Slashdot Mirror
RIAA's Throwing In the Towel Covered a Sucker Punch
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA threw in the towel, all right, but was only doing it in preparation for throwing a sucker punch. After dropping its 'making available' case, Warner v. Cassin, before Judge Robinson could decide whether to dismiss or not, it was only trying to do an 'end run' (if I may mix my sports metaphors) around the judge's deciding the motion and freezing discovery. The RIAA immediately, and secretly, filed a new case against the family, calling this one 'Warner v. Does 1-4.' In their papers the lawyers 'forgot' to mention that the new case was related. As a result, Does 1-4 was assigned to another judge, who knew nothing about the old case. The RIAA lawyers also may have forgotten that they couldn't bring any more cases over this same claim, since they'd already dismissed it twice before. Not to worry, NYCL wrote letters to both judges, reminding them of what the RIAA lawyers had forgotten."
That is all.
Wouldn't this be contempt of court or some other punishment? I mean, I'm pretty sure the judges can't be too happy about trying to be tricked like this - can they punish the lawyers in any way?
just to make sure he's safe from any shit riaa may try pulling.
now, which of you geeks want to take on this duty ?
Read radical news here
I advise old age. That's how I'm planning to kill myself.
Either their lawyers are incompetent or crooks or both but this is ridiculous. What were they expecting? That nobody was going to find out? Thanks to NYCL we get a little bit of fairness in the crooked justice system. How can you file a 'secret' lawsuit anyway?
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
How does 10 years for using lawless lawyers sound?
It's hard to believe these people actually attended law school, or are they just grabbing more money from RIAA by making it look like they're doing something?
It sure seems ridiculous from an outside point of view, but I wonder what actually goes on. Any theories?
"we've got trenchcoats and bad attitudes" - John Constantine, HellBlazer
When's the RIAA going to stop suing families and finally go for the homeless people? ;)
127.0.0.1
It seems like the RIAA is throwing all the shit they can think of at the wall to see what will stick. Seems a little desperate to me.
psmylie's dictionary: Godzillion (noun) Any number large enough to destroy Tokyo
How are these underhanded lying scumbag tactics even legal? I know they're lawyers but come on.
Don't lawyers have a certain standard they have to hold themselves to, working for the RIAA clearly lowers a persons too far to remain practicing.
A question for Ray (and any other lawyers on /.): I know lawyers are required to do what they can to the best of their ability for their clients but, to me, a non-lawyer, it really seems like the RIAA lawyers are playing dirty pool to the Nth degree. They aren't just doing everything they can - they are going beyond the call of duty to succeed even if it is beyond the scope of law and morals. Is this sort of conduct "normal" for lawyers (as in, common enough that this isn't terribly surprising) or are the RIAA lawyers truly standing out from the crowd with their actions?
Seriously, if they're gaming the system this way, they deserve to lose their licenses. This is clearly unethical and deceptive.
Or, if you chose to think that they just forgot about the second suit, they're clearly so fucking incompetent that they deserve disbarment anyway.
Jeez, that's some scummy shit.
2 Words... Jack Thompson!
They need to disbar all the RIAA lawyers.
I would like to know how this sort of thing works within the boundaries of ethics rules. Sanctions? Disbarment?
Anyone have knowledge to input?
You would think so. But ethics charges against attorneys are rare and they are very hard to enforce. If you don't believe me, look at how long Jack Thompson has been toying with the system.
I'm not a lawyer, but isn't there some kind of estoppel that prevents a party from dismissing a suit that isn't going well and then refiling it?
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
I don't think this is a smart move. Given that the first case is still active, and that the new case involves the same acts and the same defendants, can't the defense move to have the new case reassigned to the first judge and consolidated with the first case? I'd think that would be a lawyer's worst nightmare, to have tried this kind of end-run and wind up back in front of the judge you tried to evade anyway. He's sure to be none too thrilled about it, and now has a reason to crack down harder.
**Hug**
...since there was no actual trial for the defendants in the initial case, but how is this remotely legal? IANAL, but if someone here actually is, how is it legal, procedurally, that a plaintiff is permitted to drop a claim and then immediately file an identical new one? This seems like blatant judge shopping, as it seemed possible that Judge Robinson would dismiss the charges with prejudice (so they could not be refiled), leaving precedent for dismissal of "making available" cases.
RW
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Any response at all?
I don't just mean the RIAA, either. SCO v IBM stands out as another really big example where lawyers get to screw directly with the things that we in geekdom make a daily living from (e.g. the RIAA spewing mistruths about how the Internet works, corps claiming rights they do not have over code, etc).
As a bonus, maybe keeping the less scrupulous lawyers among us honest will at least make things a little easier for all of us.
Even coordinating a letter-writing campaign couldn't hurt, y'know?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
since their overlords basically own all copyright in practice.
Read radical news here
we use unearthly vengeful avatar magic instead. we bend space/time, shift densities, put shear force on souls, and do force pushes.
Read radical news here
Yeah, that's what I say - call in the gestapo!! That'll fix those bastards!!
why it is so important to try and nail this particular defendant. It's not like they lack potential victims; drop "making available" (just as they did in refiling this one) and do the next sweep. Is it only because they're pissed this one got away? They can't afford it. Revenge is a dish best prepared from correct ingredients; if all you have is crap, just keep shoveling it in front of the ventilator, and don't attempt precision targeting.
I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
That's so awesome. I wish more lawyers were as cool as NYCL. I certainly hope these douchebag RIAA lawyers get what's coming to them.
We are very proud to announce our new workshop called Subversion of Justice.
We think this is the new trend in law at this moment, and have already found 4 speakers that are more than willing to state their case.
Our thanks go to Mr Bush, Mr Thompson, An anonymous person from the Scientology church who wants to go by the nomicker of 'Tom', and one or more speakers from an organization calling themselves RIAA for being this fast in giving their assent to speak at this great event.
Please stay tuned for more details.
Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
This clearly looks like an attempt by the lawyers to game the system. There are clear rules they should know. At some level lawyers for both parties are supposed to be agents of the court.
Fines to recover the courts cost for all actions are needed on top of disbarment of the RIAA's lawyers. The message "Don't Game the System" needs to be sent.
Maybe I'm wrong, but to be a practicing attorney, you are legally obligated to be ethical.
suits dont go well with magic.
Read radical news here
No you're not. Unless the collapsing thing was a designed feature.
lawyer names are irrelevant. filth are done via proxies.
Read radical news here
You should really look up Amicus curiae.
An amicus curiae brief that brings to the attention of the Court relevant matter not already brought to its attention by the parties may be of considerable help to the Court. An amicus curiae brief that does not serve this purpose burdens the Court, and its filing is not favored.
