×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RIAA Lawyer Jumps Ship

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the bigger-better-deal dept.

The Courts 181

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's top litigation lawyer, who has been personally leading the RIAA's litigation campaign for the past several years, Richard Gabriel, will be leaving his law practice after getting a job as a state court judge for a 2-year term in Colorado. What this will mean to the RIAA's litigation machine is anyone's guess. Mr. Gabriel has personally argued all of the RIAA's main cases, including Elektra v. Barker, Atlantic v. Howell, Atlantic v. Brennan, Capitol v. Foster, Atlantic v. Andersen, UMG v. Lindor, and London-Sire v. Doe 1, and personally tried the Capitol v. Thomas case, the only RIAA case that has ever gone to trial. He was working directly under the supervision of the RIAA's mysterious 'representative' Matthew Oppenheim."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

181 comments

What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356614)

A good start.

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356632)

What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom?

RIAA Lawyer Jumps Ship
I hope the sharks are waiting.

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (2, Interesting)

Bohabo (1273432) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356702)

In the old days people had a way of dealing with people like the RIAA execs. They grabbed them, stripped them, beat them, coated them in tar and feathers. In other words they made a public example of them to discourage other similar-thinking assholes from doing the same thing. Are we too civilized for that today?

"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side."
        - Hunter S. Thompson

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (1, Interesting)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357100)

Umm... no, they didn't. Because in the old days, the RIAA would be the people with the money and power - ie, the nobility. They don't get beaten.

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (2, Informative)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357212)

ie, the nobility. They don't get beaten.
Don't tell that to Marie Antoinette :)

"Let them listen to CAKE! [cakemusic.com] "

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (4, Funny)

Abreu (173023) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356914)

What do you call 1 lawyer chained to the bottom of the sea? Pollution!

What do you call all of the world's lawyers chained to the bottom of the sea? Solution!

Thank you, Thank you! Try the steak!

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357826)

What do you call all of the world's lawyers chained to the bottom of the sea? Solution!
I didn't know lawyers dissolve in sea water. Cool! I am gonna patent a sea water spray to fend off lawyers.

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (5, Funny)

Raconteur (1132577) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356942)

http://www.lawyer-jokes.us/ [lawyer-jokes.us] One of my favs: What do you do when you see four lawyers up to the neck in wet cement? Answer: get more cement! The point of this post: searching for 'riaa' at that site produces no results. Slackers!!! Get on it!

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357416)

I guess most jokes still work if you just replace "lawyer" with "RIAA lawyer"

Re:What do you call 1 lawyer at the ocean's bottom (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357434)

What is a "lucky break"?
A bus full of lawyers goes off a cliff.

What is a "crying shame"?
There was an empty seat.

New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (4, Interesting)

Adriax (746043) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356626)

It means they'll file to get every case moved to his courtroom.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (5, Insightful)

actionbastard (1206160) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356660)

It means they'll file to get every case moved to his courtroom.

So that every defendant moves to have him recuse himself from the proceeding.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357822)

which he will decline to do. This man has foolishly tainted his entire professional career by arguing for the RIAA, I see no reason why we should trust him to be honest as a judge either.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (4, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356726)

That would sort of depend on why he left. If he left due to any acrimony, the RIAA would likely go out of their way to stay well clear of his courtroom (and it would only affect Colorado residents anyway)

Also, he may have left after sniffing the wind and seeing that other judges are starting to find the RIAA's tactics to be questionable at best... and likely wants to be well clear of the RIAA if/when it finally (okay, hopefully) implodes.

Finally, even if he did hear any of these cases, he's have two fears constantly on his mind: Appeals, and the possibility that not recusing himself from an case involving his former employer would likely land him in hotter water than by simply recusing himself in the first place.

Just idle thoughts - standard disclaimers pply, etc. :)

/P

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (4, Insightful)

m.ducharme (1082683) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357000)

Also, he may have been bucking for a seat on the Bench for a long time now, and finally got his chance.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (2, Insightful)

jamstar7 (694492) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357058)

So what? He's a judge now. Unseating a sitting judge takes a lot. The old expression of 4 acts of God & an act of Congress come to mind.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (4, Informative)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357088)

Not so sure in his case... he's answerable to the state legislature, not Congress (which means he can find himself on the docket a lot faster, esp. if he makes any local enemies, which his type I'm sure is prone to collecting).

