Will the RIAA go after Mavis Roy’s kids?
p2pnet news view | RIAA News:- Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music are in deep trouble.
The honest, hard-working multi-billion-dollar corporate music labels say they’re slowly but surely being stripped clean by hard-core file sharers, with students as the main focus — for the moment.
When someone shares a digital music files someone else, claim the Big 4, a sale is lost and things have become so bad that, “During the past several years, thousands of regular working class folks in the music community have lost their jobs,” RIAA spinster Cara Duckworth recently told the San Francisco Chronicle.
The RIAA says it’s all-but abandoned the bitter and twisted sue ‘em all campaign it launched against Big 4 customers on behalf of the Big 4.
But as is the case with any RIAA statement, it isn’t worth a damn and innocent people are still being pursued by RIAA thugs dressed up as lawyers.
Ask Mavis Roy who, says Nate Anderson in Ars Technica, “was baffled when the music labels accused her of sharing songs like ‘Real Niggaz,’ ‘Jigga My Nigga,’ and ‘Da Rockwilder’ using BearShare. Unable to afford a lawyer, Roy was confused by the legal documents she received.
” ‘I thought it was a scam and I was being pressured to send them money for something I have never done,’ she eventually wrote the court in a letter.”
It is a scam, but not the kind Mavis thought.
‘… massive illegal distributor of copyright music …’
Vivendi Universal (France), Sony BMG (Japan and Germany), EMI (Britain), and Warner Music (US) are abusing legal and law enforcement systems around the world to con people into believing Mavis Roy and others like her are hard-core criminals and thieves.
And in a reality never mentioned in the mainstream media, tax-payers, not the Big 4, are funding the campaigns.
In a case slated to begin this fall, student attorneys at the Consumer and Commercial Law Clinic of the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, are acting on behalf Mavis, accused of being a “massive illegal distributor of copyright music”.
She was served with papers but didn’t responded, which meant she automatically fell into default. As a consequence, all that remained was a hearing to decide how much she supposedly owed in the way of ‘damages’.
“She personally wrote the court a letter, explaining that she had not understood the notices, thought they were some kind of scam, and could not afford a lawyer to look into them,” says Ars Technica, quoting her letter as stating »»»
I have never downloaded nor do I even know where to go to download. I feel they should have to show me something that proves this was done by me.
The labels, “eventually moved to skip the damages hearing altogether (since Roy had not yet shown up in court) and have the judge make a decision without a hearing, but Roy did file an objection of her own in plain language,” says the story.
“In four sentences, she objects to the cancellation, says that she didn’t download any music, and ‘will appear in court. I know they [the labels] do not have proof of anything and that is why they are trying to push it through without a hearing.’At the bottom of the page, the ‘certificate of service’ showing that a copy of the note was sent to the record labels’ attorney, is handwritten.”
In Ars Technica, Nate goes on »»»
In a document filed last September, Roy describes every person in her household who might have “discoverable information” relevant to her defense. From that document, we learn that the home did possess a Dell computer of some kind, but that Roy’s husband did not know how to use it. Roy herself used it but “did not use it to download or upload any music files.”
Roy does have two children living at home, one 22 and one 19. While these might seem like far more likely targets of the lawsuit, Roy claims that neither child used the family computer (which is apparently quite old) in the last four years, and that neither has a computer of their own.
Roy’s home computer actually became nonfunctional in the spring of 2007 and was removed from her home by her brother, who took it to his house to fix it. He found a machine infected with “one or more viruses” and then replaced the hard drive, recycling the original.
That last item is key, since the hard drive in the computer at the time of alleged infringement no longer exists. Forensic analysis of the drive might therefore not yield much useful information, and could make the case harder to prosecute.
A ‘black-hearted bully organisation’
With the addition of the Concord case, the tide is still turning, p2pnet said recently, continuing »»»
The RIAA has lost all credibility as a trade organisation genuinely looking after the interests of its so-called members …
Instead, it`s revealed as a black-hearted bully organisation whose primary role is to victimise innocent people across America whom it calls criminals and thieves â people such as »»»
- Ciara Sauro, a 19-year-old transplant patient
- Marie Lindor, a New York health aide who doesn`t know one end of a computer from the other
- Rae-Jay Schwartz (above right), wheelchair-bound by multiple sclerosis, the terrible medical condition which attacks the central nervous system
- Tanya Andersen, a disabled Oregon mother
- Larry Scantlebury, a helicopter pilot who flew for America in Vietnam and who died when an aneurysm in his brain ruptured shortly after he was attacked by the RIAA.
Thousands of other equally innocent people have since 2003 been singled out in Big 4 subpoenas so they could be tried in public by innuendo.
But in all that time, not one person has been found guilty in a court of law of any of the claims levelled by the RIAA .
The Big 4 haven’t gone after Mavis’ children.
Yet.
But an important aspect of many, if not most, cases is for the RIAA to first attack the parent or parents and make their lives as miserable as possible, at the same time sensitising other family members.
Then, once the mothers and fathers have been publicly humiliated in the media, drop the case and go after their true victims.
The children.
Will the RIAA remain true to form and soon turn on Mavis’ children?
Stay tuned.
Jon Newton – p2pnet
March, 2009
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.
March 17th, 2009 at 11:15 am
“Rae-Jay Schwartz (above right), wheelchair-bound by multiple sclerosis…”
Just a question…
Which one of those birds uses the wheelchair?
: )
(I know, I know… it was quote from another article. Put those flamethrowers away.)
8 O
March 17th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
the abandonment of the lawsuits has more to do with “we have sued all the suckers and prolly wont win versus people with balls”
March 17th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
‘and your little dog too !’
March 18th, 2009 at 3:16 am
Carefull RIAA! My kids have guns and my pet is a tiger.
Any RIAA lawers want to negotiate?
March 18th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
The title of this could have been “Will a cockroach scuttle out from a crack, gobble up whatever it finds and shit all over everything”?