--Rule 37(1), Rules of the Supreme Court of the U.S.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Ray Beckerman, you're my hero. Thanks for all you've done.
I can't tell for sure, but there is some indication, if you follow the links back, that NYCL, you know, Ray Beckerman, is Counsel for the Defendants, and as such would of course have standing to address both judges. And if I'm wrong, well see my sibling post re: Amicus Curiae briefs.
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
Mind you, as they filed it with "Does 1-4" they *could* claim that the never new that those Does in the new suit are in fact the Cassin family.
Advocates may not be the most honest of people, but they have enough intelligence *not* to put themselves over a frying fire if they can help it.
A fitting captcha : disguise.
There's an old legal maxim that say if you can't win under the law, argue the facts. And if you can't win under either, well, there's always lying, cheating, and stealing.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
This is the direct result of all those dollars you and I have given the parent companies over the years. Next time a new CD, DVD, etc hits the shelves, consider buying it used first. Wait a month or two, until someone else gets bored of it, and support a local business instead of these vampires.
Yes you are, if you're the PE who signed off on it.
It it collapses because of your deliberate mistakes, then yes, you can be sued over it. The suit against you may not succeed, but you damn well can be taken to court over it.
Likewise, these RIAA lawyers should face some form of penalty or review before an ethics board. Will they? Probably not. But they should.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Contempt of court citations?
Seems to me that what they did here was clearly an action in contempt of court, since they ostensibly refiled the same case, hoping to get a free "reset" button with a new judge.
This is one of the real illustrative reasons why we need a "loser pays" system in the courts (where the initiating party would be liable for all legal and court expenses if they lose), since it would discourage megacartels like the MAFIAA from using their financial advantage to manipulate the legal system.
What the defendants should do is immediately file a contempt motion in the original court.
Corporatism != Free Market
Imagine a coin. Good is one one side and bad is on other. Then there are lawyers, which are opposite to both sides. They are greater than both good and evil, able to walk on edges between good and bad. And there is NYCL, he is in oppsoition to lawyers, and he is one of them. The most mythical man of all dimensions. He is the one which trims the edges, uncovering thruth before our eyes. He is the son of justice.
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
Andy
The law isn't about justice any more -- it's about winning -- and even worse -- ideology. The sooner the US public figures that out and starts voting with some sense the better.
Today's oxymoron is "deliberate mistakes"
No you're not. Unless the collapsing thing was a design failure.
Luigi: He (Homer) gave me a bad review. My friend put a horse head in his bed, and he ate it and gave it a bad review.
Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
So you like your lawyers to do a half-ass job? His interest here is that the parties being sued were his clients, not strangers. He's doing his job. DO read TFA next time...
Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
Amicus briefs aren't relevant at this point. Also, the rules for the district court are at issue, not the supreme court. Unless they're going straight to the supreme court, which would be quite interesting!
And there is NYCL, he is in oppsoition to lawyers, and he is one of them. The most mythical man of all dimensions. He is the one which trims the edges, uncovering thruth before our eyes. He is the son of justice.
Starring Wesley Snipes, as Blade 4: Music of Blood
I put the 't' in electrical engineering.
Sanctions are in order that's for sure, & I'm also sure there are other remedies that the judge could impose. These sort of tactics are getting out of hand & the courts have got to be getting really sick & tired of these childish tricks by the RIAA Lawyers..
It is easy. Lets hope a judge does hear the case. Maybe go like this.
Judge: Defense, I would entertain a counter suit for harassment.
Defense: I can have one on your desk tomorrow AM.
Judge: Good, we reconvene tomorrow, 1PM.
Next day...1pm.
Judge: Before I dismiss the claim, I pronounce the defendants all receive 1M plus legal fees. This is compensatory damages for harassment. If this is appealed, or comes up a again I would like to add the notes to double the awards.
Judge: Case dismissed with prejudice.
Do you have any Torrent Tracker for it?
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
Uncovering thruth? What is this "thruth" you speak of? Is it edible? Can it solve the world oil crisis?
I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
Ehh, just a little typo, sorry.
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
So if NYCL is our enemy, as you claim, then what the screaming budgie fuck does that make the RIAA lawyers? Boy scouts, paragons of humanity, and the future leaders of the free world? I think not. The RIAA lawyers, truth be told, are trying to get their clients a victory in civil court. But they are going about it in such a way, that even if NYCL was the stereotypical ambulance chaser kind of lawyer and the kind that carries a spare neck brace for defendants in auto accident cases, he would still look like the good guy in this by comparison.
Snidely Whiplash, tying Little Nell to the train-tracks, would look like a good guy by comparison.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
One interesting solution I've heard for this sort of unethical lawyering is to require lawyers to carry malpractice insurance. Talk to any doctor, and they'll tell you that malpractice insurance actually makes them targets for litigation, since the prosecution knows there is a higher chance of a high payout. At least in my state, it's mandatory doctors carry it. Apply that same rule to lawyers, and you would get a great, entertaining situation of lawyers suing each other over malpractice. Too bad politicians are typically lawyers.
I believe you accidentally included an couple phrase. Namely, "the RIAA".
Try and relax. Smoke a joint.
Play a nice long immersive game like civilizations.
As horrible as the world is there are always boobies. Try looking at some boobies for awhile.
Can I have your blow-up doll collection?
Right, because no building contractor has ever deliberately used substandard materials to cut costs, even when they had to know it would end badly.
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
IIRC alt.suicide most quick, effective and painless method of choice was 'hanging by car' (tying a 100m long rope to a tree or telephone poll and around your neck with good knots, entering your car, hit the accelerator hard and put it into gear). If you use a gun, put it inside your mouth, in the direction of the brain. Booze + pills are also an option.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
So NYCL is to lawyers what Blade is to vampires. Intriguing.
Oh my god. Since lawyers and vampires are bloodsuckers, could that mean that NYCL... is... Blade?
+1 really eloquent for /.
Flappinbooger isn't my real name
So, what you're saying is that in contrast to most lawyers, who are coins with big edges, NYCL is a marble? Or just that he has more marbles than most lawyers?
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
Hmmm, I don't think "trying his case on the internet" is as bad as it seems in this case. Given the tactics being used by the other side, and given that the RIAA is trying to get new case law favourable to their position that will affect everybody, bypassing the legislative branch in the process, it's good strategy to shine a big bright light on these cases, so people at least know what's going on.
Also, he pushes the news to us because we're Slashdot and we're interested, and because we can give him insights with regard to the technological issues that he couldn't get anywhere else. It's not like he's pushing updates to the New York Times or ABC news (at least, I don't think he is...).
Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
EPIC FAIL.