Also, he was elected for a term, which indicates elections are ahead. While most judges are pretty much re-elected ad-infinitum without so much as a "ho-hum" from the electorate, all it would take is a couple of well-placed commercials and ads touting his prior experiences and current performance (if negative), and he's toast. I don;t think the RIAA would have too much interest in bailing him out, so he'd be pretty much on his own.

Then again, who knows? :)

/P

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (1)

garett_spencley (193892) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357090)

It's also possible that he left because he always wanted to be a judge and a job finally opened up for him. I may be wrong but I was under the impression that most, if not all, judges start out as lawyers.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (4, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357132)

...I was under the impression that most, if not all, judges start out as lawyers.

Frighteningly enough, so do most politicians...

/P

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (3, Insightful)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357686)

And therein lies the horrible though that crossed my mind when I read the headline. "Those scumbag riaa bastards have put a guy on the bench."

He *might* serve five years, then go back to the riaa for giant buckos.

---

Damned weed, three pokes and I figured Iraq might turn into another Vietnam.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357516)

How about "since the RIAA noticed that judges turn against them, they think it's time that they not only get lawyers but also judges that support their cases"?

I guess that he is friends with Ritter (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357664)

I have been so on ritter, but have lost all respect for this bastard. If he is putting this guy in as a judge, well, that speaks of ritter's character.

Re:New sympathetic venue for RIAA cases (5, Funny)

Cathoderoytube (1088737) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357366)

Don't you ever watch tv? That won't happen, he'll have to give his former buddies a hard time to show he's not playing any favorites. Then they'll be all like 'Why're you giving us such a hard time?' then he'll be like 'Because I don't want people to think I'm playing favorites. I mean we were practically married before', then they'll be like 'Oh so that's how it is, is it? You know, you left your ipod at our apartment last time you were over. It would be a shame if people found out about your ILLEGAL ABBA MP3's!' then he'll be like 'Yeah you don't scare me, I'll just make file sharing legal!' then they'll be like 'Oh ho ho will you now? What makes you think we'll be filing any cases in your district?' then he'll be like 'What happened to us?' then they'll be like 'You forgot your friends! And you became a complete jerk since you became a judge! We feel like we don't even know you any more!' then he'll be like 'It's true! I've worked so hard to impress the other judges I forgot who my real friends were!'. Then they'll hug and make up.

So yeah, they'll be filing all their cases in his district.

awesome (5, Insightful)

Frosty-B-Bad (259317) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356648)

so a man that thinks the RIAA is honest and right is now a judge in the United States Courts. Somehow the words just can't describe the feelings of failure that have surfaced when I read this post.

Re:awesome (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356724)

Judges tend to be former lawyers, yeah. Your point?

the real question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356790)



how much cash is changing hands as a result of the *appointment* by the governor.. to an *appeals* court no less (aren't those the venues where legal precedences are set?)

hope it's a lot.. and i hope he ends up having to recuse himself from any copyright-related cases.. so the riaa gets nothing for their "investment"

Re:awesome (5, Insightful)

Yeef (978352) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356818)

There's always the possibility that he never believed in the RIAA's bullshit and just did it all out of greed, but someone with such loose morals isn't the kind of person you'd want behind the bench. It seems to be a lose-lose situation for the people of Colorado.

Re:awesome (5, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356992)

There's always the possibility that he never believed in the RIAA's bullshit and just did it all out of greed, but someone with such loose morals isn't the kind of person you'd want behind the bench.
My feeling is that his motivations ran like this:

1. It was primarily for the money, lots and lots of money.

2. It made him feel important; he was pretending to be a lawyer. (Never mind that most of the cases were "ex parte" cases and "default" cases, in which there was no opponent at all, and that in the remaining ones, most of the people couldn't afford a lawyer. So he was always "litigating" against either no one, or someone who had no lawyer, or in a few cases against an unpaid or underpaid lawyer. See, e.g. the eloquent opinion of Judge Otero in Elektra v. O'Brien [blogspot.com] in which the Judge, talking specifically about Mr. Gabriel's "cases", decried the fact that "the federal judiciary is being used as a hammer by a small group of plaintiffs to pound settlements out of unrepresented defendants.") I.e., Mr. Gabriel is a man who has been making his living the past 2 1/2 years suing children, the disabled, the homeless, displaced persons, the elderly, people living on Welfare and Social Security, and other defenseless individuals, and taking money from innocent people simply because they couldn't afford the cost of defending a federal lawsuit.

And after communicating with him on practically a daily basis for the past 2 1/2 years.... I don't think he feels the slightest bit of shame over it.

