Slashdot Log In
Lindor Attacks Record Company Copyright-Pooling
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Sep 14, 2007 01:22 PM
from the avoiding-the-rule-of-inverse-ninjas dept.
from the avoiding-the-rule-of-inverse-ninjas dept.
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Back in March, 2006, Marie Lindor called the record companies suing her a collusive cartel, and their joint agreement to pool their copyrights "copyright misuse" (pdf). A year and a half later, the RIAA apparently got nervous about that allegation and made a motion to strike the allegations. Ms. Lindor has struck back, pointing out to the Judge not only that the RIAA's arguments had no legal basis, but also that its brief was completely silent as to any justification for the record companies' copyright-pooling agreement. Such a justification would be necessary for it to pass muster under 'rule of reason' analysis mandated by the US Supreme Court. Ms. Lindor, a home health worker who has never even used a computer, let alone infringed anyone's copyrights with a p2p file sharing program, is the same defendant who exposed, with a little help from her friends, some of the weaknesses in the RIAA's expert testimony. She also obtained a ruling that the RIAA's $750-per-song file damages theory might be a wee bit unconstitutional."
Related Stories
[+]
Entertainment: Judge OKs Challenge To RIAA's $750-Per-Song Claim 333 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In UMG v. Lindor, in Brooklyn federal court, the presiding judge has held that Marie Lindor can try to prove that the RIAA's claim of $750-per-song statutory damages is a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Constitution, since she has evidence that the actual wholesale price of the downloads is only 70 cents. This decision activates an earlier ruling by the Magistrate in the case that the record labels must now turn over 'all relevant documents' regarding the prices at which they sell legal downloads to online retailers, and produce a witness to give a deposition by telephone on the subject. Judge Trager rejected the RIAA's claim that the defense was frivolous, pointing out that the RIAA had cited no authorities contradicting the defense, but Ms. Lindor's attorneys had cited cases and law review articles indicating that it was a valid defense. See the Decision at pp. 6-7."
[+]
Ask Slashdot: What Questions Would You Ask An RIAA 'Expert'? 616 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer asks: "In UMG v. Lindor, the RIAA has submitted an 'expert' report (pdf) and 26-page curriculum vitae (pdf), prepared by Dr. Doug Jacobson of Iowa State University who is the RIAA's expert witness in all of its cases against consumers, relating to alleged copyright infringement by means of a shared files folder on Kazaa, and supposed analysis of the hard drive of a computer in Ms. Lindor's apartment. The RIAA's 'experts' have been shut down in the Netherlands and Canada, having been shown by Prof. Sips and Dr. Pouwelse of Delft University's Parallel and Distributed Systems research group (pdf) to have failed to do their homework, but are still operating in the USA. The materials were submitted in connection with a motion to compel Ms. Lindor's son, who lives 4 miles away from her, to turn over his computer and music listening devices to the RIAA. Both Ms. Lindor's attorney (pdf) and Ms. Lindor's son's attorney (pdf) have objected to the introduction of these materials, but Dr. Jacobson's document production and deposition are scheduled for January and February, and we would love to get the tech community's ideas for questions to ask, and in general your reactions, thoughts, opinions, information, and any other input you can share with us. (In case you haven't guessed, we are the attorneys for Ms. Lindor.)"
[+]
Technology: RIAA's 'Expert' Witness Testimony Now Online 512 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The online community now has an opportunity to see the fruits of its labor. Back in December, the Slashdot ('What Questions Would You Ask an RIAA Expert?') and Groklaw ('Another Lawyer Would Like to Pick Your Brain, Please') communities were asked for their input on possible questions to pose to the RIAA's 'expert'. Dr. Doug Jacobson of Iowa State University, was scheduled to be deposed in February in UMG v. Lindor, for the first time in any RIAA case. Ms. Lindor's lawyers were flooded with about 1400 responses. The deposition of Dr. Jacobson went forward on February 23, 2007, and the transcript is now available online (pdf) (ascii). Ray Beckerman, one of Ms. Lindor's attorneys, had this comment: 'We are deeply grateful to the community for reviewing our request, for giving us thoughts and ideas, and for reviewing other readers' responses. Now I ask the tech community to review this all-important transcript, and bear witness to the shoddy investigation and junk science upon which the RIAA has based its litigation war against the people. The computer scientists among you will be astounded that the RIAA has been permitted to burden our court system with cases based upon such arrant and careless nonsense.'"