There is a war going on for your mind.
You are Harvey Dent and I claim my five pounds.
Hey look, RIAA astroturfers have invaded /.
There is a war going on for your mind.
you're some sort of saint in the fight against corrupt business abuses upon society
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Um...how would looking at birds help? /ducks
Living With a Nerd
...and these are their stories.
Duh-duh da-da-da-da duhhhhhh!
He just has bigger marbles and isn't afraid to show them.
Sig temporarily out of service.
The RIAA lawyers are just lawyers trying to win cases for their client. As far as I can tell, none of them have any particular affinity for the "bigger picture" vision of RIAA executives.
NYCL, on the other hand, is painting himself as more than just a lawyer - more a geek's knight in shining armo(u)r. He's building an albeit minor cult of personality - if you doubt it, read some of the responses to this and previous NYCL articles. He's distracting the enemies of the RIAA away from what they should be doing - which is building a viable alternative. It's just like the MS anti-trust crap in the late '90s: firms thinking it'd be easier to fight MS with lawyers to restrict them artificially rather than spending time and money on a worthy competing product.
These firms have learnt their lesson: antitrust did very little to hurt Microsoft, but Firefox is (for all the dislike I have for the Mozilla Foundation's corporate structure) doing a good job. As, more slowly, is OOo. And every desktop needs a browser now, so best make sure it's yours.
They are rare and hard to enforce because they are reserved to cases such as this one.
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
"Obscenity is the crutch of the inarticulate motherfucker." - cloak42
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
See, this kind of thing should lead to all the lawyers working those cases being disbarred (personally), and the law firms they work for losing their licenses to practice law.
Legal tactics like this just waste taxpayer money (after all, the courts are taxpayer funded), and drive up the legal costs of the parties that are trying to defend against their claims.
In addition to all of this, he's also (and more importantly, imo) spreading details about the dirty and questionably or purely illegal tricks the RIAA are using. This information is useful to ANYONE that has been accused by the RIAA, and I for one am glad to know that we have people that are willing to share as much information about the situation as they can.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Bits are not free. Do not waste them on another Blade sequel. Shut down the computer if you're not using it.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I'm usually not a big fan of lawyers, but props! Keep those suckers on their toes and don't let them forget they're being watched as much as they're watching.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
What the RIAA lawyers are doing is often referred to as a collateral attack - the attempt to undermine one Court's unfavourable ruling by seeking out a different ruling in another court. It is also related to the concept of litigation by installments. It is generally accepted that fundamental principles of justice (fairness, expediency, access to justice, finality, and certainty) are undermined by collateral attacks. The Court committing the collateral attack is often estopped (by collateral estoppel) from making a judgment which would undermine another Court's ruling. One example of this principle exists in mainstream media as "double jeopardy". In the practice of law, this is quite a common issue; for example, when a unionized individual brings a collective agreement grievance to labour arbitration they are often then precluded from seeking out a remedy at Court.
A collateral attack is not the same as an appeal. Appeals are to "higher" Courts that typically only have a limited scope to review the decision of a lower Court.
Of course, you ought to seek out proper legal advice in your jurisdiction to see how these rules would apply and in particular apply to the facts of your situation.
It is ironic that the very sort of anonymous proceedings with the use of John Does as defendants arose originally out of the efforts of attorneys to steer their clients away from a trial by combat. These legal fictions were useful as long as both parties preferred the jury trial and were willing to participate in the fiction, but the fiction could easily unravel if the defendant thought that the plaintiffs were full of crap and preferred to stomp the accuser's guts out instead of continuing to participate in the fiction. The following excerpt was taken from the wikipedia article on Legal Fictions:
"A similar albeit more complicated legal fiction involved pleadings in the common law action of ejectment by which title to real property was tried. The common law had a procedure whereby title to land could be put in direct issue, called the writ of right. One inconvenience of this procedure, though, was that the defendant at his option could insist on trial by wager of battle, which is to say, trial by combat, a judicially sanctioned duel. Most plaintiffs were unwilling to stake life and limb on the hazard of the battle, so the procedure fell into disuse. Rather, an elaborate tale was told in the pleadings, about how one John Doe leased land by the plaintiff, but that he was ousted by Richard Roe, who claimed a contrary lease by the defendant. These events, if true, led to the assize of novel disseisin, later called the mixed action in ejectment, a procedure in which title could ultimately be determined, but which led instead to trial by jury. This is the origin of the names John Doe, Richard Roe, and so forth, for anonymous parties. The fiction of Doe, Roe, and the leases was not challenged by the parties unless they wished to stake their life and safety on a trial by combat."
"This is just a puff piece. NYCL is trying to claim that, had it not been for his heroic move, the courts would have had nooooo idea of what was going on."
Surprisingly few judges read slashdot, so they lack the in-depth legal knowledge of experts such as yourself. It turns out that the court depends on the lawyers involved in the cases before them to provide them with the facts and to even look up and provide the relevant legal references for their arguments. Unbelievable as it may sound to you, few judges are omniscient.
It's time for some sanctions against the RIAA.
Umm... Unless I'm mistaken, NYCL is a lawyer too.
> If you don't believe me, look at how long Jack Thompson has been toying with the system.
Might not be a good example, considering he got one of the most severe disbarments ever handed down by the Florida Bar. Most people hadn't even heard of "enhanced disbarment" til JT. The wheels of justice grind slowly but finely.
Suicide-bomb RIAA headquarters. Two birds with one stone! :D
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
na na na na na na na nanan annanana nnaaa nnaaa nana ann ann ann ann ann annanna nna nnaaanana...BATMAN!
An end run around the law (which is what the RIAA lawyers are doing) justifies Beckerman sending a letter to both judges. And I am sure neither will be upset by his action.
This letter should go as well to the bar associations to which these lawyers belong. This is a serious breach of ethics. (Yes, lawyers do in fact have a code of ethics; they are officers of the court first and foremost and their duty to their client comes second.)
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Oh. Yeah. And he's the defense counsel. Tee-hee. :D
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Yes, that's right, astroturfers from RIAA are coming along to tell people that RMS's constructive (and fairly successful) approach is better than NYCL's destructive approach. Paranoid much?
Is there anything in US law that could be used to shut NYCL the fuck up for basically announcing on the Internet what he does for each case while it's still open? Or is America a free-for-all where, if I'm e.g. prosecuting someone charged with child abuse, I can post to the Internet summaries of the documents I'm submitting to the court where I try to prove how much of a kiddie fiddler the still-innocent-until-proven-guilty is?
I mean, fuck, if this were to ever go to jury trial, the only way I could be guaranteed to get an untainted jury would be to make sure that no juror has ever read Slashdot. Which, ironically, would exclude the very people more likely to view RIAA for the immoral bastards they are.
