Comments on: RIAA schoolgirl victim hearing http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546 p2pnet.net - reader powered Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:11:09 -0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-30019 Reader's Write Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:06:56 +0000 #comment-30019 There is a good reason most politicians started out as lawyers. There is a good reason most politicians started out as lawyers.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29800 Reader's Write Wed, 11 Jan 2006 17:16:48 +0000 #comment-29800 In a sense, the facts are very similar. Psychologically, the motivations are the same: Fear and greed. In one case, people were gassed by the Nazis as ordered by feared higher ups. In the current case kids are sued as ordered by by the lawyer's paying customer, for copying songs. The motivation is greed. With Jews, the Nazis started by requiring that Jews wear a Star of David and move to a restricted area. That was step one, an attack on freedom. Then cane step 2, the extermination. RIAA, their lawyers and the participating judges are working on step 1, the extortion, intimidation and economic destruction for the sick purpose of giving a lesson to instill fear of copying in the population. Tomorrow, on step 2, kids and ordinary people will be jailed for the same reason. Lawyers and lawyer-judges should have the moral guts to quit thier job prior to any participation in lawsuits against a kids or anyone that is charged for such a banal activity as copying songs to a hard disk or a cassette, for the purpose of attacking freedom. If they don't these lawyers and judges should and may some day have their own Nuremberg. George Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Rafael Venegas http://www.gvenegas.com In a sense, the facts are very similar.
Psychologically, the motivations are the same: Fear and greed.

In one case, people were gassed by the Nazis as ordered by feared higher ups. In the current case kids are sued as ordered by by the lawyer’s paying customer, for copying songs. The motivation is greed.

With Jews, the Nazis started by requiring that Jews wear a Star of David and move to a restricted area. That was step one, an attack on freedom. Then cane step 2, the extermination.

RIAA, their lawyers and the participating judges are working on step 1, the extortion, intimidation and economic destruction for the sick purpose of giving a lesson to instill fear of copying in the population. Tomorrow, on step 2, kids and ordinary people will be jailed for the same reason.

Lawyers and lawyer-judges should have the moral guts to quit thier job prior to any participation in lawsuits against a kids or anyone that is charged for such a banal activity as copying songs to a hard disk or a cassette, for the purpose of attacking freedom. If they don’t these lawyers and judges should and may some day have their own Nuremberg.

George Santayana:
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29772 Reader's Write Wed, 11 Jan 2006 00:24:51 +0000 #comment-29772 "Is there any difference between the war crimes and what is going on here?" Um... yeah. A huge difference. The claims of the RIAA lawyers are the same, but there's a HUGE difference between the war crimes and the RIAA lawsuits. “Is there any difference between the war crimes and what is going on here?”

Um… yeah. A huge difference. The claims of the RIAA lawyers are the same, but there’s a HUGE difference between the war crimes and the RIAA lawsuits.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29752 Reader's Write Tue, 10 Jan 2006 22:14:02 +0000 #comment-29752 "This idioticy of sueing children shows that the RIAA has no shame, no level too low to stoop." After World War II the war criminal's defense was that they were following orders. Is there any difference between the war crimes and what is going on here? After this morally bankrupt lawsuit debacle is over will tha RIAA lawyers say they were following orders of their paying customers? Will the judges say they were following orders of the law so as to continue in their employment and salary? They should all remember: Many of the crimes comitted during Worl War II were legal and required by the law of survival. The criminals either followed oiders or were executed. Lawyers are supposed to work following a code of ethics. Strangely these ethics codes do not talk about morals, but ethics cannot exists outside a framework of morals. What an incredible loophole! Remeber Nuremberg. Rafael Venegas http://www.gvenegas.com “This idioticy of sueing children shows that the RIAA has no shame, no level too low to stoop.”

After World War II the war criminal’s defense was that they were following orders.

Is there any difference between the war crimes and what is going on here?

After this morally bankrupt lawsuit debacle is over will tha RIAA lawyers say they were following orders of their paying customers?

Will the judges say they were following orders of the law so as to continue in their employment and salary?

They should all remember:

Many of the crimes comitted during Worl War II were legal and required by the law of survival. The criminals either followed oiders or were executed.

Lawyers are supposed to work following a code of ethics. Strangely these ethics codes do not talk about morals, but ethics cannot exists outside a framework of morals. What an incredible loophole!

