p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA mass lawsuits ‘improper’
p2p news / p2pnet: Ray Beckerman, the New York lawyer whose work is increasingly centres on defending RIAA victims, believes Organized Music has been seriously overstepping the mark with its mass anti-p2p file sharing subpoenas.
RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) owners Sony BMG, Vivendi Universal, Warner Music and EMI, have milked priceless PR by launching huge job lots of subpoenas against people they want lined up for inclusion in their sue ‘em all sales and marketing campaign.
RIAA sues 754 makes a better mainstream media headline than RIAA subpoenas 1.
But, “According to the 2004 decisions and orders of Judge Newcomer, in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, it is improper for the RIAA to continue to bring single cases against a large number of John Does,” says Beckerman on Recording Industry vs The People.
Among other things, “The claims against the different Defendants will require separate trials as they may involve separate witnesses, different evidence, and different legal theories and defenses, which could lead to confusion of the jury,” says Newcomer.
Beckerman points up the RIAA practice of “starting off its torrents of litigation with massive, secret suits against John Doe defendants who do not know they’ve even been sued. Invariably these cases name dozens, scores, or even hundreds of different ‘John Does’ in a single lawsuit.
He goes on:
“I recently came across the decisions from Judge Newcomer in the Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania, who explained in very clear terms why the law does not permit the joinder of the multiple John Does.
“Judge Newcomer pointed out that none of the normal indicia for joinder are present:
1. There is nothing in the complaint indicating that the claims result from the same incident or incidents;
2. The claims against the defendants would all require different trials, since there would be different evidence, different theories, different defenses, etc.
3. There will almost separately be different issues of fact;
4. There is no indication that plaintiff’s alleged injuries arose from the same transactions or occurrences.
“In BMG v. Does, the case he was deciding, which was against 204 defendants, the judge required the RIAA to file 203 new lawsuits.
“Since these decisions are from 2004, and since judicial precedents are usually followed by lawyers, it is a bit difficult for me to understand why the RIAA has been proceeding as though Judge Newcomer’s decisions do not exist.”
Download Newcomer’s first Order Denying Joinder here or the second, here. If you have trouble, go here for the first, or here for the second.
Also read:-
RIAA victims - The ‘We’re Not Taking Any More’ club, September 17, 2005
Recording Industry vs The People - Under Decisions by Judge Newcomer, RIAA is Improperly Joining “John Does”, November 21, 2005
November 21st, 2005 at 6:19 pm
Their trying to sue hundreds & thousands of people at the same time has to be one of the most idiotic wastes of court time ever seen. Tort reform is needed against corporate lawsuits, not individual lawsuits. Of course, the press trots out suits by people to “expose” frivolous suing & ignores the more prevalent corporate versions.
November 21st, 2005 at 6:34 pm
If the Republicratic faction were to have its way, individuals would not be able to sue corporations, but the corporations would still be able to sue anybody at will, also the corporations would be legally allowed to do ANYTHING they want. If the Demican faction has its way, all rights would be converted to privileges which would be given and denied at the whim of even the lowest of officails. Either faction would continue to export jobs, money, and power to other despotic governments. This is the reason why we need a change in government. Let’s kick the Democratic-Republican PARTY out!!!!!
November 21st, 2005 at 7:42 pm
“Since these decisions are from 2004, and since judicial precedents are usually followed by lawyers, it is a bit difficult for me to understand why the RIAA has been proceeding as though Judge Newcomer’s decisions do not exist.”
Simple. they don’t believe the law applies to them. they are above the law.
November 21st, 2005 at 7:47 pm
The judge who made this ruling probably know that he is under the scruteny of website and blogs like this one. People are beginning to get fed up with overbearing judges, and many judges are afraid that their deads will be brought to public light.
November 21st, 2005 at 7:50 pm
“Since these decisions are from 2004, and since judicial precedents are usually followed by lawyers, it is a bit difficult for me to understand why the RIAA has been proceeding as though Judge Newcomer’s decisions do not exist.”
Here is the explanation: Judges do as they see fit.
My family had two lawsuits against two different publishers. The facts of the cases were altogether different. None of Judge Newcomer’s criteria for joining cases were present. The lawyer of one publisher lied and said the two cases were identical, when in fact they were altogether different. The judge joined the cases.
Details here (search for “joinder”):
http://rafa_venegas.web.prdigital.com/fuste-opinon-analysis.htm
Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com
November 22nd, 2005 at 2:37 am
YES!!!!! The more the people defend themselves in the courts, the less they will be pushed around and persecuted.
LET MY PEOPLE GO!!!
November 22nd, 2005 at 7:09 am
The RIAA should be made to pay court costs for clogging up the states time.
November 22nd, 2005 at 3:21 pm
That is the first sensible political statement I have read on the internet and you have both parties pegged.
November 22nd, 2005 at 11:53 pm
A Spanish cout in the Alicante provinve has just foud two peddler of pirated cds and dvds guilty. Thre peddlers were arrested in possesion of 1,000 cds and dvds. A fine of 360 euros (about $500) was given to the sellers. No jail term is mentioned. Although 7,500 in eros were requested as damages, no damages were awarded to the Spanish RIAA/MPAA equivalent combo, because, as the judge stated, the economic theory that the sale of pirated disks reduced the actual sales of the original cds and dvds is not valid. The court decided, says the story, that the sales of legal records is not reduced by pirate records.
Iam pointing out this story to contrast the soft approach in Spain to selling copied disks to the absurd thinking of RIAA/MPAA/Bush Administration for personal not-for-profit copying and sharing.
BTW, not-for-profit copying and sharing is legal in Spain.
Read here (spanish)
http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=21778
Rafael Venegas
htp://www.gvenegas.com