p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA puts a price on Tanya Andersen’s suffering
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- “Are RIAA victims who beat the Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG copyright cop entitled to legal fees?” - p2pnet asked earlier today, going on, “that’s what a San Antonio man wants to know.”
A little later, “Debbie Foster and Tanya Andersen can tell you all about trying to get money you’re owed out of the RIAA,” we said, adding, “Exactly how much she’s [Tanya] owed has yet to be decided, and even then she’ll have to get it out of the Big 4 enforcer.”
But now we know.
If Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA have their way, the amount awarded will be derisory —- the equivalent of nickels and and dimes.
And she’ll have to fight tooth and nail even for that.
In another post, “I find it interesting that you choose to vilify Mr Gabriel for the amount he earns,” said a p2pnet Reader’s Write.
“$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.”
It was in response to a story observing Holme Robert & Owen, the RIAA’s current legal gun-slingers, were, “trying to weasel $513” out of RIAA victim Michelle Santangelo and her brother, Bobby, for “processing” paperwork.
We went on that Gabriel (right) is a primary RIAA out-sourced attack lawyer, saying 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”.
Andersen is represented Lory Lybeck, and Gabriel and colleague William R. Patton are acting for the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) in a bid to make sure Lybeck, who’s exemplary work has left Gabiriel, et al, choking in the dust, doesn’t, in effect, get paid.
Lybeck is, says Gabriel in an official document, “asking the court apply a multiplier of two, citing, in a conclusory manner, substantial risks of pursuing this case, the significant time, money and resources” spent by her attorneys, “and the novelty and complexity of the issues in this case” as grounds for her request.
Put another way, Andersen is asking for about $300,000, says Recording Industry vs The People.
But she should be awarded a paltry $30,099, maintains Gabriel.
Oh, and 20 cents.
That works out to $10,000 a year for the suffering not only Tanya, but also her daughter Kylee, now 11, have had to endure at the RIAA’s hands.
Among many other infamies, the RIAA even tried to directly contact Kylee.
In February 2007, a paralegal from the law firm retained by the RIAA and the labels called Andersen’s apartment looking for Kylee, and in April 2007, fake phone calls were also made to Kylee’s former elementary school.
The woman on the phone was pretending to be Kylee’s grandma, “inquiring as to her attendance,” say Lybeck and Andersen.
Even $300,000 is a mockery. It should be far more than that.
Judge Donald C. Ashmanskas ruled, “defendant incurred substantial fees before the claims against her were dismissed, including those incurred to file her motion for summary judgment and to respond to a motion to dismiss her counterclaims with prejudice”.
Meanwhile, “As with so many of the cases launched by the RIAA against the Big 4’s own customers, of whom Andersen was one, the RIAA has been prevaricating, stalling, stone-walling,” p2pnet said in another post, adding:
“But that’s done.”
For years Lybeck and Andersen have together been fighting the RIAA, eventually bringing it to a dead halt and now she and Lybeck are now about to finally conduct discovery.
Andersen is, “very anxious to finally be able to conduct discovery after her case was delayed nearly a year,” Lybeck told p2pnet . “The discovery will disclose the serious harm that the RIAA has inflicted on the American public and the courts for the last five years as a result of their flawed and illegal sham litigation enterprise.”
Definitely stay tuned.
Jon Newton - p2pnet
Also See:
messing with customers - Comcast paid seat hogs in FCC hearing, February 27, 2008
p2pnet - Bell Sympatico P2P Black List, November 3, 2007
supposed to follow - Bell-Sympatico P2P throttling: more, March 25, 2008
incurred substantial fees - New win for Tanya Andersen against RIAA, January 17, 2008
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.
March 26th, 2008 at 4:57 am
“$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.”
Really?
Lwyers are paid or charge exorbitant fees for work done and for ficticious work (research is a favorite gimmick) simply because they operate as a pice fixing monoply. That is what the so called BAR association are mainly for.
The other purpose of the BAR to have a place where the cozy get togethers can eventually facilitate case fixing among brotherhood lawyers, say at the BARs liquor bar. Of course, clients know nothing of this.
BAR, by the way should stand for BROTHERHOOD OF ATTORNEY ROBBERS.
March 27th, 2008 at 6:37 am
The person above forgets that in that price are included the wages of the people working for this advocate. Also forgets that this includes the multiplier (540 hours at $375 is 200k). And doesn’t know anything about the (very) elaborate computer programs build to prevent what he’s accusing advocates of (fraud).