NYCL is the enemy. In a twisted way, it might be a good thing that RIAA has such easy competition, because they need to go a few steps further before people are sufficiently affected by their actions (as a single representative of a general trend) for a popular revolt. Alas, I think NYCL's just competent enough to keep everyone focused on these pointless skirmishes while the battle is lost.
And then the only one on this side who will come out solvent is NYCL. I hope, in a decade or so's time, he will remember this post or some similar response to one of his publicity-seeking tirades, and remember that not everyone was taken in. On a bed of money surrounded by beautiful women, of course, but at least this AC can put the smallest fly in his ointment of a thousand sycophantic geeks.
(Or, as Bugs Bunny puts it, "diabolycal sabotaygee".)
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Yep, because I'm sure that instead of working on alternatives, every geek is just hanging onto NYCL's words...
Horse hockey!
I deal with engineers and the crap they produce all the time. I can't even tell you how many times I've reviewed the as-builts for a facility (signed and sealed by a PE) only to visit the facility and find the as-builts do not truly reflect what is on-site. And I don't mean "oh, this is 3 feet further up the wall than the drawings reflect." More like, oh, despite what the engineer said they never bothered to build this legally required sampling port so now they cannot collect samples properly. I have never once seen or even heard of any repercussions back on the engineer who signed off on incorrect plans. Worse, it's usually engineers from the same one or two firms that pull this stuff.
It is good to know that the activist circuit judges and below are free to ignore precedents and rules set by the supreme court. Perhaps now /. can away with having separate but equal comment spaces. One for those that can code in assembly, solve differential equations, write complete sentences, paragraphs, and essays, and speak at least two natural languages. A second for the children and idiots.
Seriously, it is good we have the supreme court as an equal part of our three ring circus. In only took 20 years of so for the congress to start passing unconstitutional self serving legislation. We would have ended up with an oligarchy in our effort to stamp out a dictatorship if it weren't for the supreme court.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
I like it.
Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
the Nottingham Youth Cricket League (NYCL) defends against RIAA cases?
RMS' approach? Are we just supposed to build a shadow-legal system or something? It's not like we can fork the damn thing.
BTW, If you are just trying to make sure everyone knows you are a witless moron, you sure are doing a great job of it.
There is a war going on for your mind.
Those of you who sign deals with the RIAA can guarantee I will NEVER buy your music.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
I have no opinion on the matter but just want to point out that the mentality, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend," often doesn't work out to well. Like, I dunno, Iraq.
Can anyone bring charges against the RIAA for all the underhanded things they are doing? I mean come on. Someone needs to coutersue or something for the damage teh RIAA is doing to innocent victims of thier under handed ways. Come on, lets see case Does 1-10000000000000 vs the RIAA.
and what is that 'most severe' disbarment? He has to stop monkeying about filing nuisance suits in Florida for 10 years. Woohoo! He can just move to Georgia, Alabama or any of the 49 other states, enter the bar, and start the whole charade all over again. By the time that he's been disbarred in 49 other states, his disbarment in Florida will be over and he can start around again.
It's a pathetic punishment, and it doesn't even stop him from directing similar suits argued by non-disbared sockpuppets in Florida.
I say we play into their game... to their detriment.
Find the lamest, most retarded RIAA artist out there (I'm thinking orders of magnitude beyond Milli Vanilli here) and everyone (and I mean everyone) buy ONLY that artist's material. Buy every CD, online album, single, ringtone, whatever. I wanna see that artist as the sole occupant of every music chart and radio playlist. The more obvious to everyone of the sham that is taking place, the better.
Once the RIAA is dependent on this single jackass of an artist for all of their revenue (effectively killing off the rest of their artists or driving them outside the RIAA), stop buying. Let the competition, based on free market labels and artists with true talent, drive the final stake through their sorry butts. It will go down as one of the most hilarious (and satisfying) scandals ever.
I would think he would get tossed out of court for showing his marbles...
Dear Judges.
I'm surprised you continue to let the RIAA get away with all the crap they pull.
Please finally put the smackdown on them in a way that hurts them and their parent record companies enough to stop them once and for all from making a mockery of the US constituiton and our legal system.
I heard they're going to be placed on Double-Secret Probation
And I'm posting here because NYCL is precisely the kind of self-absorbed cunt that makes the world so unbearable.
Would a self-absorbing cunt require tampons? No idea why that thought popped into my head.
Trolling is a art,
No, you compete with the RIAA by offering a better production and distribution system for music artists - a direct RMS analogy would be the distribution of music in source form while encouraging users to improve on the productions and redistribute freely. Income from live performance, physical copies, merchandise, donation, ultimately customization for use in adverts/films etc. Free music in the style of Free software. I'm not saying that this method is precisely appropriate for music, but I haven't spent the decades the FSF has thinking about it - what I am saying is that it's time people put in serious constructive effort.
As for your "shadow-legal system" strawman, this problem reduces to complex laws and the requirement for lawyers in order to navigate the legal system. Minor battles won, lost or aborted on detailed legal points does nothing but maintain the status quo and make the lawyers rich. NYCL has, on Slashdot at least, managed to build a virtual monopoly on coverage of RIAA. But what makes a difference in the real world are initiatives which provide the market with an alternative that tips the balance of power: iTunes is the obvious example.
Win with the free market, not with lawyers: let the latter wither on the vine, and make America a freer place to live and work. You are feeding the wrong beast.
Sincerely,
Witless moron.
(Currently witnessing the day a geek site cheerleads for lawyers over support for technological and ideological innovation.)
To say nothing of Jack McCoy!
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
These "lawyers" not mentioning related claims is grounds for disciplinary action. This is called abuse of process. It is against the law.
They're using their grammar skills there.
If it is deliberate it IS NOT a mistake.
If you accidentally do something wrong it is a mistake.
If you deliberately do something wrong it is sabotage.
NYCL, you rock
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Failure to properly maintain?
> And there is no double jeopardy rules in civil cases. They're allowed to bring the case to court as many times as they can find venues.
Umm, no they're not. The FRCP (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) generally limits you to bringing the same case twice. After that, you're through. You're not allowed to sue someone and withdraw the minute you appear to be losing over and over, it simply isn't fair. You ARE correct in the fact that it's not "double jeopardy" because it's a civil case, though, but the FRCP does have rules covering this!
Now, there are probably crazy procedural gotchas here, like whether it's the "same" case or whether they can do something inventive, but that's the general rule. They'll probably say that they're retrying to Does case again instead of the case vs. a named party and that they're somehow legally "different" this time. I hope that the Court doesn't buy that, though, because it's total BS in my opinion. But IANAL, so they might be able to get away with it.
