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

Mother of 5 takes on Big Music

p2pnet.net News Special:- Since the Big Four record label cartel started its sue ‘em all marketing campaign, several victims have said they’d stand up to its RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America). So far, none of them has due, primarily, to their lack of financial and, hence, legal resources. But this may change with New York’s Patricia Santangelo.

The Big Four are using their now-standard Pay us or Else tactic, threatening her with civil court unless she can somehow come up with $7,500 to buy them off.

The lawsuits are a PR blitz custom-designed to indelibly mark men, women and children who share music and other files with each other online as vicious, hardened criminals out to deliberately bilk the honest, but beleagured, entertainment industry and its hard-pressed workers.

However, just as music industry claims that there’s a thriving, reasonably priced online business are false, accusations that file sharing is causing terrible financial losses to the industry and awful hardship to its workers are equally disingenuous.

Meanwhile, none of the estimated 13,500 very ordinary Americans pilloried by the labels has been found guilty of anything because not one of them has ever appeared before a judge. As one of the first victims, Lorraine Sullivan told p2pnet.

“If I knew the rest of my life wouldn’t be ruined and that I wouldn’t have this huge financial thing hanging over my head, I’d stand up to them. But I can’t take the risk.”

It’s clearly impossible for an ordinary person with ordinary resources to take on the multi-billion-dollar industry with its bottomless pockets and legions of highly paid lawyers. Not that this stops RIAA spinsters from implying thousands of people have been found ‘guilty’ of the crime of sharing music with each other, an assertion faithfully repeat by the mainstream media as though it comes from credible sources. And the time-honoured maxim Innocent until proven Guilty goes by the board.

But Patricia Santangelo plans to fight and backing her is the New York law firm of Beldock Levine & Hoffman with Ray Beckerman in the front ranks.

Read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet: About how much will cost to mount and maintain Patricia Santangelo’s defense?

Beckerman: We have no idea what the total cost will be in the long run. We do not expect it to be wildly expensive, because (i) we are charging drastically reduced fees (e.g. my personal rate is half my standard rate) and (ii) we expect the case to be dismissed, based upon the motion to dismiss, which has been briefed, submitted, and argued, and is now awaiting decision. If the motion is granted, there will be no pretrial discovery, and no trial.

p2pnet: Where will the money to pay for it come from?

Beckerman: We expect Ms Santangelo’s costs to be picked up by the RIAA, since (a) the copyright statute permits the Court to shift the attorneys fees to the losing party, (b) these cases were clearly frivolous and brought in bad faith, and (c) it is a matter of public interest that the RIAA be deterred from bringing more such meritless cases.

p2pnet: Record label financial, political and legal resources are immense. Will you be able to fight to the end matched against this kind of weight?

Beckerman: We will fight to the end. Anyone who knows me knows that I don’t take on something unless I am prepared to fight to the end. Also, anyone who knows me knows that the one thing I can’t stand is a bully. The RIAA will give up long before we do, because sooner or later it will dawn upon them that their attorneys are taking them for a ride.

p2pnet: You say on your site, “we and our firm have undertaken to represent people in our area who have been sued by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)”. Are you representing anyone other than Patricia Santangelo?

Beckerman: Yes we have other people we have represented, however only one other matter is actually in litigation. We just entered that case a week ago, and have nothing yet to report.

p2pnet: If there are other people near you who want to be represented, will there a limit to their numbers?

Beckerman: As far as I am concerned there should be no limit to how many people we can represent. If we have too many cases we can hire more lawyers.

p2pnet: Could you summarize your defense platform?

Beckerman: There is no such thing as a “defense platform”, the way I practice law. Although I am fully aware that there are important societal issues at stake, I am an old fashioned “country lawyer” (regardless of the fact that my office is in the most cosmopolitan of places, Manhattan). I represent people. And I represent them one person at a time. So I cannot represent people on a cookie cutter basis. My style of practice is to make my client a partner in decision making. In each case I do what is in the best interests of that particular client, and what that particular client wants me to do (with certain exceptions, such as professional courtesies, which is something a lawyer has to take responsibility for on his own). I can say that in Elektra v Santangelo, the basis for our motion to dismiss complaint was that the complaint failed to allege any specific acts of infringement. In response plaintiff disagreed, arguing that its vague complaint did satisfy the pleading standards, since it alleged that a Kazaa account attached to Ms. Santangelo’s IP address had a “shared files folder”. Our reply papers reminded the Court that that alone would not make out a claim for copyright infringement, and that the Courts have consistently required specific acts of copying, and the dates and times of those acts. A fully set of the motion papers is now online. In the unlikely event that our motion is not granted, there are numerous other issues that would come into play later on in the case.

p2pnet: On a scale of one to 10, where do you place your chances of winning?

Beckerman: I think our chances of winning the Santangelo case are a 10. Our motion was based on black letter law. The plaintiff’s ‘opposition’ papers were weak, digressive, and nonsensical. I believe they will be laughed out of court.

p2pnet: Have you yet heard from the RIAA? If so, from whom and what did they say?

Beckerman: The only people I speak to, or can speak to, are their attorneys. All the attorneys I have spoken to are junior attorneys, who are doing what they are told, and who have not exercised and are not authorized to exercise any decision-making authority. It will be an interesting conversation when and if I get to talk to whoever has managed to convince the gullible people in charge of the RIAA that their terrorism is helping them.

p2pnet: Would you be prepared to collaborate with other lawyers/law firms in the US to help other people in the same situation as Patricia Santangelo?

