Wow, those are some fireworks! Just make sure we can see them all across the country. I'm really enjoying your letter. It's hilarious and very compelling reading to anyone with half a brain, let's hope the judge agrees...
Thanks. But I can't really take the credit. The RIAA's lawyers are the ones feeding me my material.
I'm also trying to get people to read and discuss the laws, rather than making using common sense (which never has applied in copyright law), spurious deductions, and/or anecdotal evidence. (Yes, I know this is Slashdot. And no, I'm not new here.) Sounds like you pretty much understand what you're up against.
too, along with Electronic Frontier Foundation, US Internet Industry Association, Public Knowledge, and Computer & Communications Industry Association, on the side of Jammie Thomas. Also joining in with the RIAA and MPAA is an amicus curiae "Thomas D. Sydnor II of the Progress and Freedom Foundation", whatever the heck that is. Apparently Sydnor was a lawyer for content owners before he set up this "foundation". Here is a complete list of the amicus briefs. Some good reading in there. My prediction: the RIAA's 'making available' theory is dead in the water in Duluth, and the RIAA's only trial is going to result in a do-over.
Just reply with his full name, addresses of his legal and most frequented vacation residences, passport picture, daily routes to and from work, etc. I'll take care of the rest.
I kid, I kid. No, but seriously... Did you say "vacation"? What the hell is a "vacation"?
NYCL needs to reply to this, so we can know if he really is the son of justice. I must know. No I'm not.
But I try to be. Did you marry the daughter of justice? Then you'd be the son-in-law of justice! No, I did not. I married the daughter of goodness. But I'm related only by marriage.
Unfortunately, the profession really needs to get its act together and make it true. Until it does, they are a reflection on the profession, regardless of how ethical its other members are. Agreed. What has been permitted to go on, to date, is a sad reflection on the legal profession. The judges need to stop this chicanery.
Hey Ray,
Would you care to state, for the record, that you love life and don't have any - you know - suicidal tendencies, or that you don't like to partake in high risk activities?
Just in case something.... unfortunate happens. If anything happens to me, you can pretty well figure out who did it.
And for the record, I do love life, have no suicidal tendencies, and never engage in high risk activities.
However it could be argued that my entry into this arena may have displayed some masochistic tendency.
NYCL: at what point do the RIAA open themselves up to racketeering charges with behavior like this? In my opinion, they already have, with a massive 5 year nationwide extortion campaign, use of unlicensed investigators, unlawful collection tactics, criminal violations of the federal computer fraud and abuse act, criminal price fixing in negotiating settlements, many instances of perjury.......
Seconded, enthusiastically. He's a lawyer but he's keeping the RIAA's lawyers in check purely by his own sheer awesomeness. We're really fortunate to have him on slashdot; he always keeps us informed and lifts the level of discourse on slashdot with his contributions.
NYCL needs to reply to this, so we can know if he really is the son of justice. I must know. No I'm not.
[VeNoMO619]
So for all those who haven't, or forgotten to say it, THANK YOU NYCL. [Technician]
In support of his fine work, he is the first Friend I picked on Slashdot. Show your support by listing him as a friend. I noticed you haven't done this yet, otherwise your post would have shown on my screen as you being a friend of a friend. Can you add him as a friend to say thanks and show your support? This guy should have a huge Fan list. He earned it. [VeNoM0619]
He has been on my friends list for over a month now (I've been randomly following his articles on and off). Your post appears friend as a friend (green + green) already as well. If it doesn't show that way for me for you as well, and it still doesn't in this post, try submitting a bug report. Thank you both for your kind words. VeNoMO619 is indeed both a 'friend' and a 'fan' as is Technician. I can't tell you how much the support of actual human, decent people, means to me, as I labor each day doing the very unpleasant work of litigating against ghouls.
--
Surprisingly few judges read slashdot, so they lack the in-depth legal knowledge of experts such as yourself. It turns out that the court depends on the lawyers involved in the cases before them to provide them with the facts and to even look up and provide the relevant legal references for their arguments. Unbelievable as it may sound to you, few judges are omniscient. LOL. Your post should be modded +5 Funny.
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. Yes I think he does.
I'm not a lawyer, but I've hired a few over the years.
Frankly, I want my lawyers ready and willing to sue their own mothers if that's what I want them to do.
I regard lawyers (mine or not) as instruments of the client's will. Only the dregs of the profession are like that. You want to be represented by the dregs, be my guest. But you'll find that the real victims of those types of lawyers are..... their clients.
