Wed May 21 2008 04:54:39 PM CDT from Xevoros@uncnsrd (Uncensored)
I have an idea about a business to work with the RIAA to get some semblance of freedom,how do i get in contact with pwople at the studios to mention my idea?
They don't have much information on their page regarding business contacts. They have a single contact blurb located here:
Hope that helps.
Anyone have a grenade or two I can have?
Jamendo tells me that I don't have to worry much about the RIAA. Of course there's a whole lot of crappy music on there, but the occasional gem is worth it. Their Jazz sections are particularly impressive.
The Recording Industry Association of America is declaring attorney-blogger Ray Beckerman a "vexatious" litigator and is seeking unspecified monetary sanctions to punish him in his defense of a New York woman accused of making copyrighted music available on the Kazaa file sharing system.
The RIAA said Beckerman, one of the nation's few attorneys who defends accused file sharers, "has maintained an anti-recording industry blog during the course of this case and has consistently posted virtually every one of his baseless motions on his blog seeking to bolster his public relations campaign and embarrass plaintiffs," the RIAA wrote (.pdf) in court briefs. "Such vexatious conduct demeans the integrity of these judicial proceedings and warrants this imposition of sanctions."
Lory Lybeck, a Washington state defense attorney leading a proposed class-action lawsuit accusing the RIAA of allegedly engaging in "sham" litigation tactics, said the RIAA's motion comes from the same organization that has sued about 30,000 people over the last five years for file sharing, some of them falsely. It's the same organization, he said, that has sued dead people, the elderly and even children -- all while using unlicensed investigators.
Thu Sep 18 2008 16:05:58 UTC from Ford II@uncnsrd (Uncensored)
Sounds like free speech to me.
What price innocent infringement? That's the question a San Antonio jury will have to address in mid-November, as the RIAA and 20-year-old Whitney Harper will battle in court over the amount of damages Harper will have to pay to the record labels after being found liable for copyright infringement by a federal judge.
Harper was 16 when MediaSentry discovered and downloaded a number of tracks from what proved to be her shared folder on KaZaA. The record labels sued her father, but he was dropped from the suit once Whitney admitted to using KaZaA for downloading and sharing music. Her admission was enough to convince Judge Xavier Rodriguez to hand the RIAA a summary judgment this past August, but he ruled that damages be capped at $200 per song, not the $750 at minimum sought by the RIAA.
The reason for the $200 limit was Harper's innocent infringement defense. She admitted to using KaZaA, but said that she didn't know that what she was doing was wrong due to her age at the time and general lack of knowledge about how computers and P2P systems work. There was no warning from KaZaA that the music on the network was "stolen or abused copyrighted material," noted Judge Rodriguez in his opinion. He also agreed with Harper's assertion that she had "no knowledge or understanding of file trading, online distribution networks or copyright infringement" and that she believed there was nothing illegal about her activities.
Ignorance of the law may be no defense against being held liable for infringement, but it can put a serious cap on damages. Under the Copyright Act, infringement is normally punishable by fines of up to $750 to $30,000 per act, and the upper limit can be raised to $150,000 if the infringement is deemed malicious. But for cases of innocent infringement, the judge can reduce the damages below the $750 floor. In the case of Maverick v. Harper, the judge told the record labels they could accept damages of $200 per song or have a jury decide what the total damages should be; the RIAA has chosen a jury trial over the damages.
The RIAA's decision to reject the judge's award appears a bit hypocritical on a couple of levels. The group has said on numerous occasions that its legal campaign against P2P users isn't about making money—indeed, an industry executive testified during the Jammie Thomas trial that the lawsuits are a money-losing proposition. Instead, the suits are meant, among other things, as a deterrent to copyright infringement and to teach P2P users a lesson.
Here, it seems painfully clear that the lesson has been taught. Harper has been found liable for 37 counts of copyright infringement and the judge is willing to award the RIAA $7,400 in damages—almost double what her father would have had to pay had he accepted the terms of the RIAA's prelitigation settlement letter back in 2005. Furthermore, in the 28,000-plus copyright infringement lawsuits filed by the record labels, the RIAA has never once asked for a set monetary damages, saying instead that it would be content with whatever the court deemed appropriate (former RIAA head litigator Richard Gabriel made this very statement during the Thomas trial). Judge Rodriguez did exactly that, and the labels have decided that it wasn't enough. Now, the RIAA will tie up a federal courtroom, a judge, and a jury for a few days before Thanksgiving in hopes of extracting an additional pound of flesh from someone who says she didn't know she was doing anything wrong back when she was just 16 years old.
Judge Davis issued an order today rejecting the RIAA's effort to rewrite copyright law to include a form of 'attempted infringement.' Based on this order, the first p2p case ever to make it to a jury verdict is now headed for a *second* trial. Even more interesting, the Court devotes several paragraphs to a plea to Congress to lower penalties for noncommercial, individual infringers."
Looks like even the lawmakers are telling the RIAA to DIAF with the shit they're pulling.
More good news!
Fred sez, "Yesterday, the DoJ sent a letter to Senators Specter and Leahy blasting the new civil enforcement provisions in the latest "IP enforcement" legislation, S.3325, pending in the Senate. The letter is a hum-dinger, pointing out that the bill would turn taxpayer-supported DoJ civil servants into pro bono lawyers for Hollywood."
DOJ doesn't WANT to do this, and is telling Hollywood; "Yesh, no thanks!"
RIAA Decries Texas Woman as 'Vexatious' for Demanding File Sharing Trial
The Recording Industry Association of America is labeling a Texas woman "vexatious" for her refusal to pay the record labels $7,400 for allegedly infringing 37 songs on the Kazaa file sharing network.
Instead, 22-year-old Whitney Harper is demanding a jury trial. The Texas Tech student wants a federal judge to consider the mistrial in the Jammie Thomas case, in which a jury awarded the RIAA $222,000 for infringing 24 songs. In that case, the nation's only file sharing lawsuit to go to trial, a Minnesota federal judge declared a mistrial after concluding he wrongly instructed jurors that simply making music files available on a peer-to-peer network constituted infringement.
Whitney's motion is believed to be the first of the thousands of pending RIAA file sharing cases to invoke the Jammie Thomas mistrial decision, which U.S. District Judge Michael Davis wrote Sept. 24. The RIAA wants to appeal that decision, but first needs Davis' blessing.
The RIAA has apparently had a change of heart towards a Texas woman accused of sharing music over KaZaA when she was 16 years old. In Maverick v. Harper, the industry group has backed off its demand for a jury trial and has instead opted to accept a judge's $7,400 damage award: $200 for each of 37 songs downloaded in whole or in part by the RIAA's hired investigative gun, MediaSentry.
Oct 20 2008 8:50am from flynnfx @uncnsrd
RIAA now wants to avoid trial in innocent infringement case
The RIAA has apparently had a change of heart towards a Texas woman accused
of sharing music over KaZaA when she was 16 years old. In Maverick v. Harper,
the industry group has backed off its demand for a jury trial and has instead
opted to accept a judge's $7,400 damage award: $200 for each of 37 songs
downloaded in whole or in part by the RIAA's hired investigative gun,
$200 for each song? What drugs do these judges take? I want some.
Probably closer to 4, since i have a few gigs waiting to be sorted...