Gagging people under ’settlement’ deals
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- There’s a phrase which comes up time and again when one or other element of the corporate entertainment industry is caught blatantly cheating and/or lying and/or fixing.
They ’settle’ but “admit no wrong-doing”.
An example came up in 2004 when Capitol Records, Inc d/b/a EMI Music Distribution, Virgin Records America, Inc, and Priority Records LLC; Time Warner, Inc, Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corp, WEA, Inc, Warner Music Group, Inc, Warner Bros Records, Inc, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Elektra Entertainment Group, Inc, and Rhino Entertainment Company; Universal Music & Video Distribution Corporation, Universal Music Group, Inc, and UMG Recordings, Inc; Bertelsmann Music Group, Inc and BMG Music; and, Sony Music Entertainment Inc [the Big 4, in short] were price fixing and got caught.
After 43 US attorneys general went after them in an antitrust litigation, they “admitted no wrong-doing” but were nonetheless ordered to supply 3,5000,000 music lovers with cash payouts. And as part of their settlement for not having done anything wrong, the (not)guilty parties were also to supply public schools and libraries with free CDs .
“As you’d expect, they dragged their feet for as long as possible before starting the payments and, as you’d expect, they’re now doing their best to weasel out of their obligation by providing crap CDs no one in their right mind would want,” said p2pet at the time.
But there’s also another way they escape.
What of the settlements?
New York lawyer Ray Beckerman runs the famous Recording Industry vs The People blog, an amazing repository with links to most of the important RIAA filesharing cases, together with lawyers who’ve acted for RIAA victims.
Beckerman himself has represented not a few people who found themselves on the wrong end of RIAA subpoenas, one of them being Marie Lindor.
In our post on this case, we included this Beckerman quote »»»
The plaintiffs, who are competitors, are a cartel acting collusively in violation of the antitrust laws and of public policy, by tying their copyrights to each other, collusively litigating and settling all cases together, and by entering into an unlawful agreement among themselves to prosecute and to dispose of all cases in accordance with a uniform agreement, and through common lawyers, thus overreaching the bounds and scope of whatever copyrights they might have. As such, they are guilty of misuse of their copyrights.
Now, “Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy has recommended that the RIAA’s motion for discovery sanctions against the defendant and her counsel in UMG Recordings v. Lindor be denied, and that the RIAA’s motion for the action to be voluntarily dismissed ‘without prejudice’ be granted,” Beckerman blogged.
Under it, “Ray Beckerman says: cartel acting collusively in violation of the antitrust laws and of public policy, by tying their copyrights to each other, collusively litigating and settling all cases together,” says Gene in a Reader’s Write, going on »»»
My question is, “what of the settlements?” Directv made well over 50,000 such settlements and the RIAA has made just as many if not more.
Most of these are confidential and contents cannot be made public.
In time though it will come out just what people were forced to sign. For instance, what if Directv or the RIAA committed some sort of crime and the defendant was made to sign stating they would not report that crime? What if someone is currently under a settlement where the RIAA or Directv made a mistake but the defendant was made to pay anyway?
Of course where a mistake had been made the original court complaint would have been untruthful as only it could being a mistake?
While people have a certain time to appeal, what of those are not permitted appeal because to do so would breech the confidential agreement? What is at stake here is an individuals constitutional right where they were a victim to report a crime. In some cases the right to protect there own property.
“Ten years from now, innocent persons are still bound to a settlement which may continue to deny rights and liberties,” Gene adds.
“I have a web site which targets just one such issue where these suits have not only ignored the defendant but other courts as well — http://theft-by-satellite-company.com/index.html.”
Excellent point, and below are re-runs of two p2pnet posts which further underscore the travesty »»»
RIAA v Greubel: ’settled’ [September 5, 2008]
p2pnet news view | RIAA News:- Elisa Greubel, 15, made headlines when she contacted Nettwerk Music artist MC Lars to say his ‘Download This Song,’ a track on his then latest release, really meant something to her.
“That was because Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG were trying extort a lot of money from her father, David, for supposedly sharing nine copyrighted songs online,” said p2pnet, going on:
“MC Lars passed Elisa’s message to Canada’s Terry McBride, who runs Nettwerk, and he decided, ‘Suing music fans isn’t the solution, it’s the problem,’ as he told p2pnet in a Q&A.
