RIAA Sues Hospitalized Teenager

bonsai said:
Did the RIAA know she was hospitalized? Did the family file hardship with the court? Did the family even attempt to file anything with the court or just ignore the summons hoping it would go away? Did the family attempt to contact free legal services? The ACLU would probably cover the case for free in a heart beat. These are all things that the article doesn't bother to address because it wants to present a biased sensationalist story.
Click to expand...

Why would the ACLU take the case? I was with you in principle until you came up with that gem ... I don't think you really know or understand what the ACLU does.
 
hardware_failure said:
What I think is funny is the whole reason behind these lawsuits. Will it help "reimburse" the RIAA for their "declared" losses? No. They want to scare people. What does something like this do? Makes people hate them more. Its self destructive. The RIAA/MPAA need to embrace the digital distribution of media rather than fight it. Its called evolution.

It will be a glorious time if someday the RIAA/MPAA both rest in piss.
Click to expand...

Itunes and other online sales are evolution. Giving their stuff away for free isn't.
 
hardware_failure said:
What I think is funny is the whole reason behind these lawsuits. Will it help "reimburse" the RIAA for their "declared" losses? No. They want to scare people. What does something like this do? Makes people hate them more. Its self destructive. The RIAA/MPAA need to embrace the digital distribution of media rather than fight it. Its called evolution.

It will be a glorious time if someday the RIAA/MPAA both rest in piss.
Click to expand...

They dont care what happens, they are getting rich. Nothing that happens to the RIAA will hurt any of the individuals involved. Know how this is all going to end if it does end? Some rich lawyers retire or move on to other endeavors after milking as many people as possible dry.
 
DonInKansas said:
You talk trash on lawyers now; will your tune change one day if you ever get accused of something you did not do? Hmmm......
Click to expand...

happened. lawyer tells me its my word against the cops and theres nothing i can do about a falsified police report. lawyer already had my $1500 retainer. done and done. fuck lawyers.
 
Exavior said:
Itunes and other online sales are evolution. Giving their stuff away for free isn't.
Click to expand...

make one album and sit on your ass for 20 years and expect everyone to pay up? sorry. music albums are advertisement for concerts. you want to make money in the music business? here's a thought- PLAY MUSIC.
 
Grrr, it should be the artists themselves suing people. RIAA, worthless like the IRS.
 
I am totally against the RIAA and their bullshit, but I'm sure that the family received numerous summons and other documentation regarding the case before they were actually sued. If the family didn't respond to anything and tried to ignore it, then it's their fault that they are in this situation. The least they could have done is appealed to the court with the current situation and have the issue set aside until the hospitalization was over with - but they didn't. They failed to take any action at all and I view this as the family's fault.
 
Tokamak said:
They didn't show up in court because they couldn't afford a lawyer. That's the problem with the tort system vs. the criminal system. In the criminal system you're appointed an attorney. These lawsuits presume guilt until proven innocent, and they don't even supply a lawyer. The tort system needs to be overhauled so it's not so incredibly biased toward the wealthy.
Click to expand...

exactly.

i don't get how there can even be a split among techies on this.... Bottom line is the RIAA are going overboard. hell if you are a criminal in the hospital they leave you alone until you are released and then they arrest you...thats right...they postpone things until you are capable to show up in court. Ruling a hospitalized person as a no show ON TOP of them not being able to afford a lawyer... I live in pgh, it saddens me that this happens here.... that judge deserves a kick in the ass.

Someone else said it best... its like spitting on a sidewalk... its not like she broke into their offices and took items... this old generation does not understand the digital realm...this becomes more and more apparent... they need to start dying faster so the generation that had to live under the shadow of the riaa can take over and put a stop to this.

bottom line is..to quote wow kiddies the riaa needs to stop QQ and realize that even with piracy they still make a retarded profit.... and to this day still hose the artist that aren't AAA top tier. Which is sad because most of them are so manufactured it's disgusting.
 
