Comments on: RIAA builds new consumer class http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495 p2pnet.net - reader powered Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:59:36 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495/comment-page-1#comment-131740 Reader's Write Thu, 28 Dec 2006 14:11:19 +0000 #comment-131740 Basically the 11 circuit court of appeals said that Directv had no cause of action against people for the mere purchase of a device. Like the RIAA cases, one must have done something like view the programming or download a song. In that 11 circuit appeals breifs, directv admits that inn most cases they never had evidence of anyone actually having viewed there programming with out paying. They only had the purchase of a device which may have been capable of making an access card. These have become known as a hypothetical claim. Like the directv cases, the RIAA cannot provide any proof who sat behind a computer or in Directv cases, who watched television with out paying. Directv took money from thousands of dollars knowing they owed nothing. Mailed out over 100, 000 letters from which most settled. Then sued some 30,000 people in Federal court running people out of money then forcing an out of court confidental settlement. About 100 cases actually went to trial and it was about 50/50 win loss. Where there are confidental settlements one has to watch for those where the public is prohibited from reporting any acts of purgery or evidence tampering. Not only are people summarily sued but the right to report crimes taken from them in confidental settlement. If they report the crime, they are sued for disclosure and breech of the confidental agreement. The justice system is also good with a settlement agreement where someone is silenced from reporting criminal acts by attorneys under the confidental agreement. In all these suits, claims are made which they know are not true and manufactured or manipulated evidence is some what common. Basically the 11 circuit court of appeals said that Directv had no cause of action against people for the mere purchase of a device. Like the RIAA cases, one must have done something like view the programming or download a song. In that 11 circuit appeals breifs, directv admits that inn most cases they never had evidence of anyone actually having viewed there programming with out paying. They only had the purchase of a device which may have been capable of making an access card. These have become known as a hypothetical claim. Like the directv cases, the RIAA cannot provide any proof who sat behind a computer or in Directv cases, who watched television with out paying. Directv took money from thousands of dollars knowing they owed nothing. Mailed out over 100, 000 letters from which most settled. Then sued some 30,000 people in Federal court running people out of money then forcing an out of court confidental settlement. About 100 cases actually went to trial and it was about 50/50 win loss. Where there are confidental settlements one has to watch for those where the public is prohibited from reporting any acts of purgery or evidence tampering. Not only are people summarily sued but the right to report crimes taken from them in confidental settlement. If they report the crime, they are sued for disclosure and breech of the confidental agreement. The justice system is also good with a settlement agreement where someone is silenced from reporting criminal acts by attorneys under the confidental agreement. In all these suits, claims are made which they know are not true and manufactured or manipulated evidence is some what common.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495/comment-page-1#comment-131231 Reader's Write Fri, 08 Dec 2006 20:56:23 +0000 #comment-131231 At the risk of sounding callous, did the degree that this story concentrated on MS seem to be a bit much? The disease, unfortunate as it may be, is being exploited here in a flagrant appeal to pity, and is irrelavent to the issue. If the person did anything wrong here, having a disease does not excuse any wrongdoing. If she did nothing wrong, then the RIAA's actions are pretty detestable regardless. I'm no fan of the RIAA, but is the Snidely Whiplash caricature that we see in stories like this really necessary? At the risk of sounding callous, did the degree that this story concentrated on MS seem to be a bit much? The disease, unfortunate as it may be, is being exploited here in a flagrant appeal to pity, and is irrelavent to the issue. If the person did anything wrong here, having a disease does not excuse any wrongdoing. If she did nothing wrong, then the RIAA’s actions are pretty detestable regardless.

I’m no fan of the RIAA, but is the Snidely Whiplash caricature that we see in stories like this really necessary?

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495/comment-page-1#comment-130740 Reader's Write Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:44:31 +0000 #comment-130740 How did the lawsuits by Direct TV, that were referenced above, finally stop? I'd heard about this before, but never have heard how the suits were stopped. How did the lawsuits by Direct TV, that were referenced above, finally stop? I’d heard about this before, but never have heard how the suits were stopped.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495/comment-page-1#comment-130727 Reader's Write Tue, 21 Nov 2006 23:37:26 +0000 #comment-130727 DirectTV was concerned with folks who pirated their signal through electronic black boxes, both ready made and self assembled. They too, cast a large net over the universe of people who both were stealing the signal and who for some other reason were thought to perhaps have purchased electronic supplies which may have been used in the building of a black box (as well as legitimate uses). If I remember correctly, they were forced to stop this despicable practice through consumer lawsuits. I am sure RIAA knows how to tread a much tighter tightrope. I just hope they get nailed. I still will not subscribe to DirectTV although I have no reason to fear them. DirectTV was concerned with folks who pirated their signal through electronic black boxes, both ready made and self assembled. They too, cast a large net over the universe of people who both were stealing the signal and who for some other reason were thought to perhaps have purchased electronic supplies which may have been used in the building of a black box (as well as legitimate uses). If I remember correctly, they were forced to stop this despicable practice through consumer lawsuits. I am sure RIAA knows how to tread a much tighter tightrope. I just hope they get nailed. I still will not subscribe to DirectTV although I have no reason to fear them.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495/comment-page-1#comment-130703 Reader's Write Tue, 21 Nov 2006 06:05:58 +0000 #comment-130703 why were you sued by directtv? why were you sued by directtv?

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/10495/comment-page-1#comment-130702 Reader's Write Tue, 21 Nov 2006 05:04:18 +0000 #comment-130702 I was sued by Directv, They made up a story just like the many stories made up by the RIAA. Then use the court to assist in taking people's money on the basis of a fraudulent claim. The individual cannot prove innocence because they do not have the money. The attorney's representing them have destroyed many American Families now by driving them into bankruptcy. These families then fall onto public tax rolls for support. The new class is a bunch of American's who are looking for that part of the Constitution which protects there property from such thefts. The justice system has failed and in fact shown support to the RIAA and Directv in taking money from people whom they knew were innocent or wrong doing. I cannot wait for the shoe is on the other foot and the public can make up stories and false claims against big corporations. I was sued by Directv, They made up a story just like the many stories made up by the RIAA. Then use the court to assist in taking people’s money on the basis of a fraudulent claim. The individual cannot prove innocence because they do not have the money. The attorney’s representing them have destroyed many American Families now by driving them into bankruptcy. These families then fall onto public tax rolls for support. The new class is a bunch of American’s who are looking for that part of the Constitution which protects there property from such thefts. The justice system has failed and in fact shown support to the RIAA and Directv in taking money from people whom they knew were innocent or wrong doing. I cannot wait for the shoe is on the other foot and the public can make up stories and false claims against big corporations.

]]>