Comments on: RIAA HEARING! Vitally important

By: RIAA HEARING! Vitally important « Music Top News

RIAA HEARING! Vitally important « Music Top News — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:59:12 +0000

[...] read more | digg story [...]

By: Entertainment News Blog - Celebrity Movies Music Television » RIAA HEARING! Vitally important

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:33:24 +0000

[...] at 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, courtroom 21D on the 21st Floor. BE THERE IF YoU CAN !!!read more | digg [...]

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000

Looks like we have to wait for the outcome:

“Elektra v. Barker dismissal motion argued; parties now await decision”:
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 07:29:20 +0000

The 11th circuit appeals in the Directv cases (Treworgy V Directv) stated that the mere purchase of a device which is capable of altering an access card is not enough to bring private civil suit for a loss. Thousands were sued because they had the capability of making a device which might be used to steal television programming. It would be the same as buying a corvette and when you buy it you pay the police officer for the ticket because you might speed.

In the Riaa case, a song was made available but the fact of your having listened to it has yet to be proven. This is especially true when you have an individual who has an account with an ISP but could prove to be elsewhere at the time of the download. In the RIAA cases like the directv cases, it never mattered if the person the claim did some wrong, they still just want money. In both cases, the claims made to a court may well be false claims or claims which could be considered fraud because they never knew if a person actuually viewed television or listened to a song.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 00:33:07 +0000

I shared your befuddlement. The text says “tomorrow” and it appears to be dated Jan 25, 2007, so I’d guess Jan 26, 2007, which would mean that the hearing is underway now.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 23:45:02 +0000

I wonder if they would allow someone to come in and webcast it. That would be good move but the RIAA might try to sue the person doing the webcast for copyright infringement too.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 22:22:21 +0000

Thanks for the heads up but what date does it take place.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:11:30 +0000

I dunno about that. Arnold won the CA gov seat as did Jesse Jackson. No one thought either one would have chance in hell of getting elected so I imagine that a similar fluke could happen hear.

Pity I don’t live close enough to attend.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:17:42 +0000

I agree. Since it sounds like “she didn’t know it was illegal,” yet she understood that she was file-sharing, she’s going to lose. Regardless how wrong it is to sue customers, when people know they file share, and admit the truth to the judge, let’s face it, the judges will count them guilty.

I’m surprised this lawsuit is going faster than Santangelo vs. Elektra

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 03:10:44 +0000

I predict ( unfortunately ) another RIAA win; if the U.S. court system bent any further backwards to accommodate Hollywood and the music industry it’s spine would break.