Exavior said:
However I do feel that like it or not, they have a right to get money for their products.
Click to expand...

I picked that one sentence out of your entire post to make a point.

As a musician myself, let it be said... Musicians see VERY, VERY little of the money raked in from music sales and from what has been posted in the news previously musicians are seeing little to actually zero of the RIAA settlements.

Musicians make the product but people that do nothing (executives and lawyers) get the money.

That is why I believe that the RIAA lawsuits are all bullshit.
 
STealing music is stealing. It is a criminal act. You engage in it and get caught, you should suffer the consequences.

If I went into best buy and shoplifted a CD, I have in fact comitted almost the exact same crime, but you wouldn't see the kind of crap the RIAA pulls.

However, this does not mean that RIAA isn't both stupid and a complete abuse of the law.

Much like the OJ case, you can have both a criminal and civil portion of a case. Also like the Oj case (the original one, where he was sued by the family after being found not guilty), the civil case is usually deferred until after the criminal proceedings.

The RIAA has chosen to ignore the criminal aspects, and all the legal protections and hurdles that entails, and used lawsuits to make an end run around it as well as to gain authority equivalent to the power of law enforcement by bringing badly formed sutis to court and using the legal authority of court orders to execute their "investigations."

They have also lobbied for laws specific to them that are unduly punitive. Even when you can demonstrate that what has occured, with or without malicious intent, is the equivalent of stealing a CD from best buy, and making 100 copies for friends or strangers, you get punished like you had a CD duping warehouse and duped tens of thousand of copies.

While I agree that just because you whine doesn't mean you have a right to free stuff, the RIAA pretty much embodies everything wrong with politicians, lawyers, and heartless corporations into one useless and ineffective entity tha quite honestly could probably be prosecuted under RICO statutes if it wouldn't result in lots of senators getting lots of prosecutors fired.
 
raz-0 said:
STealing music is stealing. It is a criminal act. You engage in it and get caught, you should suffer the consequences.
Click to expand...

I think you missed the day in reality school when they explained that there's a difference between criminal and civil law.
 
It's about bad laws in your country. Yes, uploading is against law here in Slovakia too, but :
1) someone can't open up a case like this - it's stupid that any country law allows to open up case without proofs. As i said once - first they must produce some proof and then they can make a case against you. If any law system allows cases like this, then that law system failed. Period.
2) uploading is against law here, downloading isn't.
3) even if it is questionable, there is a fair use law, which they already break by anti-copying stuff on CD. How can you make a backup copy guaranteed by law, if they don't allow you to do a copy ?

By the way, iTunes & other online music stores are cool. But there is one major problem for rest of the world - they are mostly USA or western Europe only.
iTunes - sure, but not in eastern Europe.
Amazon - sure, but only in USA & Canada.
XBOX Marketplace - sure, but only in USA & Canada.

How can they except lower piracy if they don't provide any legal possibilites except buying a simple CD for $30-$40 (yeah, one simple CD costs so much here). Plus, they already take money from each sold empty CD, DVD, USB stick, HDD, CD/DVD burner, empty papers, copiers...
 
Damn RIAA are coldblooded. I'm sending massmailing this story to all friends, coworkers, family who are oblivious to this and think twice about using Limewire or torrents.
 
Damn RIAA are coldblooded, I'm mass mailing this story to all friends, coworkers, family who are oblivious to this and telling them to think twice about using Limewire or torrents.
 
krupted said:
happened. lawyer tells me its my word against the cops and theres nothing i can do about a falsified police report. lawyer already had my $1500 retainer. done and done. fuck lawyers.
Click to expand...

It sucks, but your lawyer was right. Once the boys in blue circle up, a small fry has almost no chance. As to "fuck lawyers", I agree partially. But some are actually human beings that sleep well at night because they have no reason not to. Obviously, many others, like those that work at RIAA, only sleep well at night because their greed murdered their conscience.

