Comments on: Santangelo fund: 69 cents needed!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 29 Jan 2006 18:47:55 +0000

if you question Ms. Santangelo’s integrity, motives, or intentions you can piss off. This gallant lady is fighting your fight, as well as her own, and it certainly has been no picnic. She has been under enough scrutiny since this whole rigmarole began and has withstood it better than most of the recent Supreme Court nominees. If you side with her persecutors, then by all means have a field day and join their most unholy war on their customer base.

Personally, I feel that the entertainment cartel has shown its colors as dishonest, corrupt, venal, and – well, go to your thesaurus, there’s a vast range of negative words that apply. They have attempted to suborn witnesses, they have attempted to wring large sums of money from a group hardly capable of meeting their larcenous demands, have made whores out of our Senators and Congressmen in order to achieve their nefarious goals, and they have broken more criminal law than any of the persons they have filed suit against.

Do not, however, make the mistake of believing you can spread their gospel of poor picked on losers of billions of dollars by making any posts at this web site. We have followed the case too closely to be bilked by the scum of the earth that calls itself the representatives of the entertainment industry.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:53:59 +0000

I agree that the money may have better been spent on something like the kidnapping and execution of Mitch Bainwol and Cary Sherman. It would probably put a stop to all the lawsuits. Ideally there would be some kind of beheading video like those seen in Iraq, which everybody would be able to download off of p2p networks.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:07:46 +0000

Just think, if Patti would have settled for 3 grand, she would have over 2 grand in donation money to blow. Now she’s at least 24 grand in the hole.

She could have taken a nice vacation with her kids to Disney Land or something. Why go through the headache?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:39:32 +0000

There isn’t a heck of a lot more to say at this point, but there’ll be a few developments within the next few days and I will, of course, post as and when, so stay tuned.

For now, this is going to be a long battle, one way or another. But it’s an historic one – the first time individuals of all ages and beliefs who’ve never met each other, and who probably never will, are doing what they can to help a victim of sheer, unadultrated corporate greed.

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:35:53 +0000

“Perhaps Patti should use this money to get a settlement now? ”

Subtle.
What are you using your industry shill paycheck for ?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:22:57 +0000

My understanding is that, yes, all the donations are going directly to Ms. Santangelo (among other things, I verified that it really is her email address attached to the PayPal account.) She may need to spend more on legal help at some point, but that will be up to her.

Anyway, Rogers and Beckerman won’t get any part of the donation money; they seem to be out of the picture at this point — except maybe for some unofficial legal advice, and a convenient address for snail-mail donations to avoid spreading Santangelos’ home address around too much.

It’s been quite a few days now since the last fresh news on the case; I’m going to go and try to scare some up now, and put the results somewhere obvious — like maybe in “Elektra v. Santangelo” on Wikipedia…

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:05:46 +0000

$24000+ so far for a motion of dismissal, that should have cost around $1000…. Why so much money for work done up until this point? I do believe that Patti Santangelo is a good person, but I don’t trust Ray Beckerman. Perhaps Patti should use this money to get a settlement now?

So the question I have, is why the hell should people put money into a kitty that is going to enrich a lawyer? Mrs Santangelo is keeping Beckerman on retainer, but if he is such a good person why not do pro bono work? Especially when she is representing herself?

Perhaps it is all part of Beckerman’s strategy?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 23 Jan 2006 04:06:41 +0000

i don’t know about previous lawyer bills, but i do know that it will cost her to keep fighting them even without a lawyer

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 23 Jan 2006 03:24:00 +0000

I dont really understand this explanation. Doesnt she have lawyer fees from the beginning that are unpaid?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 22 Jan 2006 06:00:03 +0000

like alex h said in that other piece:

“Patricia Santangelo still has legal expenses. Retaining a lawyer is not the extent of the total legal fees that can be racked up fighting a civil lawsuit. Need to file a document with the court? Pay up. Need to subpoena a RIAA “piracy investigator”? Pay up. Need a one-off conversation with an expert in a particular legal or technical field? Pay up. It’s not a “Lawyer costs $100/hour x 35 hours = $3,500 in legal fees” kind of situation.”

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:54:09 +0000

Is the money going to Patricia or her lawyer or both?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 22 Jan 2006 02:23:02 +0000

Read this:

http://p2pnet.net/story/7537

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 22 Jan 2006 00:31:45 +0000

To pour money down a lawyer’s black hole….