Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

NYCL Responds to RIAA Accusations

Posted by timothy on Sat Nov 08, 2008 05:42 PM
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."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Ray Beckerman Sued By the RIAA 725 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Ray Beckerman, known for questioning the RIAAs legal tactics (also for frequent Slashdot contributions), was sued by the RIAA over his blog Recording Industry vs. People. In question is the 'vexatious' claims that the RIAAs legal tactics is a 'sham.' Beckerman is quoted as saying that the litigation against him is 'frivolous and irresponsible.'"
[+] RIAA Brief Attacks Free Software Foundation 554 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA has requested permission to file a response to the amicus curiae brief filed by the Free Software Foundation in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, the Boston case against a Boston University grad student accused of having downloaded some song files when in his teens. In their proposed response, the RIAA lawyers personally attacked The Free Software Foundation, Ray Beckerman (NewYorkCountryLawyer), and NYCL's blog, 'Recording Industry vs. The People.' The 9-page response (PDF) — 4 pages longer than the document to which it was responding — termed the FSF an organization 'dedicated to eliminating restrictions on copying, redistribution, and modifying computer programs,' and accused the FSF of having an 'open and virulent bias against copyrights' and 'blatant bias' against the record companies. They called 'Recording Industry vs. The People' an 'anti-recording industry web site' and stated that NYCL 'is currently subject to a pending sanctions motion for his conduct in representing a defendant' (without disclosing that plaintiffs' lawyers were 'subject to a pending motion for Rule 11 sanctions for their conduct in representing plaintiffs' in that very case)."
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
More
Loading... please wait.
  • pettyness (Score:5, Funny)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Saturday November 08 2008, @05:45PM (#25689875)

    This kind of behavior is the lawyer equivalent of turning the lights off while someone else is in the bathroom. They probably left the toilet seat up too. Grr. Argh... wet socks.

  • Way to go! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Fjandr (66656) on Saturday November 08 2008, @05:46PM (#25689877) Homepage Journal

    It's nice to see someone like NYCL take such an in-your-face position against the RIAA's actions and come out on top.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08 2008, @05:48PM (#25689891)

    NYCL writes in third person? Anonymous coward approves.

    • by Bieeanda (961632) on Saturday November 08 2008, @05:58PM (#25689941)
      All real superheroes do.
      • Re:Third Person (Score:5, Informative)

        by NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) * on Saturday November 08 2008, @10:27PM (#25691539) Homepage Journal

        Why haven't we seen NYCL here for a while? Court gag order or something?

        I submitted 2 stories on October 28th, one of which got accepted, one of which got rejected. Since then there just hasn't been any Slashdot-worthy RIAA litigation news.

          • Re:Third Person (Score:5, Informative)

            by NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) * on Sunday November 09 2008, @12:18AM (#25692081) Homepage Journal

            moderation in your submittals is what makes me read every one you post

            Thank you. I appreciate that.

            I try to keep in mind the distinction between my blog and my Slashdot submissions.

            In my blog, I just try to give complete information, so that lawyers representing defendants won't get caught off guard by anything that happens and will have a full set of legal resources to use in preparing their own arguments and legal documents. I.e. I post things that aren't really surprising or newsworthy, but they're just useful information to have in one place.

            My Slashdot submissions are confined to things that I think the world should know about. However, Slashdot's editors don't always agree with my assessment and more of my submissions are rejected than submitted.

            One thing I try to do, which I see in Groklaw, but nowhere else in the news world, is to give people access to the actual legal documents, so they can make up their minds for themselves. I hate reading news articles about legal events where the articles do not share with the reader copies of any of the underlying documents. In this day and age, where almost all federal litigation is electronic and there are *pdf files of every document, I feel there is no excuse for holding back on that.

  • Footnote (Score:5, Insightful)

    by phantomfive (622387) on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:00PM (#25689965) Homepage Journal
    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.

      • Re:Footnote (Score:5, Insightful)

        by BSAtHome (455370) on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:24PM (#25690087)

        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.

        • Re:Footnote (Score:5, Interesting)

          by phantomfive (622387) on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:34PM (#25690153) Homepage Journal
          Being stressed, bashed, scarred, and abused is part of life. Everyone has to deal with it. That happens whether you have the RIAA or not. Having a chance to watch the ones doing the abuse get their just results, if not necessarily humorous, is very satisfying.
          • Re:Footnote (Score:5, Informative)

            by symes (835608) on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:53PM (#25690283) Journal
            Not so - very high levels of stress can have profound lasting consequences on health (both mental and physical). It is not good. Trouble is that it is hard to measure these lasting consequences.
          • by jonaskoelker (922170) <jonaskoelker@[ ].org ['gnu' in gap]> on Saturday November 08 2008, @08:01PM (#25690719) Homepage

            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".

          • Re:Footnote (Score:5, Insightful)

            by _Sprocket_ (42527) on Saturday November 08 2008, @08:07PM (#25690751)

            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.

        • Re:Footnote (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Antique Geekmeister (740220) on Saturday November 08 2008, @07:45PM (#25690609)

          Their policy is not to 'make sense'. Their policy is to frighten people. An insane attack dog is more frightening, and in a number of more ways more effective, than a well-trained guard dog to keep people off the territory where you let the dog loose, even if you do not in fact own that territory and have no legal cause to let that dog hurt anyone.

          Plenty of people in the music industry, especially in production and distribution, have mastered this art for many years, against agents, performers, and normal purchasers. This is just another form of the 'trial by champions' or effectively 'trial by mercenaries in suits' that legal systems have provided since the time of the crucifixion of Jesus and Pontius Pilate washing his hands of the mess.

        • Re:Footnote (Score:5, Interesting)

          by NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) * on Saturday November 08 2008, @10:08PM (#25691447) Homepage Journal

          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.

          Very, very true. You were deservably modded to +5.

  • One man army? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:08PM (#25690005)

    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.

    • Re:One man army? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by PDG (100516) <pdg@webcrush.com> on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:20PM (#25690059) Homepage

      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.

    • Re:One man army? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) * on Sunday November 09 2008, @12:32AM (#25692155) Homepage Journal

      If I were NYCL my focus would be converting more of my peers, raising an army against the RIAA.

      That really has been my focus. The purpose of the blog was to empower other lawyers. Since I started it, more and more lawyers have come into the fold. I give them free listings in my "Directory of Defense Lawyers" and we try to help each other whenever we can. Are there enough lawyers doing it? No. But more and more are coming into the fight.

  • by Kierthos (225954) on Saturday November 08 2008, @06:27PM (#25690117) Homepage

    We salute you, sir.

    • by NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) * on Saturday November 08 2008, @10:16PM (#25691481) Homepage Journal

      NYCL, I'm surprised. With all of the egregious conduct you're documented, I'm surprised you're just making a declaration in opposition rather than a motion of your own for sanctions under FRCP 11(c)(2). Is your reasoning something you can share with us, or shall we just watch the master in action? ;-)

      Can't comment on that.

      Here's [cornell.edu] a link to Rule 11.