Back to the topic. You, or a representative, have to appear, one way or another you HAVE to appear when summonsed. Otherwise you end up with default judgments. They should have visited legal aid, had the mother walk into court and inform them the girl was in the hospital and unable to come, or something, anything. Almost anything at all would have been better than what they did. Which was apparently nothing. This story is overblown on that front imho. Sick or not they should have made some attempt to do something prior to receiving a summary judgment against them.

But, RIAA lawyers can still rot in hell. The American legal system should not be a piggy bank for lawyers. The RIAA is suing on behalf of people that are not getting a dime of the money. I can't see how that should even be legal. Ehh, I guess class action lawyers do it all the time, why not RIAA lawyers. Disgusting....
 
krupted said:
happened. lawyer tells me its my word against the cops and theres nothing i can do about a falsified police report. lawyer already had my $1500 retainer. done and done. fuck lawyers.
Click to expand...

It's not the lawyer's fault that you were caught up in an imperfect system. Why do you insult the one person who *might* be able to help you, when the real oppressors (the police and lawmakers) go unscathed?

GORANKAR said:
Back to the topic. You, or a representative, have to appear, one way or another you HAVE to appear when summonsed.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There is no excuse for failing to appear in court. If you physically are unable to, you can be represented, with proper documentation. It's *not* that hard.
 
Manaknight said:
exactly.

i don't get how there can even be a split among techies on this.... Bottom line is the RIAA are going overboard. hell if you are a criminal in the hospital they leave you alone until you are released and then they arrest you...thats right...they postpone things until you are capable to show up in court. Ruling a hospitalized person as a no show ON TOP of them not being able to afford a lawyer... I live in pgh, it saddens me that this happens here.... that judge deserves a kick in the ass.
Click to expand...

Why does the judge deserve anything. They didn't defend themselves. End of story. Since they didn't defend themselves it was a default judgment.

You get a traffic ticket and don't show to defend yourself they will do the same thing. If the mother showed up and asked that it be delayed due to medical conditions and the judge refused then it would be one thing. The article didn't say that though.

End of it is the judge did the right thing.
 
If laws can be picked and chosed to be made; I say they can be picked and chosed to be followed...
 
Myg said:
If laws can be picked and chosed to be made; I say they can be picked and chosed to be followed...
Click to expand...

also agreed

and for the record, you don't need a lawyer for a traffic ticket... they couldn't afford a lawyer, already making it unfair
 
I believe anyone can easily defeat a lawsuit from the RIAA. How does the RIAA have hard evidence that John Doe downloaded the songs??How does the RIAA know it wasnt the son's friend or the neighbor. The RIAA has no real hard core evidence that it was Mr. Doe. All they have is a IP Address....

In my opinion it is really hard for the RIAA to catche music pirates red handed unless the a person admits guilt.
 
Arcygenical said:
It's not the lawyer's fault that you were caught up in an imperfect system. Why do you insult the one person who *might* be able to help you, when the real oppressors (the police and lawmakers) go unscathed?
Click to expand...


might help so what? he didnt even try to help. he said "yeah i can do it, no prob. thatll be $1500. ok, now that i have your money, i cant help you sorry have a great day!". thats a lawyer, and sadly yes that is most lawyers.
 
Joe270 said:
I believe anyone can easily defeat a lawsuit from the RIAA. How does the RIAA have hard evidence that John Doe downloaded the songs??How does the RIAA know it wasnt the son's friend or the neighbor. The RIAA has no real hard core evidence that it was Mr. Doe. All they have is a IP Address....

In my opinion it is really hard for the RIAA to catche music pirates red handed unless the a person admits guilt.
Click to expand...

i agree. if i got caught up in this shitstorm, i would go to trial by jury no matter what. thats where they will have to show their data logs as proof and i can tell them "it wasnt me, i was sleeping at that time"
 
evanisthecoastie said:
I thought if you couldnt afford a lawyer, one is appointed to you...
Click to expand...

