Welcome to P2PNET.net - The original daily p2p and digital news site. Always First!
Register | Login
RIAA News
Cool Stuff
MPAA News
Games / Consoles
News
Music
Movies
TV
Open Source
Mobiles
Advertising
Product News
P2P
Off Topic
Freedom
Politics
Interviews
Security
DRM
Links
Kids and Kartels
Search: 
Search
 
Web P2PNET   
Search: 
Search
Torrent Site Tracker
TekSavvy
 
Add real-time p2pnet headlines to YOUR site ! Click here to download our newsfeed code

Patti Santangelo v RIAA: battle won?

p2pnet.net news:- Odds are that Patti Santangelo, the New York mother who was the first RIAA victim to make a determined stand against the Big 4, helped to no small extent by p2pnet readers who put their money where their mouths were, contributing thousands of dollars towards her legal costs, has won her battle to clear her name and show up the Big 4 for the bullies they are.

She and her lawyer, Jordan Glass, have signed and submitted a stipulation to dismiss with prejudice the case lodged against her by the RIAA, clearly taking their cue from the language of US federal district court judge Colleen McMahon’s response to Glass’s letter of March 31. In it, he wrote Patti would stipulate to a dismissal of any sort only if she retained the right to move for legal fees.

McMahon’s language seemed to indicate it was time to end the farce, and the court had the power to entertain a motion for legal fees.

But even if judge McMahon grants the dismissal, and there’s every reason to believe she will, that still leaves two of Patti’s children, Michelle, 20, and Bobby, 16, in the direct line of fire.

“With prejudice” means the Big 4 wouldn’t be able to re-start the case at some time in the future, and if judge McMahon decides to grants fees and costs, they could be heavy.

Both Patti and Glass wanted to take this to trial. She told p2pnet, “This is the most appropriate thing to do based upon what judge McMahon wrote. It shows what we were able to accomplish by fighting back,” going on:

We didn’t get everything we wanted – I know how much Jordan wanted to take this to trial, and so did I – but other people like me have been fighting back since we won the first discovery objections last year.

Now I have to focus on case against my children. I think this shows what we can accomplish, but it wouldn’t have been possible without all the people who funded the campaign.

I don’t know how other parents are managing it without money. That’s why the RIAA is picking on people without money, because people with money can beat them. But now that the other defendants have my case to refer to, maybe that will help them save money and have more power to win. I know it made a big difference regarding discovery for other defendants, so I hope this will be a good precedent for them, too.

With Patti’s case out of the way, will the Elektra Entertainment Group, Virgin Records America, UMG Recordings, BMG Music and Sony BMG Music Entertainment drop their case against her children?

If they do, they’ll be setting a precedent other families in the same, or a similar, boat will be quick to use. So the RIAA will probably intensify, rather than abandon, its efforts against Bobby and Michelle.

The only thing likely to give the RIAA serious pause is if RIAA victims and their lawyers launch a concerted campaign through a class action suit, or other type of action where defendants are able to join together.

Individually, the victims have little weight. But if they were able to stand as a group against the Big 4, with their legions of lawyers and bottomless pockets, it could be another matter.

There might also be similar possibilities for a class action against the units used by the RIAA to extort money from its targets.

In 2005, judge McMahon told the cartel’s lawyers she’d, “love to see a mom fighting one of these,” referring to the settlement centres routinely employed by the RIAA to get money out of its victims.

However, class actions are expensive costing in the region of a quarter of a million dollars to start, so the RIAA, EMI (Britain), Vivendi Universal (France), Sony BMG (Japan and Germany) and Warner Music (US) may be in effect wagering this alone will be sufficient to stop a class action from being attempted.

Stay tuned.

Slashdot Slashdot it!

Also See:
entertain a motionNew twist in RIAA, Santangelo, April 4, 2007
mom fighting one of theseRIAA writes to Judge McMahon, September 7, 2006
direct line of fireUs, Them, p2p and file sharing, December 9, 2006

If your Net access is blocked by government restrictions, try Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at thIs the end (of the Net) nigh?zze University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Go here for the official download, here for the p2pnet download, and here for details. And if you’re Chinese and you’re looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate, the DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent web site blocking outside of China. Download it here.


rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php | | And use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site

Tired of being treated like a criminal? They depend on you, not the other way around. Don’t buy their ‘product’. Do bug your local politicians. Use emails, snail-mail, phone calls, faxes, IM, stop them in the street, blog. And if you’re into organizing, organize petitions, organize demonstrations and then turn up on your local political rep’s doorstep, making sure you’ve contacted your local tv/radio station/newspaper in advance. Don’t just complain. Do something!

HOME

5 Responses to “Patti Santangelo v RIAA: battle won?”

  1. Reader's Write Says:

    The Quebecers should consider a class action against the cartels because Quebec is one of the most class-action friendly provinces in Canada. At least this would keep the cartels away from Canada.

  2. Reader's Write Says:

    As Al Capone once stated…”You can go further with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone”. Time for people to take up the gun to deal with THE RIAA. A few bloody bodies of RIAA executive should make the point!

  3. Reader's Write Says:

    You’re an IDIOT if you are seriously considering MURDER as an option to these lawsuits!

    I HOPE you were joking!

    If not,I hope you get thrown in jail!

  4. Reader's Write Says:

    He’s not.

    He’s attempting to leave a false trail.
    He’s trying to create the impression that the owners
    of this site, and the people who come here, encourage
    criminal activity.

    No one here condones any kind of criminal behavior.
    The only activity endorsed here is a BOYCOTT.

    Don’t Buy, Don’t DL, Don’t have anything to do with
    RIAA ‘ product ‘ .
    If you MUST have it, buy it used from a pawn shop
    or second hand CD reseller ( RIAA gets no more cash
    from it ).

    No one here will ever support any criminal activity.

    Ever.

  5. Reader's Write Says:

    Well if he is NOT JOKING…. then as I said, I hope he gets thrown in jail!

    To suggest murder as an option for stopping a civil lawsuit is crazy, makes me wonder what drugs that poster was on when he said that.

    To be against the RIAA and MPAA and support those who LEGALLY oppose them is one thing, but to say that you would murder someone associated with them in cold blood over it, is totally another matter!

Leave a Reply

Please no Spam, flaming (attacking others), trolling, and posting off-topic. Thanks.

    Advertisements
MP3Rocket


Remove Spyware with AntiSpyware for Windows®