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."
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.
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.
Barring a drink, how can we help the campaign financially? I know that there have been ways stated previously, but I forget. I've already made my donation to the EFF, but is there a fund or something to keep you and Ms. Lindor on the RIAA's backs?
I can only do like $20, but if half of the registered/. users contributed $5 each, that gives you $2.5M to work with and keep flinging the RIAA's poop back at them. A little from a lot can go a long way.
Let's donate some money to her defense fund... Too bad she doesn't have a website for that.
If you send a check to Vandenberg & Feliu, LLP, As Attorneys for Marie Lindor" we will deposit it in our escrow account and apply it to Ms. Lindor's account. I can assure you she will warmly appreciate it. Our mailing address is: Vandenberg & Feliu, LLP, 110 E. 42 St., New York, NY 10017, Att: Ray Beckerman
In the grand scheme of things, what I can contribute is very little, but you will receive a check from me. Also, don't be surprised if you find a modest bottle of scotch deliverd to that address as soon as I figure out the best way to have one legally delivered. 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/.'ers willing to c
In the grand scheme of things, what I can contribute is very little, but you will receive a check from me. Also, don't be surprised if you find a modest bottle of scotch deliverd to that address as soon as I figure out the best way to have one legally delivered.
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/.'ers willing to contribute to the cause.
Good news. A family friend of Ms. Lindor's will be setting up a PayPal account for contributions to help her defray the costs of defending herself from the RIAA. Will post the information as soon as the account is set up. I will post the information here and on Recording Industry vs. The People [blogspot.com].
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.
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.
I know what you mean about one side trying to permanently remove the rights of the other.
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.
Don't forget the fortunately unsuccessful attempt by the MPAA to have the Video Cassette Recorder ruled a contraband technology, and the legal battles both they and the RIAA have fought all down the line as new technologies are brought to market. They have the gall to talk about theft, when they've stolen far, far more from us and are trying to take more. There needs to be a certain balance, a balance that the Founders struck so well that it stood up for two hundred years. These people have to know what the
I mean, if an American corporation went overseas somewhere, and funded a bunch of lawyers to begin suing the pants of the locals, you can bet there'd be an uproar.
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.
Several years ago, a record company exec made a really good point. "File Sharing" isn't really "sharing" because when you share something with someone, you don't have it anymore. 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
The RIAA bought and paid for elected representatives. Those representatives created laws which allow the RIAA to metaphorically rape anybody who has stepped out of line causing them the loss of any amount of potential revenue. The courts need to respect the laws that our corrupt politicians have put on the books.
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.
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.
a home health worker who has never even used a computer
Uhh... WHAT??
Yup.
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.
I wholeheartedly support Ms. Lindor's efforts and those of her attorneys. I also think the collusion argument is fantastic, but in the interest of fairness I think one aspect of this is worth pointing out. I don't think the "Never Used a Computer" angle is quite as strong an argument as it is being made out to be. Reading into the various articles a bit, it seems at least possible that copyright infringement was taking place by a member of her family, and its not that far a logical stretch that she could
It was only a matter of time before someone managed to use Slashdot for it's ability to harness ideas and viewpoints. Usually it's just spitting into the wind with no one making any effort to record the good ideas that do pop up.
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.
To those of you who are doing this I would like to say thank you to each and every one of you, but I'd probably get modded "redundant". So I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you.... you know who you are!
Such a justification would be necessary for it to pass muster under 'rule of reason' analysis mandated by the US Supreme Court.
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.
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.
Deep within the womb of time,
a creature thus be born
The seed of life is united with
the egg of tyranny
Gestates forth from within the womb of life
for three-quarter and nigh a year
The creature thus be born!
The creature thus be formed!
And ye of years...
[Your current age + bells]
Will chime!
When the heavens open up
and drink from the silver cup
The creature thus be born!
And blow the magic horn!
To alert
Which is why most restaurants that used to have their employees sing Happy Birthday to patrons celebrating their birthday now have to sing some contrived crapola instead. Another example of how copyrights can seem to live forever and dorks (oh, excuse me "greedy corporations" but dorks works too) try to grab money for something they never should have really owned and certainly didn't come up with.
Man, I'm sure steamed about that. Restaurant employees can't sing the actual Happy Birthday to customers.
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.
I figure that another reason restaurant chains don't use "Happy Birthday" is so that they can create a custom song that contains nothing but two notes separated by a single semitone. It's their attempt to make it a tiny bit less excruciating to listen to the bellowing of a group of waitstaff with a sum total of zero singing talent.
So with the potential for that much music to become public domain, my first question is: Where can I contribute to her legal fund? Even though the results aren't guaranteed, the possibility of such a public boon would seem to be a good investment.
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.
"is the same defendant who exposed, with a little help from her friends, some of the weaknesses in the RIAA's expert testimony."
Considering how all the links from this particular quote are to/. articles, I have to say I had no idea that most/.ers are such excellent lawyers.
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.
"is the same defendant who exposed, with a little help from her friends, some of the weaknesses in the RIAA's expert testimony."
Considering how all the links from this particular quote are to/. articles, I have to say I had no idea that most/.ers are such excellent lawyers.
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.
Actually the Slashdot community was extremely helpful in helping to both formulate questions for the expert, and in reviewing the transcript of his testimony.
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.
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)