Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Loses Bid To Keep Revenues Secret
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's motion to keep secret the record companies' 1999-to-date revenues for the copyrighted song files at the heart of the case has been denied, in the Boston case scheduled for trial July 27th, SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum. The Judge had previously ordered the plaintiff record companies to produce a summary of the 1999-to-date revenues for the recordings, broken down into physical and digital sales. On the day the summary was due to be produced, instead of producing it, they produced a 'protective order motion' asking the Judge to rule that the information would have to be kept secret. The Judge rejected that motion: 'the Court does not comprehend how disclosure would impair the Plaintiffs' competitive business prospects when three of the four biggest record labels in the world — Warner Bros. Records, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, and UMG Recording, Inc. — are participating jointly in this lawsuit and, presumably, would have joint access to this information.'"
I will believe it when the smoke and mirrors are actually changed to some hard data. This seems more an Emperor's new clothes thing to me though. The RIAA does not wish to reveal that the hand they are playing is a busted flush
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
I wonder if they told the artists one set of numbers and need more time to make sure what they give to the court matches that set.
Panic now, beat the rush!
because music copyright usually results in a monopoly situation there is not competition - no one else is publishing the same track in competition to them, so the information is not commercially sensitive
Reede: Your honor, I object!
Judge: Why?
Reede: Because it's devastating to my case!
Judge: Overruled.
Reede: Good call!
They'd have to show what they actually gain from "honest" business and have that compared to their extortion schemes. It could even show that the "claimed losses" exceed what one person could possibly cause in damages.
And that in turn could mean that their insane claims (and the verdicts that ensued) could be up for review, they could end up with far more sane sentences and that in turn would make the whole "shock and awe" deterrent a joke.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
haha! well, maybe now their hollywood accounting will come back to bite them in the ass as they struggle to show that the songs are now worth massive damages, when they were worth nothing or less as they computed royalties for the artists they were screwing.
Sony, EMI, Warner Bros, and Universal are in real trouble. Make sure you check http://riaaradar.com/ to make sure when you purchase music you don't buy anything from these companies that fund the RIAA.
MAFIAA: But sir we sold 4 million digital downloads and made 2 million in revenue from those downloads.
JUDGE: So your are saying you made about 50 cents each download right?
MAFIAA: Yes sir.
JUDGE: So we can roughly say the value of each download is 50 cents right?
MAFIAA: Yes sir.
JUDGE: So even if we get "Biblical" in damages of 40 fold we are looking at about $20 a track right?
MAFIAA: Errr well....
JUDGE: So for 24 tracks at $20 bucks each Jammie owes you about $480 bucks right?
MAFIAA: You have to take into account everyone that downloaded them.
JUDGE: Ok so lets say 10 people downloaded each one, that's about so that's about $4800 right?
MAFIAA: Sir that isn't enough!
JUDGE: How much is enough?
MAFIAA: IT'S NEVER ENOUGH!!! (Rips off the mask to reveal he's infact a tenticle demon!!)
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Ray--if I was ordered by a judge to produce a detailed breakdown of my accounting (say a trial for tax evasion) practices over the past years by 7/31, and on the 31st I came to court with just a "protective order motion" asking that my accounting practices be kept secret...
Wouldn't I be held in contempt?
I mean...I can see producing the motion *with* the information...or...before it...but... tell me why it is these guys appear to have rights in the legal system that everyone else doesn't... More importantly, what piece of paperwork do I have to file so I can ignore court orders like they do and get off scott free?
Gertner's ruling states that "[the Court] will, however, order the second set of documents, which implicate the business interests of third-party artist-owned companies, shielded from disclosure."
What are these documents, and who are these "third-party artist-owned companies?"
the judge has corrected a MAJOR malfunction in your logic circuits. next time when you accuse someone of damaging your profits, you will remember to actually prove EVIDENCE to back up your case. that is, unless your leashholders are afraid of being proven wrong about all the shit you have been perpetrating. enjoy.
Read radical news here
This could be the beginnings of an interesting new strategy against the RIAA. Forcing the RIAA to produce the verifiable truth about various things and to pull their skeletons from their closets and put them on display can likely act as quite a deterrent against RIAA actions.
Still. How is the judge taking their failure to produce the data? Does making a motion instead of producing the data result in an automatic extension somehow? Is this an unwritten part of due process now?
Spill the beans already, how much are we talking? Anyone down for taking bets?
It's obviously $23,148,855,308,184,500.00
Your post, it smells like new meme.
I'm putting my money on "case is dropped, RIAA gets to keep things secret"
Planet Zebeth - Metroid with a twist
I'm putting my money on "case is dropped, RIAA gets to keep things secret"
That's an interesting thought. Hard for me to imagine them doing that, though.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Oh, then just pay for it with a Visa card.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Yeah, but they do a lot of things that are hard for me to imagine until they do them.
It's not just the royalties/payments to the artists, it's the taxes, which could become an even bigger issue.
While big corps might be able to get away with shady practises to hide their real profits, if they try to stick with a large penalty by announcing revenues of several times what was declared on their taxes they're likely going to be in deep trouble
Not only that, but showing huge profits is going to blow away their pleas of "piracy is killing the industry and we're losing money/profits/etc", which is probably the real point here....