I guess that about says it all.

Re:awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357204)

Of course. The people who control almost all recorded music in the world can afford higher billable hour rates than the latest 10 year old girl defendant can. I can't imagine anyone defending the RIAA because they believe in the RIAA's cause (i.e. extortion, might makes right, all your base are belong to big labels, etc.).

Well Ray (5, Funny)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357240)

Ray, this is what I propose: I will assume the role of an alcoholic homeless person living in a carboard box. During my spare time I will build a computer out of coconuts and driftwood. I will then use this computer to post on slashdot and download illegal files. When the RIAA summons me to court I will make a suit out of seaweed and defend myself. Cunningly I will have counsel (you). I will then throw away my disguise and expose my underpants that I wear outside my stockings, proclaim I am superman, and hit them wear it hurts. What are your thoughts?

Re:awesome (5, Insightful)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357278)

Unfortunately, it is people like this RIAA lawyer who give the legal profession such a bad reputation among the general public whereas honest and upright lawyers, like our friend NewYorkCountryLawyer, receive much of the ill will associated with that negative reputation and very little recognition for the good work that they do. I for one would like to take this opportunity to thank NewYorkCountryLawyer for the excellent work that he has done in compiling the various briefs, decisions, along with his own original commentary and arguments, and other related materials on his blog to assist in the defense of the ordinary working folks who are being crushed by the RIAA and their unscrupulous attorneys.

Some of the defendants may have sinned yes, but was their crime (assuming that they are convicted and that is not a certainty) really so great as to merit the complete destruction of their lives and their utter financial ruin? It is really too bad that the RIAA has chosen to take the lowest of the low roads with their lawsuit campaign, but hopefully with interested people like NewYorkCountryLawyer and Slashdot staying on top of things we can eventually compel the RIAA and their members to quit harassing the public in lieu of actually having a business plan.

Re:awesome (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357288)

Some 13-year-old speculating cluelessly on the motivations of a person he's never met and whose job he has no understanding of is "+5 Informative"? You kids are hilarious.

Re:awesome (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357362)

Why, Mr. Gabriel. How nice to see you. Welcome aboard the Slashdot Express ... ticket, please.

Re:awesome (5, Interesting)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357756)

Why, Mr. Gabriel. How nice to see you. Welcome aboard the Slashdot Express ... ticket, please.
I don't think that AC was Mr. Gabriel.

I think it's some new guy they hired, who doesn't know that I'm 60, that I've met Mr. Gabriel a number of times and communicate with him many times a week, and that I understand Mr. Gabriel's job a lot better than Mr. Gabriel does.

Re:awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357836)

Ray, I love the work you do. Every time I hear you're in a case, I pray that you win, and every time you do, I cheer your victories. Please keep fighting the good fight. But even the scum of the earth deserve a lawyer and a day in court (especially when they've got a legitimate gripe).

Maybe this guy is a jerk and a greedy SOB -- I don't know, I've never dealt with him. I won't apologize for him. But whatever his reasons, right or wrong, he was upholding the rule of law. He wasn't "pretending" to be a lawyer, he IS a lawyer. Just like you. Please take the high ground and don't attack him for it. Attack his position, yes, but don't attack the man for defending it.

Re:awesome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357004)

As a resident of the litigious state of Colorado, this makes me want to immediately move anywhere else.

Re:awesome (1)

andruk (1132557) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357350)

I, too, am a resident in Colorado, anybody know what city he is in (so I can avoid him like the plague/borg)?

Re:awesome (3, Informative)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357022)

He may have never believed in their specific goal, but it's my understanding that if he believed that they had a legal case and he was willing to take up that case, then he was ethically bound to take all legal measures to support his clients while employed by them. It's also possible that he was assigned the case by his superiors at the law firm, which can be difficult to turn down short of a clear conflict of interest.

A lawyer cannot throw a case just because he doesn't like his client. There are penalties for that, including those handed down from the bar and possible civil remedies.

Re:awesome (1)

billcopc (196330) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357072)

The thing with lawyers is there's usually two of them. Inevitably, one wins and one loses.

In most cases, the loser still gets paid. It really doesn't matter whose side you're on, as long as you can afford the lease on that luxury car you never learned to drive.

Re:awesome (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357168)

Well, there is that part about taking up the case in the first place, then doing it repeatedly in subsequent cases...