[+]
Your Rights Online: RIAA Security Expert's Quest For Reliability 170 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In the ongoing case of UMG v. Lindor, Ms. Lindor has now moved to exclude the trial testimony of the RIAA's 'expert' witness, Dr. Doug Jacobson. Jacobson is the CTO and co-founder of Palisade Systems, Inc, and a teacher of internet security at Iowa State, but in his February 23rd deposition testimony she argues he failed to meet the reliability standards prescribed by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Federal Rule of Evidence 702. The Groklaw and Slashdot communities participated in both the preparation of the deposition questions, and the vetting of the witness's responses."
[+]
Record Company Collusion a Defense to RIAA Case? 275 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Is collusion by the record companies a defense to an RIAA case? We're about to find out, because the RIAA has made a motion to strike the affirmative defense of Marie Lindor, who alleged that "the plaintiffs, who are competitors, are a cartel acting collusively in violation of the antitrust laws and of public policy, by tying their copyrights to each other, collusively litigating and settling all cases together, and by entering into an unlawful agreement among themselves to prosecute and to dispose of all cases in accordance with a uniform agreement, and through common lawyers, thus overreaching the bounds and scope of whatever copyrights they might have" in UMG v. Lindor."
[+]
RIAA Wants To Throw In the Towel On 3-Year-Old Case 171 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "After three years of pursuing a home health aide in Brooklyn who has never even used a computer, the RIAA has announced it's ready to throw in the towel. Only thing; it wants the dismissal to be 'without prejudice' so it won't be liable for attorney's fees. The courts have been saying that where a copyright plaintiff gives up, the defendant is presumptively entitled to an attorney's fee award. So, Ms. Lindor says 'no way.' She wants the dismissal to be 'with prejudice,' and she wants her attorney's fees."
We've been discussing this case and Ms. Lindor's fight against the RIAA for quite some time.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Let's buy this woman a drink (Score:5, Interesting)
It may be a tad melodramatic to say this (especially now), but I certainly hope that she finds her place in the history books.
Re: (Score:2)
I really want to buy this woman (and her lawyers) a drink. They are probably doing more for our digital rights than any single group of people right now. I don't mean to discount the contributions of organizations such as the EFF (I have, in fact, contributed money in the past), but it's hard to root for a nameless, faceless group like that. This woman is fast becoming an icon for fighting the good fight against the frivilous lawsuits that the RIAA continues to file. It may be a tad melodramatic to say this (especially now), but I certainly hope that she finds her place in the history books.
Thanks, RESPAWN.
I don't know about her, but I could really use one about now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can only do like $20, but if half of the registered
Better yet, (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Better yet, (Score:5, Informative)
Thanks
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
That said... I'm sure this has been discussed before, but are there any legal reasons that you couldn't set up a website and/or Paypal account to accept further contributions? I'm sure that myself and Vlad Petric aren't the only
PayPal Account for Ms. Lindor's Legal Defense (Score:5, Informative)
Meanwhile, about that drink......
Parent
Re:PayPal Account for Ms. Lindor's Legal Defense (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Better yet, (Score:5, Informative)
Moderators, I'm sorry if this is "redundant" but it's important that I get the message out to those who want to assist this poor woman.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hmm, yeah that does prove your point...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No can do. We'd be an illegal cartel of lawsuit targets.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Knowing Congress, the actual text of the bill would make the RIAA's tactics legal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We can also always count on the random A.C. who doesn't have even a smidgen of understanding to carry on about STEALING. There's this thing called "the Big Picture" which you are apparently failing to see. You had best understand that both sides in this conflict have rights under the law, but only one side is interested in removing the other side's rights ... permanently.
I've come to the conclusion that the Anonymous Coward posts of that nature on /. are from an RIAA shill or troll. They're totally offtopic, and neither you nor I nor anyone we know has ever met anyone in the real world who believes such nonsense.
Digital Audio Tape machines (Score:2)
I still can't believe the RIAA successfully lobbied congress to prevent Americans from being able to purchase Digitial Audio Tape machines in the 1980s. The sheer gall of using congress to shut down entire technologies just because you think they threaten a business model you've become accustomed to making a killing at.
Having our rights curtailing like that really stings. The RIAA really has it coming this time.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Digital Audio Tape machines (Score:4, Informative)
Ever heard of The Pirate Bay?
Unfortunately, there IS an uproar in many countries about the goings-on of American-funded entities in the rest of the world. It just doesn't make US (or other national) headlines for some reason.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
But here's the obvious next logical step (which said executive of course failed to make): File sharing isn't really "stealing" either, because when you steal something from someone, they don't have it anymore.
