Slashdot Mirror
NC Judge Takes "A Fresh Look" At RIAA Subpoenas
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "When some North Carolina State students recently brought to the attention of the Court the apparent illegality of the RIAA's investigations by unlicensed investigators, they also caught the attention of the judges. After reading these new papers, District Judge Louise W. Flanagan, who admits that she's been routinely signing the RIAA's ex parte discovery orders in the past, has indicated that she is now going to take 'a fresh look' at the RIAA's tactics. She issued a stay of the subpoena, ordering NC State not to respond to it, and referred the motions to dismiss the cases to a Magistrate Judge for him to take that 'fresh look' at what has been going on."
Where is the motion to dismiss going now, and what is likely to happen to it?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Goliath falls dead. After a stunned silence, the crowd turns back to tending breakfast around the campfire, content to go on with what they were doing. All of David's friends celebrate, but the politicians and leaders simply begin plotting a new strategy.
And some people think CoS is evil?
Seriously: I'm glad to see that the courts are finally paying attention... to the law instead of politicians.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Took too long.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/ByChapter/Chapter_74C.html
Section 74C-12: Denial, suspension, or revocation of license, registration, or permit; duty to report criminal arrests.
(a) The Board may, after compliance with Chapter 150B of the General Statutes, deny, suspend or revoke a license, registration, or permit issued under this Chapter if it is determined that the applicant, licensee, registrant, or permit holder has done any of the following acts:
(1) Made any false statement or given any false information in connection with any application for a license, registration, or permit or for the renewal or reinstatement of a license, registration, or permit.
(6) Engaged in or permitted any employee to engage in a private protective services profession when not lawfully in possession of a valid license issued under the provisions of this Chapter.
(8) Knowingly made any false report to the employer or client for whom information is being obtained.
(12) Undertaken to give legal advice or counsel or to in any way falsely represent that he or she is representing any attorney or he or she is appearing or will appear as an attorney in any legal proceeding.
(13) Issued, delivered, or uttered any simulation of process of any nature which might lead a person or persons to believe that such simulation, written, printed, or typed, may be a summons, warrant, writ or court process, or any pleading in any court proceeding.
(17) Failed to notify the Director by a business entity other than a sole proprietorship licensed pursuant to this Chapter of the cessation of employment of the business entity's qualifying agent within the time set forth in this Chapter.
Well, since it is the Fourth of July, thanks for letting us know the fight goes on and that there will be some fireworks.
Definitely the fight goes on, and there will continue to be lots of fireworks.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
The RIAA is using false pretenses to gather the names though. The biggest problem so far is that they are "jumping" cases... filing one case against "jonh doe" at an ISP to get names, then taking discovery from that case to create new cases against individuals NOT in a group... not legal in many places as it is false pretense to the court as well as wastes time tracking down what a federal court would consider trivial cases.
The other problem is how they got the IP addresses in the first place... they've never allowed judges to look behind the veil at WHO was generating these and the paper trail...was it obtained legally? That question is getting very murky and deserves investigation. when challenged they drop cases instead of provide the evidence. Judges are getting tired of being systematically duped. These are Corporate national lawyers this behavior is not acceptable at that legal level. Not telling the "whole truth" is equivalent to lying, just harder to prove.
I dunno ... I had a cop issue me a bad ticket once. He was a well-known asshole on the force, and the judge apparently knew that. He was a fat fuck with coke-bottle glasses claiming he saw me pass a schoolbus with its sign out from six blocks away. The driver closed her sign and waved me on before I made my turn. It was the end of the month, so I guess he figured he had an easy ticket.
... didn't even affect my insurance rates. So I walked out $250 poorer (what my attorney charged) but feeling that justice had been done. The judge also had a couple of harsh words for the cop.
Still, this would have resulted in a six-month suspension had it stuck. The judge told me that the law had recently been changed, and she no longer had any leeway for this particular "offense". However, the judge actually had the prosecutor looking through a thick book of statutes to find a way to plead me down. He eventually said, "Ah-ha!", because there was wording that allowed the offense to be plead down to a lesser offense if the alleged offender (me) had not had a moving violation within the last ten years or some such. So I got off with an illegal left turn
Back in my days as a software contractor, I was in court a few times because of customers that refused to pay their bills. That happened rarely: the smart ones try to keep their developers happy because they know they may need support some day. But there were a couple that were (I found out later) having financial troubles and just figured they'd save some money. I did my homework, and when I went to court the response from the judge was always, "Pay the man!"
I know, small potatoes compared to these RIAA cases (although we were talking projects in the $35-40,000 dollar range) but so far I've been well-treated by the courts.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.