/P

Re:awesome (3, Insightful)

Martin Blank (154261) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357700)

This is true, but again, he may have been assigned the cases by his law firm, in which case he may have had little choice other than to resign. This is always an option when presented with a moral dilemma, but he may just not have been torn as much as you or I might have been.

Re:awesome (2, Insightful)

r_jensen11 (598210) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357310)

There's always the possibility that he never believed in the RIAA's bullshit and just did it all out of greed, but someone with such loose morals isn't the kind of person you'd want behind the bench. It seems to be a lose-lose situation for the people of Colorado.
Or he could just think that, regardless of the RIAA's tactics, downloading copyrighted materials without permission of the copyright holder is the wrong thing to do....

For some reason, and it shouldn't amaze me by now (but it still does,) but I still get shocked by the level of groupthink that goes on @ /. regarding the permissibility of piracy.... I'm not saying that I never download anything, but 99% of the content I do download is not for sale in my continent and the company who owns the works has refused to offer the content for foreigners (even for a fee,) so I have rationalized the "No Damages" defense. But downloading the latest 50 Cent CD just because you don't want to pay for it, I just never got that once I left highschool.

Re:awesome (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357360)

as this has been shown in courts for years(aka fair use), just because the copyright owner does not give permission does not mean by any stretch that fair use doesn't apply,fair use is to restrict copyright.

downloading copyrighted materials is 100% legal in all scenarios. Forget your wrong or right, this is an issue that is going through courts a lot lately.

Re:awesome (1)

WaltBusterkeys (1156557) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357616)

now a judge in the United States Courts
No, he's a Colorado state judge. He is not a judge appointed by President and confirmed by the Senate, therefore he is not a judge in the United States courts.

riaa? think bigger (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356686)

so, slashdot is pondering what the future of the legal standing of riaa is, after such a much maligned lawyer becomes a JUDGE.

tail, wag dog.

Appointed by Gov Ritter (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356692)

Apparently Governor Ritter doesn't realize how corrupt this makes him look. Anyone associated with RIAA is tainted, and now that taint just got on the governor. I hope Colorado voters know this happened.

Re:Appointed by Gov Ritter (4, Insightful)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357152)

He probably doesn't, because it's only to an extremely small minority that it does. Outside of the relatively small number of people reading this website, you'd be amazed at how little awareness there is.

Re:Appointed by Gov Ritter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357482)

Well, I live in Colorado and read this website. Ritter won't be getting my vote (and I often vote for Democrats, but won't for him).

Re:Appointed by Gov Ritter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357184)

and now that taint just got on the governor.
Ewww. :(

Re:Appointed by Gov Ritter (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357462)

Anyone associated with RIAA is tainted [...] I hope Colorado voters know this
They don't.

Re:Appointed by Gov Ritter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357658)

This one does.

Re:Appointed by Gov Ritter (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357832)

Apparently Governor Ritter doesn't realize how corrupt this makes him look. Anyone associated with RIAA is tainted, and now that taint just got on the governor. I hope Colorado voters know this happened.

True, Democrat Governor Bill Ritter doesn't realize how corrupt this makes him look. Anyone associated with RIAA is tainted, and now that taint just got on Democrat Governor Bill Ritter.

I hope Colorado voters know how this happened.

Meanwhile, Bush is likely to veto the PRO-IP Act [arstechnica.com] endorsed by the MPAA and passed by the Democrat House of Representatives.

I hope American voters know how this happened.

State court, not federal court (5, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356704)

He's appointed to state court, not federal court. Copyright cases are in federal court.

Re:State court, not federal court (1)

Steve1952 (651150) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356774)

I wonder if working as a State Judge will give him extra immunity from prosecution?

there are still privacy concerns that come up (4, Insightful)

reiisi (1211052) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356832)

Actually, I'm sitting here thinking how copyright has been part of the tide that helped turn the US Constitution upside down.

Matters of individual and family welfare were supposed to be handled at the bottom level as much as possible. Somehow, the need to monitor the Kluless Klutz Klan and its ikl from above has been an inroad to stretching the normal lines of control. But people who see chances for personal "advantage" in those long lines of control are naturally going to push to extend them further, so it's only natural that matters of personal privacy end up getting handled under "federal" law now.

So maybe there aren't any privacy concerns that will come up in state court, and this will be a good place to keep the guy where he can't do further damage.

Somehow, I'm not optimistic.

(Yes, I am of the opinion that the primary evil in giving IP a legal existence is that it finishes off the erosion of privacy. RMS's essays on the relationship seemed extreme when he wrote them, but the reality of the threat is becoming quite obvious now.)

