Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Wants Its $222,000 Verdict Back
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA, unhappy with the Court's decision setting aside its $222,000 jury verdict over $23.76 worth of song files, and throwing out the legal theory on which it was based, has made a motion for permission to file an appeal from the Judge's order, in Capitol v. Thomas. Normally, only final judgments are appealable, and appeals are not permissible in federal court from 'interlocutory' orders of that nature."
It's NEVER been about the money. It's not about compensating the artists. (Ha!)
This is 100% about trying to keep control of an entire industry in the hands of a very rich, very corrupt few.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
...they only filed a motion, and one that probably won't get far. When it gets far, then this should be front page material.
What lawyer, where, thinks its a good idea to sue some lady for $222,000 for $23 worth of illegal filesharing? Its bad enough the RIAA tried it in the first place, but the court shot them down, and they're still at it? You'd think anybody with half a conscience would move on at this point.
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
The parties agree that the only evidence of actual dissemination of
copyrighted works was that Plaintiffs' agent, MediaSentry, copied songs.
Plaintiffs argue that even if distribution requires an actual transfer, the trial
evidence established transfers of copyrighted works to MediaSentry. Thomas
retorts that dissemination to an investigator acting as an agent for the copyright
owner cannot constitute infringement.
"It is well–established that the lawful owner of a copyright cannot infringe
its own copyright."
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Run that by again: they're going to persuade the Court that the Court was not only wrong, but waaaay wrong (abuse of discretion) when the Court decided it had made an error by trusting them.
Boggle.
And what's at stake? A retrial, with most of the motion practice and pretrial preparation already complete. Somehow I don't see the Court agreeing that this is so profound and urgent that it can't wait for the trial to be decided on its merits and a final judgment rendered.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
This has nothing to do with expecting to win, and everything to do with attempting to run up the defendant's legal bills.
A successful motion response to a similarly silly motion (at least in the State of New Hampshire), was the following letter:
Honorable Justice ____:
Plaintiff has got to be kidding.
Respectfully submitted,
________ ________, Esq
I am officially gone from
The RIAA's claim that it's all about compensating the artists is indeed true.
What they aren't saying is that it's all about compensating the con-artists. :)
Thompson seemed to enjoy throwing around frivolous lawsuits as well.
It hadn't really hit me until I saw this sentence with the word 'seem' in the past tense.
Damn but that just looks beautiful. Thompson...seemed.
It just hadn't hit me until right now that he's history. Jeez, but I hope I live long enough to say the same about the RIAA. "The RIAA seemed to like to file frivolous lawsuits."
Ah, that's going to be great. Can't wait.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
If the monopolists let this stuff continue, they begin to lose their monopoly, too. A loss for the RIAA here will push music and other media (likely movies) back into the hands of the competitive market. Then you'd see the industry start to equalize, with less-common artists making more money, and famous artists making less. Mostly, though, the monopolists wouldn't make as much money anymore, and that's what counts.
How many juries do we need?
If you can afford them, keep running through juries till you get one that gives you the answer you want.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
That would be because the RIAA have been shouting from the mountaintops since the dawn of time that it's all about the artist. They want to stop filesharing because, according to them, it directly takes money away from the artists in the form of lost sales. Every single anti-P2P campaign you see from them is preaching the same thing. "Please don't hurt the poor artists."
But in reality, they're just trying to line their own coffers. When someone settles for some outrageous fee, not a damned cent of that goes to "making the artist whole" or making up for their lost sales. Nope, it goes directly into either the lawyer's wallets or the legal war-chest. The artist continues to get screwed to the tune of pennies per album sold, and tough shit about those lost sales killing your already paltry (unless you're Metallica or some other hyper-famous act) royalty payments.
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
The joke goes: "The RIAA called. They want their $222,000 verdict back."
RAY BECKERMAN: Everything I saw told me that the RIAA has gone insane. The place was full of bodies: Napster, Limewire, young children, innocent grandmothers. If I was still alive, it was because they wanted me that way.
RIAA: Where are you from, Beckerman?
RB: New York, sir.
RIAA: I worked in New York back in the old days; we pressed vinyl there. It was like heaven on earth then. Have you ever considered any real freedoms? Freedoms - from the opinions of others, even the opinions of your 'clients'? You say why..., Beckerman, why you wanted to terminate my control of the music industry? What did they tell you?
RB: They told me that you had gone totally insane and that your methods were unsound.
RIAA: Are my methods unsound?
RB: I don't see any method at all, sir.
RIAA: I never expected anyone like you. Are you a pirate?
RB: I'm a lawyer.
RIAA: You're neither. You're a monkey wrench, wrecking the beautiful engine of my protection racket.
(brief court recess)
RIAA: We are the hollow men / We are the stuffed men
Leaning together / Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when / We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass / Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar / Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion
I've seen horrors . . . extortion that you've seen. But you have no right to call me musical. You have a right to depose me. You have a right to do that . . . But you have no right to judge me. It's impossible for music to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what extortion means. Extortion. Extortion has a face . . . And you must make a friend of extortion. Extortion and financial terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies.
RB: They were going to make me a Digg Hero for this and I wasn't subscribed to their fucking RSS feed any more. Everybody wanted me to do it, everybody except those on the take of course. I felt like they were sitting there, dreading for me to take the gravy train away. They just apparently wanted to go out like douchebags, like poor, wasted, rag-assed dinosaurs. Even the musicians wanted them dead, not that they really took their orders from musicians anyway.
(The gavel falls.)
RIAA: The Extortion! The Extortion!
$META_SIG_JOKE
Yeah, that'll work.
Somebody mod parent down. It obviously wouldn't work.
"The cup is in turn designed for holding hot or cold liquids, and has an open rim and closed base." --US Patent #5425497