p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA ’sue ‘em all’ war losing money
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- It’ll be news to the mainstream media and others unfamiliar with corporate music industry practices of inventing facts and statistics to suit the occasion, but Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG have no idea how much money, if any, they’re losing to file sharing.
The admission came from Sony BMG’s Jennifer Pariser.
Moreover, continues Ars Technica, she owned up to something else followers of Big 4 efforts to pummel their customers into submission have known for some time: that the sue ‘em all campaign is in fact a bizarre form of loss-leader.
Designed to ultimately drive people into the waiting arms of the Big 4, it isn’t saving them money, it’s costing them, says Pariser, quoted in the story.
The revelations are certain to seriously unsettle the RIAA’s case that the BIG 4 are being: ‘devastated’ (their word) by file sharers; losing billions of dollars; and, are being forced to lay off workers in their droves because of people who share music with with each other.
They came during a trial when for the first time, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) and its minions are being forced to pony up with accurate information instead of unsupported generalisations and claims, something they’ve been getting away with since the sue ‘em all marketing project was launched in 2003.
Focus of the trial is Jammie Thomas, a 30-year-old Minnesota First Nations mother of two who’s accused of illegally distributing copyrighted music online.
She works for the Department of Natural Resources of the Mille Lacs Band.
She’s an Ojibwe and we haven’t been able to discover whether or not she lives on a reservation. But if she does, it might raise interesting possibilities given that North American Indian bands claim full nation status and it’s not inconceivable that the RIAA and its lawyers might at some point find themselves facing a complex jurisdictional problem as they try to railroad a victim who, to all intents and purposes, might live in what amounts to a foreign country.
Fanciful? Probably, but then so is the entire RIAA case.
Meanwhile, Thomas’ is the first file sharing case to go to trial.
As Ars Technica points out, it started out as as Virgin v Thomas, “but the sole Virgin Records track was stricken from the complaint, making Capitol Records the lead plaintiff”.
The story goes on:
After a relatively calm morning session, proceedings resumed after lunch. After RIAA lead counsel Richard Gabriel finished his direct examination, Thomas’ attorney David [sic - his name is Brian] Toder began his attempts to undermine the labels’ case. He focused on apparent inconsistencies from the testimony of Jennifer Pariser, Sony BMG’s the head of litigation. Toder also got Pariser to admit that IP addresses and screenshots “don’t identify human beings.”
Toder talso asked her how many people had actually downloaded music from the defendant but, “We don’t know,” she admitted.
“I can’t identify any other entities aside from what SafeNet reported, but I know that many others did… that’s the way the system works.”
Ars Technica adds:
Toder then raised the question of the RIAA targeting the wrong people in its lawsuits. “How many dead people have you sued?” he asked, a question that was blocked after Gabriel objected. Toder then took a different tack, asking Pariser if she recognized the names of Gertrude Walton, Sarah Ward, Cindy Chan, and Paul Wilke - all innocent victims of the RIAA’s driftnet tactics.
The next line of questioning was how many suits the RIAA has filed so far. Pariser estimated the number at a “few thousand.” “More like 20,000,” suggested Toder. “That’s probably an overstatement,” Pariser replied. She then made perhaps the most startling comment of the day. Saying that the record labels have spent “millions” on the lawsuits, she then said that “we’ve lost money on this program.”
We’ve yet to learn how Toder will deal with discredited RIAA ‘expert’ Dr Doug Jacobson (upper right), due to testify today.
His evidence in another case involving 57-year-old home health aide Maried Lindor, who doesn’t know one end of a computer from the other but who’s also alleged by the RIAA to be a massive illegal distributor of corporate product, was described by Lindor’s lawyere, Ray Beckerman, as “junk science”.
Toder’s toughest opponent will be fellow lawyer Cary Sherman, a brilliant sophist who for years has been leading the way for RIAA dissemblers.
He’s also slated to give evidence.
Stay tuned.
Jon Newton - p2pnet
Also See:
Ars Technica - RIAA anti-P2P campaign a real money pit, according to testimony, October 3, 2007
discredited RIAA ‘expert’ - Lindor vs the RIAA: round I0, May 17, 2007
massive illegal distributor - Marie Lindor, RIAA copyright crook, September 14, 2007
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
October 3rd, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Of course she could just be lying to speciously appear as educators rather than profiteers. Thereby appealing to the sensibilities of the jurors.
Everyone is jumping for joy that they might be losing money in this campaign of terror, that they forget she works for these purveyors of evil, and may possess the same proclivities that her employer does. Namely, proclivities of deception. Remember, claiming this as fact and without protestation, their reputation will be untarnished. And reputation is everything to a jury. If they are exposed as reprobate antagonists in this allegory, antipathy will soon be unleashed upon the plaintiffs.