So what did the judges say? Any response at all? I just wrote to them late yesterday. When they respond I'll of course post it on my blog, and put a story or comment here.
A question for Ray (and any other lawyers on/.): I know lawyers are required to do what they can to the best of their ability for their clients but, to me, a non-lawyer, it really seems like the RIAA lawyers are playing dirty pool to the Nth degree. They aren't just doing everything they can - they are going beyond the call of duty to succeed even if it is beyond the scope of law and morals. Is this sort of conduct "normal" for lawyers (as in, common enough that this isn't terribly surprising) or are the RIAA lawyers truly standing out from the crowd with their actions? No it is not normal. These lawyers are at the bottom of the profession. In my book, they're outside the profession.
Ha! I was reading throught this whole thread thinking "Where is NYCL? This is totally his bag...oh, wait, maybe this actually is his bag, and it would be unprofessional to talk about certain aspects of it?"
Thanks for what you do, man. Thanks for your kind words, Mr. Skwid.
If you had a lawyer like NYCL.... defending you pro bono.... Sorry to disillusion you, but I do not handle any of the cases pro bono. If I could afford to, I would, but I can't.
The judge instructs the jury on what legal principles they are to follow. The judge gave this jury wildly incorrect instructions. The verdict has to be set aside.
How did he get the wildly incorrect instructions? From the RIAA lawyers.
How did they get him to accept the wildly incorrect instructions? By deceiving him. They (a) failed to call his attention to contrary controlling authority, and (b) calling to his attention a case which they knew had been vacated, without telling the judge that it had been vacated.
Make that 5 judges now, as Judges Wake and Davis have come into the fold. It was especially difficult for Judge Davis, who now realizes the Duluth jury trial he presided over has to be done over, because of his having been hoodwinked by the RIAA's lawyers.
Ya, about the great job that the RIAA is doing keeping filesharing at bay. Newyorkcountrylawyer, I have enjoyed your posts on the legal details and tactics of this situation for quite some time. But if you think the actual money involved in this; win, lose, settle, "if it don't fit you must aquit" or anything else has anything to do with anything other than keeping pressure on the filesharers, you need to come to the city and realize how big these companies are. Sony BMG, a company I used to work for, could keep this pressure up for years and years, and years and years.....and years. That is, as long as the system doesn't fall apart legally, which is what the lawyers are really trying to prevent here. I'm aware they are a mighty foe. Their saving graces are that they are (a) managed by morons, (b) under a hypnotic spell induced by their lawyers, and (c) dying rapidly.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, those are some fireworks! Just make sure we can see them all across the country. I'm really enjoying your letter. It's hilarious and very compelling reading to anyone with half a brain, let's hope the judge agrees...
Thanks. But I can't really take the credit. The RIAA's lawyers are the ones feeding me my material.
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.
How am I supposed to get good legal commentary if no-one's posting on /.?
Don't look at me. I shouldn't even be working today.
too, along with Electronic Frontier Foundation, US Internet Industry Association, Public Knowledge, and Computer & Communications Industry Association, on the side of Jammie Thomas. Also joining in with the RIAA and MPAA is an amicus curiae "Thomas D. Sydnor II of the Progress and Freedom Foundation", whatever the heck that is. Apparently Sydnor was a lawyer for content owners before he set up this "foundation". Here is a complete list of the amicus briefs. Some good reading in there. My prediction: the RIAA's 'making available' theory is dead in the water in Duluth, and the RIAA's only trial is going to result in a do-over.
And for the record, I do love life, have no suicidal tendencies, and never engage in high risk activities.
However it could be argued that my entry into this arena may have displayed some masochistic tendency.
But I try to be.
Thanks, aurispector.... you made my day.
Or can I call you GreatGray?
The judge instructs the jury on what legal principles they are to follow. The judge gave this jury wildly incorrect instructions. The verdict has to be set aside.
How did he get the wildly incorrect instructions? From the RIAA lawyers.
How did they get him to accept the wildly incorrect instructions? By deceiving him. They (a) failed to call his attention to contrary controlling authority, and (b) calling to his attention a case which they knew had been vacated, without telling the judge that it had been vacated.
Make that 5 judges now, as Judges Wake and Davis have come into the fold. It was especially difficult for Judge Davis, who now realizes the Duluth jury trial he presided over has to be done over, because of his having been hoodwinked by the RIAA's lawyers.
You mean I missed it again?
What kind I say? I'm slow on the uptake.