File sharing is a violation of copyright. It's not sharing, it's not stealing, it's a copyright violation. And when it's
Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
If you can't hire corrupt politicians to make a mockery of the constitution at the expense of normal citizens then what can you do?
It should be as easy to buy judges as it is to buy congressmen.
Ha-ha, RIAA (Score:5, Funny)
The playground bully getting their ass kicked by a girl. lol.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Boy have you got that right.
RE: Let's buy that woman a drink (Score:2)
What nerve! (Score:4, Insightful)
I say! She's challenging the bedrock of modern law! It's all written and owned by the cartels, corporations, rich and poweful and they've earned it! They have worked very hard and at no little expsense to get those laws, buying representatives, influencing judge selections and so forth. How dare the little ordinary person challenge this status! This almost made the monocle pop right out of my eye! I shall have to see what I can do to prevent these common rabble from believing they were hah! created equal.
never used a computer?? (Score:3, Insightful)
Uhh... WHAT??
Re:never used a computer?? (Score:5, Informative)
Believe it or not, the RIAA has sued as an 'online media distributor' one of the only people I have never met who has never used a computer. She has never even turned one on. The only thing she has ever done with a computer is to dust around one sometimes.
That should tell you the kind of "human beings" I am litigating against.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Soap box.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Our friend, the NewYorkCountryLawyer, has not only made Slashdot his personal soap box, what the Russians would call the 'Father of all soapboxes', but he has managed to harness all the good ideas generated from several Slashdot stories and put them to good use. Not only has he put these ideas to his own personal good use, he's doing good for society as a whole, and sticking it to the RIAA in the process.
Sir, I tip my hat to you. Keep up the good work.
Aero
Hear! Hear! (Score:2)
PayPal Account for Ms. Lindor set up (Score:5, Informative)
The email address is:
wraymond@hotmail.com
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
RIAA Lottery Sometimes you win and .... (Score:3, Interesting)
The RIAA has goofed big time on this one. What they were doing was marginal at best. Now with the litigation campaign and the examination of the law as a result is starting to bring down the house of cards. I think they goofed on the litigation campaign in hopes everyone would roll over and play dead. I don't think they expected a fight with intelligent people who could see the flaws in their assertions.
They played the lottery trying to get shady practices cemented as standard operating practices. They played the gamble that the defendants would fold as the cheap option. They gambled and stand a good chance of getting copyright law handed to them on a platter with shady practices exposed as a big RICO problem.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'd pay that to hear a funural march at the RIAA's funeral
-mcgrew [kuro5hin.org]
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You aren't paying for the single.
You are paying for your unlicensed and unlimited redistribution of the single through the P2P nets.
Re: (Score:2)
You are also paying for being treated like a hardened commercial bootlegger.
That who the original statutory damage amount was targeted at.
Those absurd damage claims are simply the end results of the RIAA
getting to pay to distort the law so that you are conflated with a
Chinese CD/DVD factory.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:750 dollars a song (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Man, is there any limit to the harm copyrights bring to society?
Meanwhile, back in reality, the most of us would like to see a law passed making it illegal for restaurant employees to burst into any song at all while we are trying to enjoy a meal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:750 dollars a song (Score:5, Funny)
I really hate this song!
But if I do not sing it,
I won't work here for long... Hey!"
Copyright (C) 2007 quantum bit Productions
Redistribution permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license [creativecommons.org].
Parent
I hope ... (Score:5, Interesting)
I hope she wins and the RIAA members effectively lose the copyrights to every song involved in these suits.
That's the point of the "copyright misuse" claim: Part of the penalty for misuse of a copyright is the loss of the ability to enforce it at all.
Parent
Re:I hope ... (Score:4, Insightful)
As an added benefit, the mass loss of copyrights would force a situation where established musicians could make a good living without a heavy reliance on copyright. I would be just as happy (if not happier) to buy tickets to a Rolling Stones concert if all their work were public domain, as I would be if it remains privately owned.
Parent
Re:I hope ... (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
lol... well for starters, the "RIAA's expert testimony" was not given by lawyers, and regardless if I would hardly call them experts in their field of law, but by so called Computer / Network experts of the RIAA.
Those you will fi
Re:expert advice (Score:5, Funny)
It was not legal, but technical, input we were looking for.
As for Slashdotters being lawyers, as I said when I was interviewed in September, 2006, on Slashdot, I learned a valuable lesson then. One needs to look beyond the statutes and the cases for the law; one also needs to look at Slashdot. If something is modded +5 on Slashdot, it must be the law as well, even if neither Congress nor the Courts have recognized it yet.
:)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Who's laughing now? (Score:3, Insightful)