October 3rd, 2007 at 5:08 pm
When “top litigator for the Sony-BMG Music Group” Jennifer Pariser, asked if she thought copying a song from a CD you own should be allowed, answers flatly, “when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song,” and gets away with it, what are you going to do?
October 3rd, 2007 at 8:39 pm
“Everyone is jumping for joy that they might be losing money in this campaign of terror, that they forget she works for these purveyors of evil, and may possess the same proclivities that her employer does. Namely, proclivities of deception. Remember, claiming this as fact and without protestation, their reputation will be untarnished. And reputation is everything to a jury. If they are exposed as reprobate antagonists in this allegory, antipathy will soon be unleashed upon the plaintiffs.”
She could also face JAIL TIME for LYING TO A JURY if it is ever proven to be true also. It is called perjury!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perjury
Perjury is the act of lying or making verifiably false statements on a material matter under oath or affirmation in a court of law or in any of various sworn statements in writing. Perjury is a crime because the witness has sworn to tell the truth and, for the credibility of the court, witness testimony must be relied on as being truthful. Perjury is considered a serious offense as it can be used to usurp the power of the courts, resulting in miscarriages of justice. In the United States, for example, the general perjury statute under Federal law provides for a prison sentence of up to five years, and is found at 18 U.S.C. § 1621. See also 28 U.S.C. § 1746.
October 4th, 2007 at 1:02 am
The number of those that settle is not exactly know but a safe estimate go between 2k-4k people.
It’s mean that they would have to sue as many as 20k. For now there is only 33 cases pending and so far they lost all of them. Needless to say that they can not afford it so they are certainly lossing money. And then there is the money they loss in the boycott that are in the 100 of million that are slowly killing the 4 majors that control the RIAA. But then like the dinosaurs they are too stupid to get that. Extinction! Extinction! Extinction! Few more years left only and they will become just a bad memory! Yes! For those who serttle it is time to start a class action law suit at least or better a criminal law suit and recover the money they extorted to you with interest and penalty before they totally sink.
October 5th, 2007 at 9:29 am
From this day forward I will not purchase any Sony product of any kind. I do not copy music files or even share CDs and DVDs I own. But I am totally offended by Sony abuse of the legal system, attacks on innocent people, and general bullying of the public. Although I presently own many Sony products ranging from Large screen TVs to Stereo eqt, and many CD and DVD titles, NOW even seeing the brand name of sony in my household has become offensive. I regret ever having given any business sony, and refuse to give any business to them or any other corporate bully in the future.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:30 am
1. Sony must not be allowed to trade in the US or with any companies trading with any US entity, because of their business practices on warranties, their past behavior with stealing software in order to secretly install “rootkits” in a copyright product not theirs to safeguard their own copyright products, that they ruined computers of their customers in doing so without replacing them, for their product recommendation/warranty practices, and for having their lawyer lie before a jury.
2. Jennifer Pariser must be charged with perjury for lying that a copyright recorded for later use is stealing knowing the law in view of the fact that she did pass a bar examination.
3. RIAA, the American Bankers Association and certain other entities must be charged with racketeering under existing RICO statutes for such acts as extorting settlements, and for illegal money lending practices.
4. Attempts to bribe congress and insert special interest legislation using congressional aides later hired by RIAA>
January 1st, 2008 at 10:42 am
1. Sony must not be allowed to trade in the US or with any companies trading with any US entity, because of their business practices on warranties, their past behavior with stealing software in order to secretly install “rootkits” in a copyright product not theirs to safeguard their own copyright products, that they ruined computers of their customers in doing so without replacing them, for their product recommendation/warranty practices, and for having their lawyer lie before a jury.
2. Jennifer Pariser must be charged with perjury for lying that a copyright recorded for later use is stealing knowing the law in view of the fact that she did pass a bar examination.
3. RIAA and subsidiary entities must be charged with racketeering under existing RICO statutes for such acts as extorting settlements, for attempts to insert special legislation into bills
4. RIAA has attempted to insert special legislation “License to Virus” into unrelated bills giving it impunity if it destroys computers in banks, homes and businesses even if those machines have never had copyright material on them. This attempt is a threat to everyone including computers at power companies, and those involved with national security. This attempt should be enough to close RIAA down and charge the persons involved with it with enough to put them away for life.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:48 am
A former congressional aide, Mitch Glazier successfully inserted a secret special interest section into a major bill passed by Congress. For the favor he was hired by the special interest group. He remains at large having not been arrested and charged with this activity.