RIAA bid for $513 from Michelle Santangelo fails
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA has inadvertently given Michelle Santangelo a Valentine’s Day present.
“I find it interesting that you choose to vilify Mr Gabriel for the amount he earns. $375 is by no means an unusual rate for a senior, or even mid-level, attorney and many are paid far more than that, particularly those who work within the entertainment industries. Lawyers are paid for their expertise and for using their knowledge to represent their clients to the very best of their abilities. It’s as simple as that.”
That was a comment post to our story observing that Holme Robert & Owen, “the RIAA’s current legal gun-slingers,” were trying to weasel $513 out of her and her brother, Bobby, for “processing the paperwork”.
“Richard Gabriel is a primary RIAA out-sourced attack lawyer,” the p2pnet story went on.
“He’s front and centre in more than just a few of the cases and the proceeds from a good week’s work for him would be enough to settle claims lodged against one or two of his victims.”
But magistrate judge Mark. D. Fox hasn’t give in to the RIAA demand, says Recording Industry vs The People.
“Plaintiffs’ fee application is denied without prejudice to renew based upon sufficient documentation – either the contemporaneous time records upon which the chart was based or, if that is not possible, a partner from Plaintiffs’ counsel’s firm must submit an affidavit describing the firm’s record-keeping and billing procedures sufficient to make the required showing,” he ruled.
Until recently, Michelle had a $30,750 judgement against her as the alleged illegal distributor of 41 copywriting songs, with an additional order of $490.00 for costs.
But last summer, federal district court judge Stephen C. Robinson ordered the judgment against to be vacated which, to all intents and purposes, meant it’d been dropped, allowing Michelle to go back to square one, pleading her case as if the ruling had never been made.
Equally important, it had also given her a negative credit record, which would have followed her through life.
But as her attorney, Jordan Glass, noted, “the RIAA may still demand lawyer fees for having lodged the judgment in the first place”.
Clearly, he wasn’t wrong.
Meanwhile, the demand for $513 was dismissed without prejudice, meaning the door is still open for the RIAA representatives to try again.
If Gabriel & Co re-submit, will they add the costs of the repeat to the $513?
Does Howdy Doody have wooden eyeballs?
Michelle’s mother, Patti, was one of the first of the RIAA victims to stand up to the Big 4 and their RIAA.
“Patti Santangelo, the lone New York mother who decided she wasn’t going to be terrorized by the multi-billion-dollar Big 4 Organized Music cartel’s RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), has won her battle,” p2pnet posted in 2006, going on:
“But her victory is bitter because it still leaves two of her children, Michelle and Bobby, directly in the line of fire from Warner Music (US), EMI (Britain), Vivendi Universal (France) and Sony BMG (Japan and Germany).”
In the first (and finest) effort of its kind, p2pnet readers helped her to win, raising more than $15,000 towards her defence
Stay tuned.
Also See:
weasel $513 – RIAA legal fees revealed, July 19th, 2007
Recording Industry vs The People – Magistrate denies RIAA motion for $513 in attorneys fees, without prejudice, for failure to properly itemize, in Elektra v. Santangelo II, February 14, 2007
back to square one – Michelle Santangelo vs the RIAA, July 16, 2007
victory is bitter – RIAA drops Santangelo p2p case, December 19, 2006
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.phpNet access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