“So he decided to pick up the Greubel’s legal bill.”
The case has been ’settled,’ but it’s all taken place behind closed doors, so to speak.
Back in May Elisa’s father, David, agreed to a Q&A but later, on the advice of his lawyers, Browning and Mudd, changed his mind.
Now, “The settlement document contains no information on the terms,” says Recording Industry vs The People.
That’s a shame. It’s in the interests of anyone and everyone attacked by Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG’s RIAA to be as public as possible, especially where young people are concerned.
“Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG their RIAA have often been compared to the Mafia and, like the Mafia, they go after the weak and helpless, knowing their muscle and their goons will terrorise most people into accepting extortion they believe they can’t refuse,” said p2pnet.
“Pay the RIAA to go away.”
But, we went on, there is a difference, and it’s a substantial one >>>
Mafia hoods don’t go after children.
RIAA hoods do, and not in any collateral sense.
p2pnet continued »»»
Ask RIAA victims who have kids. Children are from the very beginning the designated targets with parents used as stage one in the RIAA softening up process.
And it doesn’t matter how young they are, or that they’re the customers of the future.
Ask Brianna LaHara, Brittany Chan, Kylee Andersen, Michelle and Bobby Santangelo, or any of the other literally thousands of kids who, despite their ages, became RIAA victims in the literal sense of the word.
Sadly, it seems there’s no need to stay tuned for this one.
And »»»
Kazaa class action ‘quietly settled’ [ September 23, 2008]
p2pnet news view | RIAA News:- Kazaa seems to be almost always front and centre in every Big 4 Organized Music cartel sue ‘em all case, p2pnet said or, to be more accurate, repeated, a couple of years ago.
Owned by Australia’s Sharman Networks, Kazaa boasts it’s ‘Fast, safe’.
Fast it may be, but thousands of people who used it in all innocence have found themselves named in an RIAA subpoena, and with threats of court cases they can’t possibly afford hanging over their heads.
Not that even one of the approximately 40,000 men, women, and even children, singled out by the Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG hit outfit the RIAA has ever been successfully sued. For anything.
There are no statistics detailing exactly how many Big 4 victims were identified because they were using Kazaa. But it’s safe to bet the vast bulk would fall into that category, one of them involving Catherine Lewan, a Kazaa user sued by the RIAA.
She was among those who paid extortion money to the RIAA and in a court document, said Sharman, “configured KaZaA such that its intended use would be illegal“.
However, her case “was quietly settled,” and behind closed doors, last fall, says Recording Industry vs The People.
Did Kazaa’s owners dispose of it because they were fearful a court and/or jury would find in Lewan’s favour, not at all incidentally also leaving a staggering number of RIAA claims open to serious doubt, to considerably understate the potential situation?
We’ll never know — unless other Big 4 victims find a lawyer or lawyers this time willing to follow through to the bitter end.
‘Suing music fans isn’t the solution’
Interestingly, Lewan was represented by Charles Lee Mudd, a Chicago lawyer who also acted for the defendant in another case, this time involving the RIAA directly, and with Canada’s Nettwerk Music paying his bill.
“Elisa Greubel, 15, made headlines when she contacted Nettwerk Music artist MC Lars to say his ‘Download This Song,’ a track on his then latest release, really meant something to her,” said a p2pnet post.
That was because Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG were, “trying extort a lot of money from her father, David, for supposedly sharing nine copyrighted songs online,” we said, going on:
“MC Lars passed Elisa’s message to Canada’s Terry McBride, who runs Nettwerk, and he decided, ‘Suing music fans isn’t the solution, it’s the problem,’ as he told p2pnet in a Q&A.
That case, too, was ’settled’ by Mudd.
Secretly.
Stay tuned.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
price fixing and got caught – Big Music price fixing saga, June 27, 2004
Marie Lindor – Judge rejects RIAA sanction demands, October 10, 2009
blogs – Magistrate denies RIAA motion for discovery sanctions in UMG v Lindor, October 9, 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.