Beckerman: Absolutely. I am thrilled to help the other lawyers and I know they’ll help me as well. That is why I have made the litigation documents available online. So that any attorney who is representing victims of the RIAA onslaught will have the benefit of knowing what we did, and what the RIAA’s lame arguments are.

p2pnet: The record label cartel is using its IFPI, BPI, and so on, to attack people in other parts of the world. Would you share any knowledge you may acquire through this case with law firms/victims outside of the US?

Beckerman: I don’t know who those organizations are, that you mentioned, but my documents are available online, so they are more than welcome to use them.

p2pnet: You’re a lawyer defending a client, but do you have any personal feelings about file sharing and file sharers?

Beckerman: Personally, from what little I know of it, I don’t think mere file sharing is a copyright violation. If someone can share a copyrighted cd without violating the copyright laws, why couldn’t they share a digital song without violating the copyright laws? But of course, you asked for a personal opinion, and this is my personal opinion. In the current climate, I certainly couldn’t advise someone legally whether it is or isn’t a copyright violation, the law is unsettled, and the RIAA is on the warpath. So until the issue has been played out in the courts, we won’t know the answer to that one.

If there’s something you think we should know, contact us – tips[at]p2pnet.net

See:-
Patricia SantangeloNew York mom battles Big Music, August 15, 2005
Pay us or ElseFile sharing, p2p criminals, March 12, 2005
backing herRIAA victim defense blog, August 27, 2005

If there’s something you think we should know, contact us – tips[at]p2pnet.net

HOME

One Response to “Mother of 5 takes on Big Music”

  1. Reader's Write Says:

    OK, so here’s a question…

    How long, after the RIAA nabs an IP address as someone to go after, will they subpoena an ISP for the information? The only info I’ve seen comes from stories like this where the “John Doe” lawsuit seems to be filed roughly half a year after the fact.

    With that being the case, why not simply change ISP’s frequently, and contact your former ISP to make sure they delete all logs of which IP addresses you had at the time?

    This should foil any attempts at discovery, should it not?

  2. Reader's Write Says:

    lol, i wouldn’t know, and I dont know how reasonable that would be… but that might work XD…

    I also wonder that if it takes them that long to do… then what if someone has lost their computer/sold since then… wouldn’t that mean the evidence against that person has also been lost?

    Here’s another situation: A family is accused of illegal file sharring, but 3 months after everything they own was destroyed in a house fire! No computer or data left, and the family is already in major financial problems… I’d greatly wonder what the RIAA would do then… lol If they still pressed charges, they’d gain greatly bad publicity…

  3. Reader's Write Says:

    Yeah, it would be interesting to know. If the ISP in question simply doesn’t know who had the IP address, that would pretty much do it for the lawsuit. And if the suing organization tried to go after whoever has the IP address now, they’d be in for embarrassment and possibly a counter-suit.

    As for simply having a lost or destroyed computer, that I’m not so sure of. If the IP address can be traced back to you, then I’d think the lawsuit could go forward.

    It would be interesting to see if a rash of file sharers rotating ISPs would shut down RIAA attempts to nail people, given the fact that it must take SOME time to file a John Doe lawsuit and issue a subpoena to get the info.

  4. Reader's Write Says:

    Well, they already sued a dead grandmother…

  5. Reader's Write Says:

    I believe ISP’s are required by law to keep IP logs for some period of time so that local/state/national law enforcement agencies can use them to track any number of illegal activities…with proper search warrants. Of course, the Patriot Act allows anti-terror organizations access to this information at will, without a warrant, without your knowledge, and makes it a crime for the ISP to inform you that access was given.

  6. Reader's Write Says:

    Hmmm…from what I’ve read, the prior efforts of the **AA were found illegal (the part where they used the DMCA to obtain info on users from ISPs without notification of the end user). So what they’re doing now is filing “John Doe” lawsuits, subpoenaing the information from ISPs in a more traditional way.

    As for ISPs, many (such as Comcast) delete their logs after a time when a customer leaves. Not sure if that includes who had what IP address, but if it does, their privacy statement says they get rid of the information after they no longer need it for billing purposes and if there is no pending legal need for the info that they’re aware of. I don’t know of any law that requires them to keep such info indefinitely. Do you?

    In other words, if you leave the ISP and they delete the logs before the subpoena arrives, then the **AA is SOL, it would seem.

    At least, that’s my theory. Still trying to get more info.

  7. Reader's Write Says:

    …and a month later they start lobying for a law that makes ISP shifting illegal…
    running & hiding from them is not a good strategy – it postpones the lawsuit for later when someone like FBI starts collecting IP & RW adresses, only full-on assoult in court can win this war…

    …yeah and I know it’s easy for me to speak, since I’m not the one sued…

  8. Reader's Write Says:

    OK, well, I’d love to know how that one would work :) I think you’d have a tough time passing a law that forced ISPs to keep all information indefinitely, considering the outcry that certain ISPs have already gotten over keeping such information, and the ongoing and increasing problems with private data theft. Mandating that consumer privacy be endangered just in case a couple of organizations want to sue the consumers wouldn’t go over very well.

    Changing ISPs to avoid being found would probably be illegal already. The trick would still be finding the person who changed ISPs. If the records aren’t there, then nothing can be done.

  9. Reader's Write Says:

    could you list some of the free anonymous proxy servers… at least the better ones?

    Thanks

    TV

  10. Reader's Write Says:

    The above link is dead. The story is on slashdot today too.

    http://riaalawsuits.us/elektra_santangelo/ has the court documents.
    http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/17924 also covers the story.

    BTW, there are several more holes in the RIAA cases, but
    probably they’ll be exploited as needed on an individual basis.

  11. Reader's Write Says:

    More info also at http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

Leave a Reply

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

    Advertisements
MP3Rocket


Remove Spyware with AntiSpyware for Windows®