- I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property
He hasn't been disbarred yet. He has been recommended for disbarment. The disbarment may occur in September when the State Supreme Court reviews the recommendation.
He's a doctor, not a lawyer. Haven't you expanded his acronym? New York County Legalpractitionerofthemedicalarts.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
We're talking about Florida. The majority of the other states will spit him back out when he tries to buy property there.
"Little is much when little you need."
Insert Death Star comment here
Seems like a heroin overdose would be the most pleasant way to die. You feel so good you just "forget to breath." Put a note on your door that says 'dead man inside, if this will bother you, call local authorities,' so that your mom or whoever doesn't have to see your limp carcass. -panda
Wrong on multiple counts.
/., I don't see any reason an artist, song writer, etc. shouldn't get paid for the works they produce. I don't torrent/p2p file share copyrighted works for this reason. However, the way in which the RIAA lawyers are going about the process is unethical at best and illegal at worst. There have been plenty of stories on /. and elsewhere regarding the probable illegality of MediaSentry's investigations without having a license to do so in the relevant jurisdictions. This story is an example of the RIAA lawyers trying to bamboozle a judge. There are plenty more examples; I'm sure a Google search will turn up plenty of reading, if you are so inclined.
/., I doubt it is because he wants a bunch of geek hero worshippers. From what I've been able to see, NYCL is actively dogging the RIAA, and even if he enjoys all the praise he gets here (wouldn't you?), the fact is, he is doing something to help others out. If you recall, on one of his first appearances here on /. he kinda got flamed a bit for a while -- there were a lot of "wow, you're a lawyer and you claim to want to help people out? What's the color of the sky on your planet?" snarky comments. However, his actions seem to have won over a lot of people. At least from what little I know about him, he has swayed /. public opinion by putting his money where his mouth is. For that, I respect him.
First, don't put all your eggs in one basket. NYCL may or may not be a musician, so he may or may not have the ability to "build a viable alternative." However, he is a lawyer, so legal action is something he is capable of (and therefore is actively) doing. If you really want something better, let everyone interested do what they do best. Don't just pin your hopes on one method of attack and pray it works.
Second, how do you know the enemies of the RIAA aren't trying to build a viable alternative? Ever been to MySpace (gag) or Soundclick or any of a number of other indie artist web sites? There are quite a few indie musicians trying to produce music without working within the existing power structure; I'm one of them, as is my brother and several of my best friends.
Third, the RIAA lawyers aren't "just trying to win cases for their client." If all they were doing is taking reasonable steps to protect the IP of their client, I wouldn't have any problems with them. As unpopular as it may be on
Fourth, and finally, while NYCL may be building a cult of personality here on
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Just out of curiosity, how would anyone posting on IIRC know what the quickest, most painless method of suicide was? If they are posting, they either didn't succeed or have never tried the method they are advocating.
Just wondering...
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Rule #29: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less.
Thanks for adding that. Yes, there are inept people in engineering, as in any other field. Generally the ineptitude goes pretty far up the management chain, as well, for the group to continue releasing inadequate work.
Have any of these situations ended in disaster (yet) that you personally knew of? I'd imagine that if a building does spontaneously collapse in a flaming wreckage, lawsuits would be launched against every company involved, and the suits against the engineering firm that designed it and the contractor that build it would be most likely to succeed. The employees of those companies wouldn't be personally liable, except possibly a top executive or two. Right? That's kind of the point of incorporating, as I understand it.
Designing to code generally implies that the structure will be safe, so an unsafe structure (e.g. Tacoma Bridge) that was built to code would not be a liability for the engineering firm that built it. Failure to meet code is what would make them liable, not just the consequences of it.
Way to go, NYCL!
Not to worry, NYCL wrote letters to both judges, reminding them of what the RIAA lawyers had forgotten.Not only is that a fantastic thing to do, it's also pretty darn funny. Forgotten, indeed.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Go read on res judicata and collateral estoppel. This is not that big of news...
"Not to worry, NYCL wrote letters to both judges, reminding them of what the RIAA lawyers had forgotten."
When I read this, I *cheered*!!!
Our very own legal hero, fighting for truth, justice, and the American way!!
Seriously, if all lawyers were like NYCL, it'd be tough to find anyone willing to pursue cases like the RIAA has been putting forth.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
You just having used Microsoft Visual Bridge Express 2008 yet. Collapsing is a standard feature if the road becomes overburdened by traffic (at which point it is assumed that you would want to demolish and upgrade the new 12 lane Enterprise Edition).
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Cary, is that you?
If it is, then I'd have to recommend something quick and painless. Like jumping balls first into a swimming pool full of razor blades and margarita salt.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
THE LIBRARY!!!!
Use the public library as your media collection. There are over 16,000 libraries and branches in the USA, I'm sure one is near you.
Go there, BORROW what you want and return it when you are done. If they do not have what you want, buy one and donate to the library for others.
Published works are important to society, but the copyright cartels MUST be killed. Buying fewer and sharing more is the only way.
You're not wanted here. Grown ups are talking in here.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I would agree with you here, because you are mostly right; however, you seem to forget that the innocents that the RIAA is trying to string out need recourse, as well. Let NYCL do his thing and while the RIAA is feeling frustrated and buying more lawyers, the RMS movement can swoop in, mostly unnoticed, and take their feet out from under them.
In this way, we assist the innocents and pull off a strategic manoeuver at the same time. What's not to like?
"Little is much when little you need."
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Why on earth would that deserve a Troll mod? Does "thruth" have some kind of recently acquired meaning which has managed to escape me in my overaged noncoolness?
Besides having to watch 5 seconds of a music video not to my taste on YouTube, my searching on Google didn't cause me any particular suffering nor enlightenment...
You can't handle the Thruth!
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
More than that. As many people mentioned, in Federal court, you can dismiss you claims and then refile them. You basically get a second shot if you screwed up and there was never a final judgment. However, if you dismiss a second time, your claims will be dismissed with prejudice. E.g., you can't file them again. In fact, it functions essentially as a final judgment on the merits of the case.
This means that they can't shop around now for a more sympathetic forum. The principal of res judicata (claim preclusion) means that the same parties can't raise the same claims after there has been a judgment. Ever. Automatic bar. All you can do is attack the judgment itself, say that it was flawed somehow. All you're going to do is piss off the judge, most of the time.
That was Jack Thompson. Which is, say it with me now kids, irony.
It has been a nervous year, with people beginning to feel like Christian Scientists with appendicitis.
