Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NYCL Responds to RIAA Accusations

Posted by timothy on from the bob-dole-and-nycl-never-seen-in-same-room dept.

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "You may recall that when the RIAA decided to run away with its tail between its legs in the long running Brooklyn case against a home health aide who has never used a computer, UMG v. Lindor, it decided to take some parting shots at the defendant and NewYorkCountryLawyer, asking for 'discovery sanctions,' and blaming them for its inability to prove its case. Today NYCL gave them his response, accusing the RIAA lawyers of persistent misstatements of fact (PDF) throughout their motion papers, and of flouting the rules and misstating the law (PDF). Although the RIAA's motion papers took a number of shots at NYCL's copyright law blog, 'Recording Industry vs. The People,' NYCL confined his response on that subject to a single footnote."

7 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. Footnote by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful
    In case anyone is wondering what the footnote actually said, here it is on page 17 of umg_lindor_081110DeclarationRB.pdf.

    I decline to enter into a point-by-point rejoinder in defense of my modest foray into "blogging". Suffice it to say that (a) my law blog is irrelevant to the motion, (b) plaintiffs' counsel themselves rely upon the blog in the course of their legal work....(c) many in-house university counsels and student legal services offices refer their students to it ....... (d) many law schools and colleges use it in their curricula ..... (e) many reputable organizations have found the views expressed in it to be worthy of further in-depth consideration...... (f) it has been cited in law review articles.....(g) plaintiffs' counsel are not candid about their real problem with the blog, which is that its existence interferes with their tactic of attempting to conceal the litigation events and prior inconsistent statements they don't want others to know about, from judges, litigants, and law enforcement authorities

    Emphasis mine. He then goes on to give a specific example of why the RIAA hates his blog, basically because it exposes the stupid things they do to the world.

    Must be a fun job to use the law to destroy evil. Kind of like that old movie The Rainmaker. If I were Ray Beckerman, I would feel like I were in a movie.

    --
    Qxe4
    1. Re:Footnote by BSAtHome · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The RIAA fiasco gets more entertaining all the time. The more they lose, the funnier it gets.

      I disagree that the cases are "funny". The recklessness expressed by the RIAA lawyers and the utter lack of common sense and decency in both professional and private conduct are disturbing. Please remember that the "accused" are scarred for life. Even if all wrongfully sued people get fully compensated, they still lose out because they have been stressed, bashed and abused.

    2. Re:Footnote by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Being stressed, bashed, scarred, and abused is part of life.

      Death is also a part of life. Yet we try to avoid it when possible and take a dim view on anyone forcing it on to others.

  2. One man army? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's a guy who has single handedly changed my opinion of lawyers. Certianly he has friends here, I'd give him a dollar. But at the same time his existence speaks badly of other lawyers. The question is: Why are there not more like him? We all recognise the RIAA are effectively an extorion racket. Why do more not speak up and take on these criminals? Leading by example may not be enough. If I were NYCL my focus would be converting more of my peers, raising an army against the RIAA. A one man battle is heroic and all, but sooner or later we all need help. It's time other lawyers saw which way the wind is blowing and get behind this leader.

    1. Re:One man army? by PDG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As much as I respect NYCL, the reason you don't see more like him is that it doesn't pay. Being noble is difficult when it effects your ability to feed your kids.

      I laud his efforts, but he is a jewel in the rough.

      --
      "Where is my mind?"
  3. To New York County Lawyer by Kierthos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We salute you, sir.

    --
    Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
  4. due vs. undue stress by jonaskoelker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Being stressed, bashed, scarred, and abused is part of life.

    True, and people should have some amount of thick skin. But...

    When people stress others without caring for their well-being and (more importantly) without a valid reason and do so repeatedly, that's where it becomes chicanery and where I think it's reasonable to step in.

    Whether we're talking about schoolyard bullies or corporate dragnet litigation, there should be some way of stopping chicanery. Lawsuits are not like an abusive spouse: you can't just divorce it.

    Looked at the Skinnerian way, when people harass you, we need you to have some way of punishing them. Otherwise, as symes said (http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1022819&cid=25690283), you become stressed out with bad effects to your health.

    Shame me for using anecdotal evidence all you want; I know what ten years of near-constant bullying can do to you. When you feel universally hated and persecuted, you don't have the most fertile ground for developing social skills; what you do have is fertile grounds for developing social anxiety.

    When on top of the endless bullying your cries for help go unanswered, you learn that you can't rely on anyone when you're in need, that no one cares about your well-being, and that people in practice have the right to mistreat you however they want.

    I do not want to be expected to tell my children that "this is a part of life".