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

RIAA ‘false and misleading’ representations

p2pnet news | RIAA News:- No pettiness is too small for Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA.

Michelle and Bobby Santangelo are following in the footsteps of their mother, Patti, refusing to let Big 4 bullies working for, and hired by, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), terrorise them into paying extortion money to leave them alone.

The RIAA went after Michelle for $543 in lawyers’ fees centering on a court decision to vacate a default judgment lodged against her.

Through their lawyer, Jordan Glass, she and her brother have filed counterclaims, among them ‘Failure to Warn’.

Another is Misuse of copyright” and RIAA lawyers Holme Roberts & Owens (HRO) are now going through the motions – literally – and in the process, charges Glass, “made materially false and misleading representations”.

The Santangelos, “may attempt to cite a recent order in Lava Records v. Amurao … to support their claim of copyright misuse,” state HRO.

Judge Charles L. Brieant, “provided no opinion or analysis when it denied the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the defendant’s counterclaim for misuse of copyright,” claim the RIAA lawyers, going on:

In its entirety, the Court’s Order regarding the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss reads, ‘Motion Dkt. #8 is granted to the extend (sic) that the first counterclaim is dismissed, and denied with respect to the second counterclaim [for copyright misuse].’ Id.

No further discussion or analysis was provided. This Order would provide little substance in support of Defendants’ claim and does not affirmatively recognize copyright misuse as a cause of action.

However, says Glass, Brieant did, in fact, provide his analysis and unpublished rationale “on the record” at the time of his ruling, as a court transcript proves.

“This misrepresentation goes beyond zealous advocacy,” he states.

SlashdotSlashdot it! Add to Technorati Favorites

Also See:
went after Michelle – RIAA wants $543 from Michelle Santangelo, August 14, 2007
filed counterclaims – RIAA accused of ‘Failure to Warn’, October 15, 2007

29 orphaned kids in Nepal spend all their days and all their nights in a tiny bamboo shack. Got $1 to spare to help them? Click here.

HOME

Leave a Reply

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

    Advertisements
MP3Rocket


Remove Spyware with AntiSpyware for Windows®