No state Bar that I am aware of will admit an attorney currently disbarred in another state. In fact, if you're admitted in multiple jurisdictions already they'll all disbar you if one does, providing that disbarment is an possible punishment for that offense being committed in their jurisdiction.
Fucking great idea for a Haunted House on Halloween. The haunted part will be the look in the eyes of all the children you just scarred.
Times have changed a little since 1940, you know. Today, the PE who signs off on a design is held legally responsible for any failures or problems with it - for life.
So when you get sued by the RIAA, your first course of action will be to bring forth the efforts of "a centralised, concerted think-tank ... to provide alternative production, distribution, licensing etc. methods?"
I'd certainly be interested in hearing the response of the judge when he points out you've brought a knife to a gun fight.
IIRC the state had added several hundred tons of concrete to that particular bridge in the form of new guard rails and resurfacing. So the original design had in fact been altered. Of course this would only shift blame to whoever approved the 'upgrades' rather than the original designer.
I understand the reference, but I still can't help but be reminded of this strip, which is what made this lawyer into something similar.
ewww....
Are you seriously asking for second-hand blow-up dolls?
Redundancy is good And also good.
Over and over.
Now a drug salesman has his place, but this isn't it. A lawyer is a tool, a necessary evil to deal with an over-complex legal system. But to be a spokesperson for a cause directly related to active cases in which he is representing one party brings immense conflict of interest, and prevents him doing either job properly.
A simple practical example: it may be that his defendant would avoid harmful stress or financial ruin by capitulating, but because NYCL is providing on-going publicity related to a case it would harm his reputation to ever propose this option. NB I am not proposing that this is an appropriate course of action in this case, merely that a lawyer's professional duties are first to the court (obey the law), second to the client (best outcome for client), and "good publicity for his cause" doesn't come in anywhere.
But before you hammer out a response, please re-read what I said. This time, try to focus on the detail rather than seeing a few words and scraping out a response.
A person with good legal knowledge may be useful in the fight against RIAA. A publicity-hungry, monopolising lawyer is not useful in the fight against RIAA
Someone with legal training is bound to be useful for fighting particular cases. But while NYCL may or may not be the best representative in particular cases - and, given the above, I would argue that he'd be a risky option - he is certainly not appropriate in his current
Read "The Peaceful Pill Handbook". You should be able to pirate a PDF online in case you can't, or don't want to, purchase it. It's probably the best guide to practical suicide methods you can find.
http://www.peacefulpillhandbook.com/
Would a self-absorbing cunt require tampons? No idea why that thought popped into my head. Why is he being modded funny?
Insightful, yes. Honest? yes.
Funny, too...
And wtf about the Freudian slip with the second sentence.. Talking about tampons and popping things in his head..
--Toll_Free
So for all those who haven't, or forgotten to say it, THANK YOU NYCL.
In support of his fine work, he is the first Friend I picked on Slashdot. Show your support by listing him as a friend. I noticed you haven't done this yet, otherwise your post would have shown on my screen as you being a friend of a friend. Can you add him as a friend to say thanks and show your support? This guy should have a huge Fan list. He earned it.
The truth shall set you free!
umbrellas?
"except possibly a top executive or two" Now THAT is the funniest thing I've heard in a long, long time. Are you 12, or did you just suffer from a temporary attack of naivete? Either way, thanks for the laugh.
RIAA: Making available is the same as actual distribution.
Judge: What? No it's not.
RIAA: SUDO Making available is the same as distribution.
Judge: Ok.
(from one of my favorite XKCDs)
__ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
steering columns? crumple zones? aluminum cans? world trade centers (whoops)
I'll have to go infringe upon a few more copyrights to raise my piracy level before I go after those RIAA ninjas...
I doubt that, there are certainly many civil governments and businesses that are nigh criminally negligent over ensuring the safety of their structures. Is the PE still responsible if the building fails because it hasn't been maintained or repaired?
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Seconded, enthusiastically. He's a lawyer but he's keeping the RIAA's lawyers in check purely by his own sheer awesomeness. We're really fortunate to have him on slashdot; he always keeps us informed and lifts the level of discourse on slashdot with his contributions.
NYCL needs to reply to this, so we can know if he really is the son of justice. I must know.
I doubt that we would be facing an oligarchy if the Supreme Court assumed the role of interpretation. We the people still have all the authority over the government, and twenty years after the end of the revolution, if things were taking a downward spiral again, we might have ended up shooting at military types again, just to get the point across.
Learn something new.
Did I not say some time back that the lawyers are greedy and the judges are now beginning to tear down their planned modus-operende to "get the cash"...
"Justice moves swiftly now that they've abolished all lawyers!". I'm waiting!
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
He has been on my friends list for over a month now (I've been randomly following his articles on and off). Your post appears friend as a friend (green + green) already as well. If it doesn't show that way for me for you as well, and it still doesn't in this post, try submitting a bug report. Unless you meant to hit replytothis on someone else's post.
Disclaimer: I am not god.
We may not be created equal
But we can be treated equal.
Contemptible. Reprehensible. Absolutely pathetic. If I were either judge I would send I nice letter to this lawyer to come down for a nice chat where I tell him to stay the hell away from cases pending before my court. Good thing you're not the judge then, since you are unable to comprehend that the attorney for the defendant is in fact a party to the case.
OK, what the hell is a "deliberate mistake"?
I know that several people have described what the RIAA has done as criminal, and I don't think that even the RIAA lawyers would disagree. I also don't condone violence in any way, shape or form. However, since I've lived in Oklahoma and Texas for most of my life, I can tell you that the Redneck way is an eye for an eye - in every sense of the word. In fact, in Texas, if someone enters your house unlawfully, you can shoot him dead.
What I'm wondering (after that lengthy prelude) is when is the RIAA going to go after someone who has the same view as some of the Rednecks that I've known and have their bad karma reciprocated? In other words, at what point do you think that someone going to resort to violence? I'm sure the RIAA lawyers wonder the same thing, and wear their ballistic vests.
I suppose the failed-suicide-survivors can at least eliminate the "this will not work" (on, in the case of gunshots to the temple, "this is not guaranteed to work") and the "this has put me thru a lot of pain, and I will still die ten days from now crying like a little girl because I don't have a stomach anymore" (like swallowing leech).
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Forget the 12 lane Enterprise Edition, that is so old!
Now we got the 12 lane SUPER NEAT VISTA edition!
It has the same number of lanes, and less cars can go at once, but more can wait in line... and don't you want the bridge to take advantage of that line?
I steal signatures. This one used to be yours.
I hope a bunch of people go to prison for this. Karma's a bitch, RIAAssholes.
Life would be easier if I had the source code.
Well, for one, it's a copyright case. So federal courts only, no state courts. This part is well-settled law; you can't bring a copyright case in state court because federal law preempts it.
:)
That said, for acts done online, jurisdiction is insane. The rules were written back before the internet, so things go haywire with the internet involved. You need to be a lawyer to understand it all, but the general takeaway I have is that so long as you have "availed" yourself of any jurisdiction, you can probably be sued there, plus or minus some crazy rules wrangling and whatever standards there are in the FRCP for motions asking that the case be removed to a more convenient venue.
So they can probably pick your state, their state, or the state any of the computers involved in the alleged infringement. It's worse when you're publishing something allegedly defamatory; they might be able to pick any of the states you had *readers* in. Who knows? With BitTorrent, they could probably sue you anywhere one of the *peers* is.
That said, in practice, the MAFIAA has nothing whatsoever to gain from forum shopping, so they don't bother. I guess they're barred from bringing multi-party Doe suits in Texas, but to my knowledge, they haven't tried getting around it by forum shopping.
Anyhow, get a real lawyer if you have a case, because I'm trying to gloss over a huge mass of complex rules that could very well have changed since I learned about them. The rules can even vary with the type of case!
Patent courts are the only place I usually hear about forum shopping, because they have a rule that when two cases are brought over the same patent, you go with the first one, and that any change of venue is pretty much at the court's discretion. This means that the patent troll attacks first, sues in Marshall, Texas, and the justice there doesn't bother with transfer motions much, and that's that. Even so, I reported on a case a while back where they might limit that discretion, so who knows?
IANAL, but this is why people pay lawyers to figure this crap out for them and why you should, too, if you go to court
- I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property
The newsreel footage of the disaster is still fascinating. It's so good that it was used as stock footage in Atom Man vs. Superman, the second Superman serial, in 1950. They used it as an episode-ending cliffhanger, with Superman bracing the bridge long enough for the one car still on the bridge to get off. (There actually is a car racing to get clear before the collapse!) Very compelling, even when you know what they did.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
Ow, sorry... I thought you said "soccer punch". Cheers.
MMO Vampire Role Playing
No, he's not. You're just an idiot trying to recover from making yourself look like a complete and total asshat and RIAA supporter.
It's a shame someone with a brain doesn't have your username, because Rydia was a cool character.
You must not open any lawyer magazines. The Texas Bar Journal (a monthly publication) has dozens of disbarments, suspensions, and censures every month. Here is June's (PDF).
It must have been a glitch. Your green bean is in your parent post and reply. I tend to read replies by friends of my friends first. Foes of my friends are often trolls, but not always.
The truth shall set you free!
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
But I try to be.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Not to worry, NYCL wrote letters to both judges, reminding them of what the RIAA lawyers had forgotten.
Hey Ray,
Would you care to state, for the record, that you love life and don't have any - you know - suicidal tendencies, or that you don't like to partake in high risk activities?
Just in case something.... unfortunate happens.
Thanks.
You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
There is a lot of hype here.
And this is the real reason the RIAA gets as much traction as they do. No matter how egregious the RIAA's legal moves are, you and many others feel that, yes, artists do have a right to make a profit off their hard work. Well, of course they do. You think we're arguing that. We're not. You and most of the public have been bedazzled into assuming, without even noticing that the whole concept needs a bit more critical thinking, that there can't possibly be any other way to profit. Flawed though copyright is, nothing else seems as good. And therefore that while the RIAA's methods are objectionable, their hearts are in the right place.
Sooner or later, probably as late as possible, entertainers are going to have to face up to the fact that copyright is broken. You think copying is easy now? People thought the cassette tape, the VCR, and a little later the Xerox copier would be the death of the entertainment industry. Today copying is far easier, it can be done without any messy paper or tape and their propensity to jam, tear, and mangle. In the future copying will be easier yet. It may well be mostly automatic. Today you at least have to push a few buttons to initiate copying, and wait a little for what passes for broadband in some countries. And even with the enormous expansion in storage space in recent times, you can still run out of room all too easily. When the entire output MPAA and RIAA members, decades of material, can be stuffed onto a fingernail sized crystal, with room to spare, and the whole thing can be transmitted anywhere in the world in under 1 minute, then what? Why bother picking and choosing among torrents, just download the entire library of mankind, then pick over it at your leisure. With tech like that, copyright is going to make about as much sense as having to obtain the rights to breathe air-- for each individual atom.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
If you're going to slit your wrists, remember to go deep. You need to seriously sever an artery, which means you have to get all the way past the dermis and a little into muscle. Pills & booze is harder than it sounds, but some decent pills or booze can reduce the pain of slicing up your arm. Plan ahead! Get a fresh razor blade and put it in a matte knife - it should provide both the speed and depth that you'll need.
Remember, cut *lengthwise* from wrist to elbow, not sideways. It's a harder angle, but more effective. Also, a tub full of warm water will reduce the chances that you'll clot after you pass out. Also, be considerate. Make sure you have enough time alone, and then leave a note outside the door to call the police. Don't make friends or family find you.
Good luck!
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
RIAA is more of a circus; from what I can tell they poke their head in, get scared, and run away. When something looks like it can go their way they stick around. They lie, cheat, and make asses of themselves constantly. Their entire abuse of the court system is a poor, overdone joke.
These people drop any case they start losing, can't you make the judge order them to get back there and finish the fight? Jack Thompson had a history of losing and having judges advise him he was being a dick....
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Planned parenthood.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
What about those of us with a minor genetic mistake causing asymptotic slowing of the aging process after adolescence? :/
Although they're complicit, disbarring the lawyers misses the real target: their clients.
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
Responding to a classic line fresh from the cunt?
Useless.
For everything else, there's Slashdot
There is a lot of gray between vigorous representation and outright contempt and many lawyers spend their entire career there but it's clear that the lawyers here crossed all of that. It's perfectly clear that they knew they could not sue again, or they wouldn't have obfuscated it by calling them Does 1-4.
That's because not only did the engineers involved not anticipate the failure given the design, but no other civil engineers did either. This wasn't a case of forgetting or just not caring, this was something unknown to their entire profession at the time.
By contrast, what's happened here is lawyers knowingly hoodwinking the court to get a suit filed that they knew very well wasn't allowed. That's like a PE cutting costs while being fully aware that the bridge will collapse in days of use.
But I try to be. Did you marry the daughter of justice? Then you'd be the son-in-law of justice!
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
You must be new here. Nobody with a user_id 1E6 would EVER read TFA.
Just out of interest: has Ms. Cassin decided whether to pursue a claim for attorneys' fees as a result of the previous suit being dropped?