In general your only constitutional right to a free lawyer is in a criminal case with only few rare exceptions.This is a civil case between 2 private parties and the best she can hope for is to get a non profit community lawyer or volunteer one.
 
You don't KNOW she's guilty. There has been no trial. Therefore she is INNOCENT until proven guilty, which hasn't happened. In civil suits you're not given a lawyer, therefore only those that can afford a lawyer can actually defend themselves.
 
Please, I would be surprised to find out that she didn't actually pirate the music. Second, all's she had to do was show up to prevent the default verdict. If she was hospitalized she just had to provide proof to the court and any judge would have changed the hearing date accordingly. It sucks that they are in a tough position, but when you do something illegal and you get caught there tends to be ramifications, and to be quite honest paying the 8k is probably cheaper than paying for an attorney... I'd say she got off easy. It's not the RIAA's fault she has a medical condition, or that her mother wasn't ambitious enough to get a real job.
 
bonsai said:
Did the RIAA know she was hospitalized? Did the family file hardship with the court? Did the family even attempt to file anything with the court or just ignore the summons hoping it would go away? Did the family attempt to contact free legal services? The ACLU would probably cover the case for free in a heart beat. These are all things that the article doesn't bother to address because it wants to present a biased sensationalist story.
Click to expand...

Playing by the RIAA rules would be tantamount to making deals with terrorists, because, it is what they are. (Now *there* is a sensationalist story for you) They seek to terrify people who copy something thats infinitely replicable and they themselves bear all the cost of ownership, such as internet connection and hard-drive space.

The money doesnt make it to artists, we know this, and the overwhelming majority of those artists dont support such music police systems. Whether for favorable image or true honesty, does it really make a difference?

What RIAA is doing is the same thing as patent trolling, except the payoff is guaranteed by law. The RIAA media piracy police training videos equate children with terrorist fundraisers.

The RIAA will do anything and step on anyone, and this is known, however this story is what it is because people have more sympathy for a debilitated child than a 30yr old man in a basement in Brooklyn whose pirating and distributing every "gangsta rap" track, mix, and edit he can get his hands on, like its a religion.

Its for the world to see, and pass their own judgment on RIAAs activities. The people know who the criminal in this case is, because they can relate on a human level that makes them "human" and not "biased" unless your "biased" really means "anti-debilitated-child-suffering".

And her parents probably either didnt understand or take these things seriously, I know mine wouldn't, and I'm pretty sure the majority wouldn't either, AND I'm pretty sure they also had their hands full.
 
Considering only one of these lawsuits has actually gone through a trial, one out of thousands, that means only one person has been proven guilty by a jury, making it likely at least a few of them were innocent. The problem is, it'll cost you tens of thousands of dollars to defend yourself, and you DO NOT get it back unless the judge determines the suit was frivilous, which very rarely happens. And I don't know about you, but I don't have tens of thousands of dollars to front for several years, during all the appeals and what not. How many of you do?
 
Guitarrasdeamor said:
Knew what they were doing, got caught. They have to pay the consequences.
Click to expand...

No, because she is in the hospital, so everyone thinks she shoujld get away with it.

I think I am gonna go lift some stuff I want, and then go check into a hospital.


:rolleyes:
 
Tokamak said:
Considering only one of these lawsuits has actually gone through a trial, one out of thousands, that means only one person has been proven guilty by a jury, making it likely at least a few of them were innocent. The problem is, it'll cost you tens of thousands of dollars to defend yourself, and you DO NOT get it back unless the judge determines the suit was frivilous, which very rarely happens. And I don't know about you, but I don't have tens of thousands of dollars to front for several years, during all the appeals and what not. How many of you do?
Click to expand...

More like most people settle out of court, suck it up and pay the settlement to avoid the thousands in litigation costs.
 
Tokamak said:
You don't KNOW she's guilty. There has been no trial. Therefore she is INNOCENT until proven guilty, which hasn't happened. In civil suits you're not given a lawyer, therefore only those that can afford a lawyer can actually defend themselves.
Click to expand...

