FOSSies are trying to gain control over commerical software developers. Different goals, but the exact same method: pooling copyrights in a quid pro quo extortion scheme.
ALL things can tempt me from this craft of verse: One time it was a woman's face, or worse-- The seeming needs of my fool-driven land; Now nothing but comes readier to the hand Than this accustomed toil. When I was young, I had not given a penny for a song Did not the poet sing it with such airs That one believed he had a sword upstairs; Yet would be now, could I but have my wish, Colder and dumber and deafer than a fish. :-)
They don't have diminished profits now; they had excessive profits before. Good luck to Ms Lindor!
Best of luck to Ms. Lindor, I hope she succeeds and deals those bastards a serious blow that'll make them think twice!
If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
Ray, some people do so much for common sense and MORAL justice that they achieve credibility simply by their actions.
:-)
Slashdot may occasionally be a bit mad but most of this crowd is not fundamentally dishonest, which is why they rail against the RIAA labelling everyone as hardcore criminals - for profit.
Given that you're fighting the good fight I can't see someone modding you down.
The only way is up
Insert
But I can't, so instead I just mailed her $50, and you $5, so you can have a beer on me.
Good luck!