Remeber Nuremberg.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29454 Reader's Write Tue, 10 Jan 2006 02:39:25 +0000 #comment-29454 It has always been known that the sue em all campaign was a losing battle from the start. Everyone knows that but the RIAA. The RIAA has no ability to have a conscience anymore than the members it represents. Nor do they have the abilities it appears to tell what is right from what is wrong. Blatently, taking the child from the parent, just for the purpose to sue is wrong in this sense. The RIAA is digging itself a hole in the ground for the music cartels burial. This business of sueing a child can bring nothing to the cartels but trouble. As is mentioned in the article the RIAA can have no hope of recovery of any sort of fees. Even if everything went according to the RIAA's wishes and the victim were found totally guilty, there would be no hope of advantage here other than the publicity. That's publicity that anyone else in their right mind wouldn't want. As far as getting any sort of judgement for this, in my mind the RIAA should have to show where it was financially damaged and to what extent. Statutory penalitys are for those selling stuff and no where do I see this accusation being made. Therefore, exactly to what extent was the cartels damaged? This idioticy of sueing children shows that the RIAA has no shame, no level too low to stoop. You should remember this, everytime you see the member products offered for sale in your town, on line, or on tv. Refuse to finance financial terrorism, for surely that is exactly what this is. It has always been known that the sue em all campaign was a losing battle from the start. Everyone knows that but the RIAA. The RIAA has no ability to have a conscience anymore than the members it represents. Nor do they have the abilities it appears to tell what is right from what is wrong. Blatently, taking the child from the parent, just for the purpose to sue is wrong in this sense. The RIAA is digging itself a hole in the ground for the music cartels burial. This business of sueing a child can bring nothing to the cartels but trouble.

As is mentioned in the article the RIAA can have no hope of recovery of any sort of fees. Even if everything went according to the RIAA’s wishes and the victim were found totally guilty, there would be no hope of advantage here other than the publicity. That’s publicity that anyone else in their right mind wouldn’t want.

As far as getting any sort of judgement for this, in my mind the RIAA should have to show where it was financially damaged and to what extent. Statutory penalitys are for those selling stuff and no where do I see this accusation being made. Therefore, exactly to what extent was the cartels damaged?

This idioticy of sueing children shows that the RIAA has no shame, no level too low to stoop. You should remember this, everytime you see the member products offered for sale in your town, on line, or on tv. Refuse to finance financial terrorism, for surely that is exactly what this is.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29443 Reader's Write Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:01:08 +0000 #comment-29443 "How can a possible loss in profits of a few cents to a record company turn into a lawsuit that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to society (yes, everything is paid by society)?" Judge Luffy: The RIAA has payed out big $$$ to congress. Can't speak on the issue of judicial bribary; would you like to see my new TV? "Is it the the result of the "law" becoming a business?" Judge Luffy: Yes "Has the judiciary gone mad, helping turn kids against parents and parents against their kids or both into mental cases?" Judge Luffy: No, see answer to question No. 1 and read between the lines. “How can a possible loss in profits of a few cents to a record company turn into a lawsuit that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to society (yes, everything is paid by society)?”

Judge Luffy: The RIAA has payed out big $$$ to congress. Can’t speak on the issue of judicial bribary; would you like to see my new TV?

“Is it the the result of the “law” becoming a business?”

Judge Luffy: Yes

“Has the judiciary gone mad, helping turn kids against parents and parents against their kids or both into mental cases?”

Judge Luffy: No, see answer to question No. 1 and read between the lines.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29442 Reader's Write Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:01:05 +0000 #comment-29442 "How can a possible loss in profits of a few cents to a record company turn into a lawsuit that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to society (yes, everything is paid by society)?" Judge Luffy: The RIAA has payed out big $$$ to congress. Can't speak on the issue of judicial bribary; would you like to see my new TV? "Is it the the result of the "law" becoming a business?" Judge Luffy: Yes "Has the judiciary gone mad, helping turn kids against parents and parents against their kids or both into mental cases?" Judge Luffy: No, see answer to question No. 1 and read between the lines. “How can a possible loss in profits of a few cents to a record company turn into a lawsuit that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to society (yes, everything is paid by society)?”

Judge Luffy: The RIAA has payed out big $$$ to congress. Can’t speak on the issue of judicial bribary; would you like to see my new TV?

“Is it the the result of the “law” becoming a business?”

Judge Luffy: Yes

“Has the judiciary gone mad, helping turn kids against parents and parents against their kids or both into mental cases?”

Judge Luffy: No, see answer to question No. 1 and read between the lines.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29435 Reader's Write Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:42:48 +0000 #comment-29435 It's a good thing that judges never have to reply to reporters. Some question for the judges are: How can a possible loss in profits of a few cents to a record company turn into a lawsuit that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to society (yes, everything is paid by society)? Is it the the result of the "law" becoming a business? Has the judiciary gone mad, helping turn kids against parents and parents against their kids or both into mental cases? Rafael Venegas http://www.gvenegas.com It’s a good thing that judges never have to reply to reporters.

Some question for the judges are:

How can a possible loss in profits of a few cents to a record company turn into a lawsuit that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to society (yes, everything is paid by society)?

Is it the the result of the “law” becoming a business?

Has the judiciary gone mad, helping turn kids against parents and parents against their kids or both into mental cases?

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/7546/comment-page-1#comment-29432 Reader's Write Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:24:01 +0000 #comment-29432 'Britanny is a minor and when someone sues a minor, the case is supposed to be against "anonymous".' you appear4 to be forgetting the laws don't apply to the cartels, they'll just bribe, I mean lobby someone to have it go away. ‘Britanny is a minor and when someone sues a minor, the case is supposed to be against “anonymous”.’

you appear4 to be forgetting the laws don’t apply to the cartels, they’ll just bribe, I mean lobby someone to have it go away.

]]>