No mention of the RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356722)

Interesting how the Republican announcement fails to mention RIAA.

Re:No mention of the RIAA (2, Insightful)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357176)

Um... why would they? RIAA is only one client of the law firm. None of his (or other judges listed) clients were mentioned either. This is a typical fluff press release, identical for companies and governments: make the people you just promoted look good. What has this to do with political party?

Re:No mention of the RIAA (4, Informative)

Technician (215283) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357256)

Interesting how the Republican announcement fails to mention RIAA.

Are you implying the Democrats had anything to say about it? Somehow, I don't think the Democrats and the Republicans are much different on the issue. If you want some indication, look at the PAC money from various lobby groups.

Here is a help with a direct link to the Lobby money from the recording industry.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=C2600 [opensecrets.org]

When you see a Republican in this mess, it makes news. When you see a Democrat, it's buisiness as usual. Be sure to look behind the curtain. Bookmark the homepage.
http://www.opensecrets.org/ [opensecrets.org]
and the Alphabetical listing;
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/alphalist.php [opensecrets.org]

See how your favorite canidate is doing and who supports them.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.php [opensecrets.org]
Here is the good one. How is the canidates doing in regard to how the movie, TV, and Recording industry is supporting your canidate. It sure looks they don't care for McCain.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.php?ind=B02 [opensecrets.org]
With over 3 million each to the Dem canidate and only just over half a million to McCain, you can tell who they want. Follow the money.

sadly, Matthew Oppenheim (-1, Offtopic)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356754)

is not an anagram for 'Senator Palpatine'

however, it is an anagram for 'A Hemp Hew Impotent' and 'Heathen Em Pimp Two'

http://wordsmith.org/anagram/anagram.cgi?anagram=Matthew+Oppenheim&t=1000 [wordsmith.org]

draw your own conclusions

Re:sadly, Matthew Oppenheim (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356878)

I conclude you have too much time on your hands.

At least I hope that's time....

So many wonderful anagrams. (1)

Mactrope (1256892) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357014)

The Enema With Pomp
Temp Enema With Hop
Temp Hot Whip Enema
The Ethane Pimp Mow
We Pimp Hot Methane
With A Hempen Tempo

There's more I'm sure because this is a very evil man with a long name.

Timing is everything (4, Informative)

overshoot (39700) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356768)

As one of my professors used to teach us, it's the smart rat that leaves before the ship sinks.

Re:Timing is everything (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357236)

I hate to burst your bubble, but "judge" is a better job than "lawyer". It pays more, and is likely less difficult.

It's also a lot harder to get. His "jumping ship" says a lot more about the job just now becoming available than it does about the RIAA imploding.

Thank you for telling me (1)

overshoot (39700) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357578)

I hate to burst your bubble, but "judge" is a better job than "lawyer". It pays more, and is likely less difficult.
I wouldn't have known that if you hadn't told me. Well, you or the fact that my best friend since primary school was a State appellate judge.

How To Download Porn With Tor (GNAA Edition) (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356820)

I like http://www.tube8.com/ [tube8.com] because it's easy to use with Tor, just view the source html of the porno page you want and copy paste to download, even with Flash disabled just search the source html for .flv and you're good, that's how I get my porn on Tor

GNAA End Transmission

Colorado, here comes the RIAA (-1, Redundant)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356836)

Richard Gabriel, will be leaving his law practice, after getting a job as a state court judge for a 2-year term in Colorado. What this will mean to the RIAA's litigation machine is anyone's guess.
That the RAII will file a lot of cases in Colorado?

Re:Colorado, here comes the RIAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357068)

Honestly, what is the point of modding something down "Redundant"? Is it an ego trip? Because there are certainly better ways to spend your mod points. You must have a very small penis.

who cares? (1, Informative)

bball99 (232214) | more than 5 years ago | (#23356976)

Kill all the lawyers!

signed,

Will Shakespeare

Re:who cares? (1)

lysse (516445) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357880)

I would point out, as so many have before, the context in which this is said... but you know what? Nobody would need to if before quoting the only bit of it you know, you people would just go and read the fucking play.

Oppenheim (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23356996)

Matthew Oppenheim is in fact a lawyer. His previous was work was with the MPAA, and he was a key player in shutting down various torrent sites in the past.

