p2p news / p2pnet:- Big Music is already feeling the heat generated by Patricia Santangelo as she takes on the Big Four record labels.

The mainstream media are conspicuous by their absence, failing to report on what’s possibly the most important development since EMI, Sony BMG, UMG and WMG first began suing their customers in a bid to force them to buy ‘product’.

The 42-year-old New York mother has refused the Big Four’s ’settlement’ offer under which it demanded $7,500 to stop harrasing her. Following her refusal to cave in, for the first time, the labels will now have to defend themselves an open court. But there’s been little or nothing about this on- or offline.

However, that the cartel is starting to worry is evidenced by its letter to US District Judge Colleen McMahon, who’s already told the cartel’s lawyers in reference to the Pay Us Or Else intimidation tactic that she’d, “love to see a mom fighting one of these”.

“In an unusual move, the RIAA’s lawyers have asked the Judge for permission to have a second oral argument of the motion, and to submit an unusual surreply to the defendant’s reply papers,” says Santangelo’s lawyers on their Recording Industry vs The People blog.

“A copy of the letter making the request was sent to Ty Rogers … even though Mr Rogers was on vacation until September 6th.”

‘Defending the seemingly indefensible’
Meanwhile, several times, while we’ve been reporting on the Big Four record labels’ Goebbelesque misinformation and disinformation sue ‘em all marketing and PR campaign, we’ve compared them to Big Tobacco, one of the several similarities being that both groups considering lying to be a normal, and eminently acceptable, form of communication.

But here’s something that almost passed us by.

EMI, UMG, WMG and Sony BMG have instructed their RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) to hire Shook Hardy & Bacon, the law firm famous for fighting off Big Tobacco’s tobacco victims and other plaintiffs, “sometimes hundreds at a time”.

On the strength of its new commission, the company has, “added lawyers and hired a subcontractor to operate a phone bank,” says the Kansas City Business Journal.

S, H & B became the most successful defender of tobacco (and other products) on the planet, said the Kansas City Star in 1996.

“They had become so by creating legends, marching into court like gunslingers and defending the seemingly indefensible. They beat back grieving families who blamed their sorrow on cigarettes or other dangerous products. They never blinked, never panicked, and always walked away unhurt.”

In other words, they’re just what the Big Four record label cartel, whose entire position is built on fabrication, needs.

================

Revised @ 4:56 pm, Pacific, September 8 (Thanks, Ian ; )

Speaking of Judge McMahon’s comments, here they are in full, prefaced by interesting and apt observations from Mike Godwin on his blog.

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

Runaround Suits
By Mike Godwin (mnemonic) - Godwin’s Law

I’ve always said that the Recording Industry Association of America and its member companies are perfectly within their rights to sue those they think are infringing on music copyrights through peer-to-peer file-trading of songs. At the same time, it seems obvious that the RIAA should pick the lawsuits prudently, based on solid evidence, so that when the cases are publicized it will be clear that the defendants deserved what they got.

That doesn’t seem to be what’s happening, however. Instead, the RIAA notifies potential defendants that they are subject to a lawsuit that may result in hundreds of thousands of dollars of liability, and then gives them the option of settling the claim for only a few thousand dollars. It ought to be needless to say this, but sometimes an innocent defendant might still opt to take the settlement, because the risk of going to court and losing is so great.

Occasionally, however, you find a defendant who is troubled enough that he or she is willing to stand up to RIAA regardless of the risk. That seems to be the case with Patricia Santangelo. I urge you to read the transcript of Ms. Santangelo’s court appearance here. It is fun to read, and it has made me an instant admirer of Judge McMahon, who refused to be a mere conduit steering Ms. Santangelo to the RIAA’s “conference center” (which should properly be called a “surrender center”):

MR. MASCHIO: No, all I was suggesting, your Honor, is that, if she doesn’t come with an attorney, that the more direct way of doing this — and this is just to facilitate things — is to deal directly with the conference center.

THE COURT: Not once you’ve filed an action in my court.

MR. MASCHIO: Okay.

THE COURT: You file an action in my court, your conference center is out of it. They have nothing to do with anything.

MR. MASCHIO: Okay. I’ll give her my card.

THE COURT: If you are here, you are here as an officer of the court. You’re taking up my time and cluttering up my calendar, so you will do it in the context of the Court. Maybe it will be with a magistrate judge, but you will be representing your client, not some conference center. And if your people want things to be done through the conference center, tell them not to bring lawsuits.

Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net

See:-
feeling the heat - Mother of 5 takes on Big Music, August 28, 2005

conspicuous by their absence - Santangelo story sweeps the Net, September 6, 2005
Kansas City Business Journal - Music to their ears: Shook Hardy prepares to prosecute piracy cases, July 22, 2005Kansas City Star - Lorillard tobacco company counts on Shook, Hardy & Bacon in cancer death lawsuit, October 11, 1996

==============

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win
- Mohandas Gandhi

This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 7th, 2005 at 10:34 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

HOME

Viewed 4857 times