First off how do you know their wasn't a trial. They didn't answer a summons. It could have been one that listed a court date or it could have requested information. The article does go into how the lawyer said he has done similar but doesn't say if it went to trial. Either way the stupid bitch screwed up. She failed to respond to the summons. It doesn't take much to respond. Since she didn't respond to defend herself she got a default judgment of guilt. Now because they pushed it aside they want people to feel sorry for them. Hey they could have pushed it off(asked for a continuance), applied for legal aid(something that it doesn't say they did), or tried to defend themselves.

Mind you all she has to do is file a motion to have the judgment vacated or a motion to set aside judgment(these are 2 different things). A motion to set aside judgment is rare. When asking for relief from default judgment you have to show cause for not responding to begin with. A judge might refuse to do it if they made no attempt to respond to begin with.

Personally I don't feel sorry for her. She is trying to play the I'm sick card which really has nothing to do with the fact that she didn't respond. It would be different if she was in a comma or something.
 
Not sure why would would decide these people are guilty. A free IP address is not exactly proof. Anyone could have made it up.


Pancreatitis is not a minor problem. It is very possible that that when she wakes up in the morning she could be dead soon and not in a pretty way. Even mild pancreatitis can be completely dehabilitating. Getting out of bed seems to be an impossible and pointless task. Some forms cause the body to start digesting itself instead of food.

Also note that there have been Judges that have thrown out these cases despite no defense. The judges duty is to protect the law not support the rich. The law has noting to do with this it is a racket. No money goes to the artists.
 
swatbat said:
First off how do you know their wasn't a trial. They didn't answer a summons.
Click to expand...

Default verdict due to non appearance means that neither side presented claims, counter-claims, evidence or proved culpability.
Judge said "is everybody here??"
Bailiff answered "No, Your Honor"
Judge said "I find in favor of the Claimant that is here! Courts adjourned."

i.e. no presentation of claims = no trail
Any good lawyer can get the ruling reversed and trial rescheduled based on this.

Also, this being a CIVIL case. The RIAA can not press criminal charges for this violation of Copyright law. And in almost every case that heads south for the RIAA, they try to settle out of court before the case comes to summation or they prevent precedence from being set in some other way. All it will take is for one case to go the full nine yards and the judge to rule in a precedence setting way and the RIAA and MPAA are toast.

So, based on the RIAA and MPAA legal tactics - they are trying to scare the public into buying their music. They are actually worse than DirecTV was 10 years ago. Their goal is to never bring a case to court, just send out letters and collect default payments.

You guys do realize that every thing that you buy that can copy digital media has a manufacturers surcharge added to it that is paid directly to the RIAA and MPAA from the media manufacturers. That's why the cds that are labeled "Audio CD" cost twice as much as the generic data cds. They got this law passed when cassette tapes came out.

And the only people that get any of this money is the members of the RIAA and the MPAA, both of which have a very exclusive membership - you have to be a record publisher or a movie publisher to join. So just being a movie studio or record label, actor or artists doesn't cut it.

Just look at who the claimants are.... BMG, Sony, Electrica, to name a few. Not one direct label. The Beatles label Apple Records has never been a member or filed one of these cases, and they are arguably one of the most sold and pirated artists there is.

Bottom line is - The RIAA and MPAA are using the current tort system to build a huge assed "Stone Bucket" to aid their lobbying for Copyright Law reform that favors them even more and as a means of generating money until they can get the legal reform that they want. And I bet it will be similar to the recording media surcharge that they already have, which basically pays them to do nothing.


I could go on about this all day.

I do agree that the family should have to tried to appear, but with their situation they were probably just overwhelmed. But the way the RIAA and MPAA are going about these legal suits is just wrong. And they have tried to sue a dead person already.
 
The RIAA and MPAA do not want you to buy music or movies. They prolly would not be making near as much money from membership dues as they would from litigation and black mailing infringers. ;)


i kid
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top