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?
I heard they were gonna put a severed horse head in his bed, but it turns out that's copyrighted.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
When's the RIAA going to stop suing families and finally go for the homeless people? ;)
127.0.0.1
Hopefully the lawyers involved will be disbarred. Probably they will not, but one can hope.
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.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"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!!!
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.
Example: Another example: Another: I think it's safe to say that NYCL has a low opinion of their tactics both from an ethical standpoint and from a legal practice standpoint.
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.
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.
now, which of you geeks want to take on this duty ?
Yes, because of when I think of effective bodyguards, I think slashdot geeks. Though I suppose theoretically if one took a bullet for NYCL, his pocket protector might intercept the bullet.
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.
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.
Makes sense. With the new summer movies coming out, this move might be used to promote the Get Smart movie:
RIAA:Would you believe that "making available" is copyright infringement?
Judge Robinson:No.
*Refiles and puts on disguise*
RIAA:How about now?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
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.
IANAL (but I am dating one) and this is the response I got from her on the matter:
"Every state has a grievance board that deals with things like unethical conduct. There is one case here involving a grievance against our client (another lawyer) for overly aggressive litigation techniques specifically the service of a subpoena on children, which is not illegal, but their parents felt it was improper and intimidating. Attorneys have to have professional liability insurance as well to protect against claims of malpractice, which could be attributed to "incompetence" or willful misconduct. I know that when I worked in NYC, there was an attorney we knew who was sanctioned (and possibly disbarred) for improperly managing his escrow account. I obviously know no case law on this, but my impression is that once the judge on the new case becomes aware of the Plaintiff's lack of following proper procedure, the case will be thrown out. As far as punishing the attorneys, I am not sure if the court system would take any action other than the dismissal of the case, but certainly if the RIAA feels that its attorneys were behaving incompetently, they could sue for malpractice. My guess is that this was intentional and that the RIAA is on board, though. And a grievance can come from anyone, not just the court or another attorney. And if a grievance was filed the board would have to determine that the RIAA's counsel knowingly ignored procedure."
Launch every sig.
"Obscenity is the crutch of the inarticulate motherfucker." - cloak42
This is off topic, but I'd never date a lawyer unless I was one.
Closing on the half century, I've just heard too many ugly stories about how bad it can get when the relationship ends. I'd prefer someone safe, like a gang leader's sister.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
The term 'Anonymous Coward' fits really well here.
So, when choosing which side to take, you obviously go with the RIAA, over the lawyer defending the Cassin family.
While their are many aspects to IP, illegal file sharing, copyrights, etc., you choose to side with the group that sends out blanket lawsuits in an attempt to do as much money-grabbing as easily as possible. This is the same group that has sued homeless people, elderly people, DEAD people, and people without computers. Based on what, they have to be right EVENTUALLY?
So many people hate these lawyers and the RIAA not just because they'd really like to download music for free (even though iTunes now sells more music than WalMart), but because they are extremely underhanded, conniving and despicable, even for lawyers. Even other lawyers can't stand them, and that says a lot.
Their MO is "find people to sue, threaten much, try to extract money, drop the case if they want to fight or it will be too hard, and don't worry about whether they did it or not, hopefully they'll just pay some money to make us go away."
Then every now and then, to show they are serious and that they can fight, push hard to win regardless of the facts so more people will be afraid.
This is not acceptable behavior in a free country. Personally, I don't know the Cassin family, and I know nothing about the evidence against them or whether they're guilty or not, but given the RIAA's tactics and prior behavior, I want the RIAA to lose, badly, expensively and repeatedly until these types of actions are no longer allowed in civilized society.
In a courtroom, your actions and your reputation as a lawyer follow you in every case you argue. These lawyers are scum and have proved it many times, they should be treated as such.
Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean that they're not out to get you.
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,
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?
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful