|
RIAA to sue Ray Beckerman
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 18 September, 2008
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has declared that the lawyer Ray Beckerman is a "vexatious litigator" and is now seeking monetary damages in an effort to punish him for his defense of a NY woman in a recent P2P case.
Beckerman, one of the few lawyers who defends alleged file sharers, is also a blogger and that point is at the heart of the new case. The RIAA says Ray ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
sgriesch
Junior Member
|
19. September 2008 @ 14:51 |
Link to this message
|
Well, at least this guy can defend himself. It won't cost him anything in legal fees.
On the other hand, the RIAA has to pay their own attorneys for a case they have no chance in hell of winning. Congratulations RIAA, you have found a new way to screw yourself. Way to go!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
ripxrush
Junior Member
|
19. September 2008 @ 21:08 |
Link to this message
|
wow! i dunno what to day! this guy did his job just like the RIAA lawyers r doing! Maybe he can sue them for same thing after they are done!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. September 2008 @ 21:09
|
Senior Member
4 product reviews
|
19. September 2008 @ 23:07 |
Link to this message
|
Nuff Said
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. September 2008 @ 23:08
|
Junior Member
|
19. September 2008 @ 23:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Welcome to America!
|
Newbie
|
20. September 2008 @ 11:28 |
Link to this message
|
Why don't they sue the judge in that case? Or even better... Why don't they sue the Congress of the United States for not passing laws in their favor? Makes more sense to me.
|
|
DPensee
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
20. September 2008 @ 15:07 |
Link to this message
|
The RIAA needs to be slapped down hard by the court system. The precedent has to be set once and for all letting them know that they can't bypass proper rules of evidentary procedure, and freely violate individual privacy, because the market is changing, their profits are down, and those dinosaurs are crying out to the heavens in effect, "We can't die! We've made such much money marketing ephemereal art that we refuse to accept that it's an obsolete 20th-century concept that doesn't work in the digital age."
Oh, and again, how much of these damages are trickling down the artists whose rights these lawsuits are alleged to protect...?
|
Newbie
|
20. September 2008 @ 16:17 |
Link to this message
|
Howdy, DPensee, in answer to your question, none of the monies secured by this farce have gone to the artists this bunch claim to represent and whose interests they claim they are looking after. Instead, they have told the artists that there is NO MONEY as they had to pay their lawyer's fees. Now since we here all know just much of a lying sack of excrement this group is and has been shown to be, I wonder just how much longer this will go on BEFORE the artists themselves start suing this bunch for stealing what is rightfully theirs.
You can bet your bottom dollar that all monies secured by this farce have since made its way to the RIAA's offshore bank accounts so they can have the latest in cars, condos, cocaine and chicas of the evening. This whole thing is nothing more than a last ditch attempt by a dying industry to grab the brass ring that used to belong to them but is now out of reach and getting further and further away each day with the ongoing lawsuits brought by them and their illegal enforcement arm, Media Sentry.
I'm hoping Ray Beckerman sues these pathetically, moronic, POS for libel and slander, after all they've accused him of doing the very thing that they have from the beginning by saying, "the defendant, her family and her counsel engaged in a deliberate pattern of misconduct by providing false, misleading, and incomplete information as to the status of defendant?s Internet service in August 2004, who resided in defendant?s home during that time, the identity and location of witnesses with information about the case, and the existence and owner of the computer connected to defendant?s Internet account at the time of infringement. ?Defendant?s misrepresentations caused plaintiffs and the court to waste substantial resources chasing empty leads and ultimately led to the destruction of critical evidence in this case."
This reads like the entire history of what and how they, the RIAA and MEDIA SENTRY, have operated since the very beginning.
|
Member
|
20. September 2008 @ 17:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
ok I'm no lawyer, judge, or to be honest a smart person.
But this kinda seems like it would fall under the double jepordy clause thingy wouldn't it??
anywhos......
so now if this goes to court..............
lets say I get in a car wreck and go to sue the other driver at fault, for some reason I lose can I go and file suit against the lawyer that reprpesnted the person at fault.
I mean comon now this makes it so lawyers gotta worry about not only for their client but also fear that there will be a suit filed against them.......
Total and complete elephant mess, the type that you need a backhoe to clean-up, not a shovel.
|
|
susieqbbb
Suspended permanently
|
21. September 2008 @ 12:00 |
Link to this message
|
Ok and how can you prove she got rid off evidence i am sorry to say this is why we have warrents that state they are allowed to take the persons computer did the riaa take the persons computer no they left it there.
So it is the Riaa's fault not the lawyer that saw what the riaa was doing and how it was screwing everyone.
And if media sentry is so great then please explain to me why they are still unlicensed???
I thought that if a bussiness was not licensed in the united states that the bussiness could face jail time or tax aduits so how lame is that
|
Newbie
|
21. September 2008 @ 14:46 |
Link to this message
|
The RIAA is so full of BS that it is coming out of their ears.. this is way over the line.
|
|
DPensee
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
21. September 2008 @ 15:23 |
Link to this message
|
Why doesn't the Supreme Court bring the RIAA to task for "Profiteering Through Litigation and Coercion"? The RIAA's new business model of extortion based on inferred intent by suing the very markets that support them for revenue will hasten the implosion of the music industry infrastructure they are so desperately trying to supplant.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Member
|
22. September 2008 @ 04:28 |
Link to this message
|
This truly is a NEW LOW...even for the RIAA cockroaches.
Quote:
The RIAA says Ray "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. Such vexatious conduct demeans the integrity of these judicial proceedings and warrants this imposition of sanctions."
Basically they're saying that Ray is not entitled to an "Opinion" with that statement. I can see if he was posting about information that was deemed to be "Confidential" by the Courts or has been sealed or the info was sensitive to the outcome or prejudicial to potential jurors, but none of this is stated in the claim for sanctions or monetary damages.
What a Proverbial "Crock-0-Shite"!!!!
These idiots seriously need to be taken down a few notches and I hope the Courts will do just that with this frivolous & "VEXATIOUS" litigation, if I can use their own terms...oh...maybe the RIAA has the copyright on the word VEXATIOUS.
vexatious, vexatious, vexatious...there, sue me you useless teets, except I live in Canada...ha-ha.
|