Boy, if this doesn't convince her to go after them, nothing will. I'd be feeling a little vindictive myself!
licet differant, aequabitur
Actually, disbarring their lawyers will put an end to these unethical tactics. Any new lawyers they hire would be forewarned to avoid them. They would also have a harder time finding new lawyers, and have to pay more. Also, remember that the RIAA's legal tactics on this case are most likely the result of the legal advice they have been receiving from these sleazeball attorneys.
But then there is the fact that the Attorney Disciplinary Committee's are the biggest joke since the Civil Complaint Review Board for the NYPD.
Sigh
The Blade analogy would go to me, not NYCL. Blade has all their powers and none of their disadvantages and can walk in the light (I'll spare you the details). NYCL is more like Maharet from Anne Rice's Queen of the Damned. He saves us mortals, but is actually a part of the Bloodsucker community even if unwillingly. The real corruption of the Bar stems from the Judges (also members of the Bar), not the lawyers themselves. Clean judges would equal clean lawyers. By definition NYCL, as an officer of the court, cannot fight the court/ judges. I on the other hand can demonstrate how corrupt they are by spoofing Star Trek episodes like A Piece of the Action using sitting federal judges as characters.
Need more proof. Who's NYCL's Whistler? I've got Ironstone. LOL! And Ironstone is being turned into a lawyer/ Bloodsucker as we speak- just like Whistler! But much of the Blade analogy breaks down after the Second movie.
But actually, who wants to be Blade right now? It could be said that he (Snipes) lost to the ultimate Bloodsuckers, the IRS!!
Disclaimer- only joking. The IRS is filled only with well meaning, hard working American civil servants. And Snipes really deserved it for not paying up.
Imagine a coin... He is the one which trims the edges
So you're saying he's a money clipper? A debaser of currency? The reason coins have edge-reeding?
And here I thought you liked him!
Sorry, I don't buy that "forgetting" for one minute, but I'm shocked they can get away with this. I mean, we see day after day, case after case, report after report about, umm, "creative" use of the law which, to a reasonable observer, are well shy of grey. I understand the need to ensure all facts are considered, but some appear to be more and more make a living out of complete BS and threatening extortion by means of legal fees, and the RIAA appears to employ the bulk of them (I guess the rest work for SCO :-).
I would really welcome a judge who sanctions these people for changing the rule of law and order into an extortion device.
Actually, here in New York we do see a string of lawyers getting disbarred. Usually these are very young, or very NOT-powerful lawyers, getting sacked for some very minor crap- missing a deadline, good faith mediation between two friends/ clients.
On the other hand, one of the most powerful Landlord attorneys (I think named partner from Borah, Goldstein) used his subpoena powers to improperly and secretly invade tenant's financial privacy, perjured his affidavits of service that stated he mailed copies of the subpoenas to both sides, violated undiscoverable tenant financial/ ID theft level information, and benefited financially from his unethical and criminal conduct. Penalty after being found guilty for over a decade of outrageous conduct? Two months suspension and a pat on the back. Currently back in action. This is a major named partner mind you. If he's not the example then who is? Note- two month suspension is rumored to have come with free airplane tickets for worldwide junket and room and board covered all courtesy of the Bar(s) here. A two month paid vacation for criminal conduct? New York Bar in action.
Contrast. Young lawyer panics, misses deadline for litigation that could be nunc pro tunc extended retroactively any damn way. Penalty- permanent disbarment and vicious public tongue lashing in the Law Journal.
Representing adversaries- lawyer, my lawyer. Gets disbarred for representing both sides (decent guy, bad choices). His firm, my firm, then represents the other side against me in a related action to the one he represented me in. USCA Second Circuit 3-judge panel- it's AOK despite having my litigation file- even after a state judge ruled they were indeed my attorneys defending against the slumlords. And even after they bailed from another case when Judge Reena Raggi ordered the matter investigated. So in New York, state and federal, serving up an associate as sacrifice is all it takes.
Last but not least. Stephen Romer, most famous NY client funds case circa 1992- his case inspired the set up of NY's IOLTA scheme after his case depleted the fund. He was the landlord of my office, and while he did not try to evict me personally, he evicted my staff (the Dúnedai) who then built me my own office in the years before the Black Tower (a/k/a White & Case) took up arms to defend me from the demon Nemisis (not Nemesis) at the Pale High Priest's bidding. (Lord of the Rings makes law sooooo much more interesting.) This successful and rich lawyer who owned swaths of property claimed to have been kidnapped, robbed, and otherwise mishandled, but without so much as a peep became a non-entity. He claimed that powerful car companies had crushed his efforts to create a new car line of efficient cars. His claim was deemed ludicrous and absurd. He was railroaded into jail without so much as a lawyer friend helping him. Total pariah- gone. Romer, a man of wealth, a philanthropist, adopted father of Sudanese children, suddenly was toxic.
But I, for whom his eviction of my crew certainly did not endear me, sat scratching my head in my new office. Why was his claim so easily dismissed? It is no secret that the mighty Darth Nader, before turning to the dark side, defeated the Greedy Monster in the Supreme Court for doing all of the things that Stephen Romer claimed. Nader v. General Motors. It's a classic case- we know that the auto industry has a history of that sort of conduct. Romer did actually have mobilized plans to start up a real eco-friendly car company. Surely someone should pursue the possibility? Well, not I, my own problems with an evil High Priest and a demon that makes Balrogs look lapdogs in comparison.
My point here is that any attorney who aspires to be clean, or philanthropic, or ethical in any way, shape, or form, can find himself or herself the sacrificial lamb for other attorney's crimes. And when you actually do something wrong, as a clean attorney you get hit with the max every time, while blatant crooks prance around unscathed bragging about the Bar's "self-policing".
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Not that I condone any of their actions, but who gives a damn about disbarment if they already have millions stashed away?
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
JENGA!!!!
That is a very good point! My point is that the ones who really have millions stashed away don't get disbarred. The ones who are struggling to get by honestly are the ones targeted as scapegoats. However, the Romer case was a strange one where the money disappeared. Who knows?
obviously :-)
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
How often do people actually catch that reference? :-D
in the dictionary.
Someone needs to rape these assholes with a 9 mile long baton and then chop their balls off.
These guys are the lowest of the low. I would rather help a murderer and serial rapist before I help one of these assholes at the RIAA.
I wish Alan Shore and Denny Crane would take on this fight in general, so it would be over once and for all.
But more importantly, because it would be a lot more fun to read about the onslaught of law rapping and pure illegal behaviors of corporate lawyers.
It could be a construction failure instead... you design it one way, but the contractors don't follow your design.
If you really want to make an end to it, remember: Down, not across when it comes time to slit your wrists.
Good, inexpensive web hosting