Jumping ship? (1)

ya really (1257084) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357086)

He didn't exactly "jump ship," he was appointed to a better job that he probably knew might happen sometime ago. Normally, you don't say you're "jumping ship" unless the said company is on the verge of collaspe, which in the case of the RIAA, sadly doesn't seem to be happening yet. Besides, who wouldn't take the offer to be a judge over working for the RIAA? I do feel sorry for those who enter his courtroom though.

Where can I find some Niggers to fuck me (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357154)

I need nigger cock in my ass and I'll suck it too, any niggers wanna fuck me? reply with contact please, serious replies only, if you use gpg post your key, i want you to fuck me, 21+ y.o. niggers only

Re:Where can I find some Niggers to fuck me (-1, Troll)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357496)

A big angry black man raping people in the ass? This seems strangely on topic.

One of the main problems... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357188)

...with lawyers is some of them become judges.

If he was a snake as a lawyer, what kind of judge do you think he will be?

State court is just another stepping stone along the way to the Federal courts.

Brave Sir Robin (2, Funny)

Chosen Reject (842143) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357206)

Mr. Gabriel has personally argued all of the RIAA's main cases, including Elektra v. Barker, Atlantic v. Howell, Atlantic v. Brennan, Capitol v. Foster, Atlantic v. Andersen, UMG v. Lindor, and London-Sire v. Doe 1, and personally tried the Capitol v. Thomas case
And who personally wet himself at the battle of Badon Hill.

CO Voters: Reject Richard Gabriel in Nov. 2010! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357234)

The appointments are for a provisional term of two years, and then until the second Tuesday in January following the next general election. Thereafter, if retained by the voters, the term is for eight years.

The voters of the state of Colorado will have the opportunity to boot Richard Gabriel from the bench in the 2010 general election. Should they fail to do so, their next shot will be in 2018.

Colorado citizens now have two years to organize to unseat this particular justice should they find fault with the company he's kept and tactics he's used in his years of loyal service to the RIAA.

Judicial retention elections are almost always ignored but there's ample time to prepare for this one.

Re:CO Voters: Reject Richard Gabriel in Nov. 2010! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357588)

A sound idea. But do you think the average voter cares? Hardly. People care about unemployment, about crime (the real kind, that affects them), about pollution, about education, about health service, about retirement, about drugs and about plumbing, and THEN, when all this is out of the way and settled, they may consider pondering asking you why this should in any way affect them.

Re:CO Voters: Reject Richard Gabriel in Nov. 2010! (1)

dlim (928138) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357782)

If the average voter doesn't care, are they likely to vote at all one way or another? Usually, I ignore that section because I don't know, don't care, or don't want to take the time to vote on the judges. (Judges don't run big campaigns) Maybe it's irresponsible, but if I have the option between making an uninformed decision and not making one at all, I'll usually choose the latter.

I live in Colorado. I will be voting to remove him from the bench in 2010. I'll probably also tell everyone I know to do the same. Then, hopefully, the people who are willing to vote to remove him will outnumber those willing to vote to keep him.

why not just call it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357306)

why not just call this place www.grabbingatstraws.com
 
anytime anything happens good/bad to a group that the goosesteppers like/don't like we have a blurb about how it can rock an issue to it's foundation but, as usual, nothing ever happens because of it.
 
are you people so desperate that you have to cheer on anything in the hopes that you're fighting the good fight? pathetic and sick.

Payback time (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357318)

thats how the machine works. spread filth for the machine, and get a crappy position somewhere. then be happy with the small position they saw fit for you in return for the irreparable damage you did to justice and human civilization.

Working for the other side (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357354)

This is NOT good.

Think about it, an obviously RIAA individual is now a JUDGE!!!

This may be a new strategy for them, we cant win in court.. .so lets become judges!!!!

Leading title? (1)

DirePickle (796986) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357598)

It suggests that he is fleeing a sinking ship, when really he's using the RIAA's crusade against rationality to catapult himself into judicial office. Woo.

Umm... can't you... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#23357604)

I mean, here, if you consider a judge to be for some reason biased in your case, you can file a complaint and, if your complaint has merit (and being an ex-lawyer of the RIAA should be enough merit in a case involving copyright) you can request the judge to be replaced.

Not possible in the US?

RIAA Logic (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23357896)

If you cannot win cases on there merits then get your lawyers to become the judges. That way they can judge in your favor regardless of merits.

Everyone doing litigation for the RIAA has shown lack of ethics and shady practices. Having that type of background doesn't sound like a good resume to be a judge.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...