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
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
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
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.
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.
...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
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?
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
"How are these underhanded lying scumbag tactics even legal?"
Because forum shopping isn't illegal.
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.
HOWEVER, because of the preceeding cases, every venue they pop up in should get their case shot down again, and again, and again.
Think "whack-a-mole".
But things like neglecting to attach case history is stuff that can get these fuckers censured and possibly disbarred.
Here's hoping!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
I work for a bar association, and we indeed host continuing legal education (CLE) seminars entitled, Avoiding Ethics Mistakes in the Legal Profession, but that title doesn't fit on our room signage so we just go with, Avoiding Ethics.
Today's oxymoron is "deliberate mistakes"
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!
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
"Obscenity is the crutch of the inarticulate motherfucker." - cloak42
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
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.
Suicide-bomb RIAA headquarters. Two birds with one stone! :D
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
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."
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.
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,
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!
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?
You can't handle the Thruth!
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
But I try to be.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful