Beta
×

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 Santangelo Case 'Settled In Principle'

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the mum's-the-word dept.

The Courts 94

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's long-running war against Patti Santangelo, her children, and even her children's schoolmates has been 'settled in principle,' with final settlement documents expected to be submitted by March 18th. Patti Santangelo is believed to be the first RIAA defendant to have made a motion to dismiss the RIAA's 'making available' complaint. The case first caught the attention of the Slashdot community back in 2005, when a transcript of Ms. Santangelo's first court appearance became available online. The case attracted national attention in December of 2005. According to the Associated Press report of the settlement, neither side was able to comment on the terms of the settlement."

cancel ×

94 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Frost piss! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023255)

Frist psot, GNAA!

Re:Frost piss! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023555)

what's the gnaa website number?

Re:Frost piss! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024509)

Me thinks I am introducing a new meme.
"Website number" - Joe Biden

Re:Frost piss! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024545)

so an IP address?

Re:Frost piss! (0, Offtopic)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025323)

127.0.0.1

Introduced me to Slashdot (5, Interesting)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023257)

This was also the case that introduced me to Slashdot. One day I discovered that people on some crazy place called "Slashdot.org" were going nuts analyzing the transcript of Patti's court appearance. I couldn't understand what I was seeing. It looked like an online Talmudic debate. The people seemed a little like lawyers -- but they clearly were not lawyers -- and many of them seemed to be smarter than lawyers. So I asked a few people, and eventually found one -- my youngest son who is a techie -- who explained it to me.

Since discovering Slashdot, my life hasn't quite been the same.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (5, Funny)

areusche (1297613) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023347)

I'm sorry to hear that your marriage has suffered. It's been difficult finding a date personally. Hopefully I can find one of those many elusive slashdottettes that lurk around here.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

plaxion (98397) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024967)

Slashdottettes? Oh, you mean Frank! He's in the basement.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (4, Funny)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025137)

I'm sorry to hear that your marriage has suffered. It's been difficult finding a date personally.

Tell me about it. I haven't been able to find a date with anyone other than my wife for 40 years now.

And then, when I started getting involved with Slashdot, I noticed that even my wife began finding me less attractive.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (4, Funny)

Anpheus (908711) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025651)

In case you missed the recent news, you can really impress her if you say during a prominent trial, "No, I don't need any compensation. But you could send my wife some flowers." Or mix it up, say chocolate, for example.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

MR.Mic (937158) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026659)

But after thousands of dollars in chocolate, he will have the opposite problem.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

anactualfemale (1470121) | more than 5 years ago | (#27027983)

Lookin' kinda lonely there, handsome.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (4, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023369)

I have just two things to say (basically)

1 - I have high hopes that the RIAA settles in such a way that it damages all their other cases, and Patti is both vindicated and compensated - even if we never known what that compensation was.

2 - I wish that there were some way for Slashdot and readers were able to label NewYorkCountryLawyer's posts as a news service rather than just another post. Yes, I realize I can go and list all his posts, but I wish there were a way to quickly do so from the front page so that all users could easily benefit from this hugely beneficial information source. Lets not forget groklaw either.

Many of us like to assume we know something about the law here. These two people (perhaps others) have done much to keep such discussions and news both current and held in a view that does not stray very far for very long from goodness. I believe that they have done more to educate the public than anyone else and their efforts deserve some recognition here.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023393)

I have just two things to say (basically)

1 - I have high hopes that the RIAA settles in such a way that it damages all their other cases, and Patti is both vindicated and compensated - even if we never known what that compensation was.

I doubt it - they probably will keep the settlement private; and since it was not decided at trial there is no impact on other cases.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (5, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023591)

I wish that there were some way for Slashdot and readers were able to label NewYorkCountryLawyer's posts as a news service rather than just another post. Yes, I realize I can go and list all his posts, but I wish there were a way to quickly do so from the front page so that all users could easily benefit from this hugely beneficial information source. Lets not forget groklaw either. Many of us like to assume we know something about the law here. These two people (perhaps others) have done much to keep such discussions and news both current and held in a view that does not stray very far for very long from goodness. I believe that they have done more to educate the public than anyone else and their efforts deserve some recognition here.

Thank you very much, for your kind words, zappepcs, and especially for mentioning me in the same breath as PJ who is a real professional journalist; I am just an amateur.

I would remind you that Groklaw's main feed is available on Slashdot as a "Slashbox"; I know because I (of course) subscribe to it.

Also I recently figured out (I'm a little slow, sometimes, I know) how to find out the RSS Feed for my Submissions on Slashdot, so you can pop it into a feed reader, or "follow" me on Twitter. The feed is: http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=rss&content_type=rss&fhfilter=%22author%3A+NewYorkCountryLawyer%22+submission&orderdir=DESC&orderby=createtime&color=black&duration=-1&startdate=&logtoken=912032%3A%3ADbgOV9ng3HbPRRrcloMyqC [slashdot.org]

Thanks again.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025763)

Many years from now, when you tell your grandkids that you know what an RSS feed is, you are going to blow their minds.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (3, Funny)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026221)

Many years from now, when you tell your grandkids that you know what an RSS feed is, you are going to blow their minds.

Not really. They'll probably be using some much more advanced technology, like "RCS". ("Really Complex Syndication").

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot - Y I Mod Up (1)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023775)

I wish that there were some way for Slashdot and readers were able to label NewYorkCountryLawyer's posts as a news service

When I have mod points and one of his posts is within my moderation window I tend to mod his posts +1 Informative - because they are!

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

budgenator (254554) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023883)

What'll happen is there will be some Anonymous leaks that make it look like the RIAA actually won or at least make Patti look bad something like the McDonalds hot coffee leak case, but she wouldn't be able to defend herself with the truth because of gag orders.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024837)

I wish that there were some way for Slashdot and readers were able to label NewYorkCountryLawyer's posts as a news service rather than just another post.

You can add NYCL to your friend list and set your account to filter their messages so that they get a fake upmod. I don't know how it's done with this new slashdot layout but a few months ago I configured my account to interpret all the posts made by the people in my friends list as +2 and NYCL's posts pop out even when they are downmodded.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (2, Interesting)

Patoski (121455) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023407)

This was also the case that introduced me to Slashdot. One day I discovered that people on some crazy place called "Slashdot.org" were going nuts analyzing the transcript of Patti's court appearance. I couldn't understand what I was seeing. It looked like an online Talmudic debate. The people seemed a little like lawyers -- but they clearly were not lawyers -- and many of them seemed to be smarter than lawyers. So I asked a few people, and eventually found one -- my youngest son who is a techie -- who explained it to me.

Since discovering Slashdot, my life hasn't quite been the same.

Thanks a bunch Ray. I know a lot of people here have the same warm feeling towards you. It's a great feeling knowing that there are others out there fighting for justice.

It's also really pleasant to see a principled and eminently competent lawyer getting some exposure. Keep up the good fight!

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (4, Insightful)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023491)

Have you by chance ever been to kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org] ?

These days it's cesspit, but during its best days it was a site where users published long, well thought, and often technical articles about interesting subjects, some of which had effect beyond the website. For instance, Opennic (alternative root DNS servers) got started at an article on K5. Users submitted stories, and other users offered criticism during an editing period and collectively approved or rejected the story.

See for example a few links in the hall of fame [maddash.org] to see what it used to be like.

I'd really like to find another place like that, its degeneration was very unfortunate.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 5 years ago | (#27027297)

Yeah, it was great while it lasted, but it went downhill when the monocle polishing started.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023539)

Since discovering Slashdot, my life hasn't quite been the same.

Ah, yes, you never forget your first goatse exposure, do you...

(Just kidding, Ray. We all love you here. ^_^)

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (5, Funny)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023637)

We all love you here.

You must be new here.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (2, Funny)

Calydor (739835) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024009)

In Soviet Russia, Ray loves Slashdot!

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

Bysshe (1330263) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023797)

Umm, you didn't specify if your life had improved or degraded. I will assume improved, afterall who wouldn't want to hang out with a bunch of nerds who all have an opinion [xkcd.com] but no credentials to fall back on.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (5, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023875)

Umm, you didn't specify if your life had improved or degraded.

I didn't, did I?

Hmmm... I guess I could argue either proposition.

I will assume improved, afterall who wouldn't want to hang out with a bunch of nerds who all have an opinion but no credentials to fall back on.

I, for one, welcome the opinions of my Nerd Overlords, especially those with no credentials. (Credentials, it seems to me, are an overpraised attribute. What matters is that the opinion be formed through rigorous reasoning, based on provable facts, advance human thought, and prove to be empirically infallible -- i.e., that it should be in agreement with mine.)

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

Bysshe (1330263) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023949)

credentials are definitely overpraised. overpriced too. mine include a toptier MBA which enables one to make seemingly reasonable, statistically provable, and empirically subjective arguments to convince the masses that they need to consume more. Consider me the worst kind - a nerd in a suit ;)

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024275)

What matters is that the opinion... should be in agreement with mine

So I've noticed :D

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (2, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024521)

What matters is that the opinion... should be in agreement with mine

So I've noticed

Or that it be contrary to yours, in which case it is also likely to be correct.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (4, Funny)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024661)

What matters is that the opinion... should be in agreement with mine

So I've noticed

Or that it be contrary to yours, in which case it is also likely to be correct.

Ai, it buuuurrrrrns....

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024811)

What matters is that the opinion be formed through rigorous reasoning, based on provable facts, advance human thought, and prove to be empirically infallible -- i.e., that it should be in agreement with mine.)

I got my degree in Forming Empirically Infallible Opinions through Rigorous Reasoning and Base on Provable Facts from the University of Phoenix via their online programs. So my Credentials are hot shit, you insensitive clod!

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

WhyMeWorry (982235) | more than 5 years ago | (#27029245)

What matters is that the opinion be formed through rigorous reasoning, based on provable facts ...

What was that again? I suppose that you also expect people to read the articles before responding.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27030959)

I suppose that you also expect people to read the articles before responding.

You must be new here.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024427)

You should talk to slashdot about becoming a regular writer for them.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024463)

Lawyers are often very smart about court procedure, less so about the law and hardly ever about the arcane details of technology and business. You would think they would seek advice more often.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024801)

...my youngest son who is a techie -- who explained it to me.

That explains your 'slash-fu' improving so quickly!

I for one, am glad you crossed our path then. (hah! thought this was going to be another lame overlords post?)

You should be nominated (along with PJ [Groklaw]) for the /. Hall of Fame....if we had one!

The world needs more lawyers like you, successfully fighting on behalf of 'the common man' against the big corporations, getting word out to the masses, and just being an all around 'fine chap'.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025089)

You should be nominated (along with PJ [Groklaw]) for the /. Hall of Fame....if we had one!

Thank you for your kind words!

Technically, there is a Slashdot "Hall of Fame" [slashdot.org] and, I am honored to say, I am in it, being in 8th place on the list of "Most Active Submitters" (which is actually kind of a misnomer; it is based only on accepted submissions; rejected submissions aren't counted). What is even more gratifying, though, is the list of people who have named me as a "Friend" on Slashdot. The list is so long I can barely load the page. If and only if you are confident in the speed and power of your computer, internet connection, and browser, here [slashdot.org] 's the URL.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

rts008 (812749) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025493)

I stand corrected, and better informed...again!

BTW: Congrat's, you've earned it.

The 'friends' list (yes, i checked your link) is impressive, but hardly surprising. Just confirms what I said previously! :-)

NYCL's Fans Page (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27027111)

here [slashdot.org] 's the URL.

It says (Chrome):
"This webpage is not available."
"Error 2 (net::ERR_FAILED): Unknown error."

Maybe your fans page has been Slashdotted?

Re:NYCL's Fans Page (1)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27027207)

It says (Chrome): "This webpage is not available." "Error 2 (net::ERR_FAILED): Unknown error."

Don't say I didn't warn you. It's a very tough page to load. Over 1600 people there.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025395)

The world needs more lawyers like you, successfully fighting on behalf of 'the common man' against the big corporations, getting word out to the masses, and just being an all around 'fine chap'.

OK, NYCL: He's been properly brainwashed. You may commence taking over the world now.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (2, Funny)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025413)

The world needs more lawyers like you, successfully fighting on behalf of 'the common man' against the big corporations, getting word out to the masses, and just being an all around 'fine chap'.

OK, NYCL: He's been properly brainwashed. You may commence taking over the world now.

Not until you come around as well. I am waiting until all pockets of resistance have been subdued.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

plaxion (98397) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024951)

Since you discovered Slashdot, Slashdot hasn't been the same either... and I mean that in a good way.

Thank you for your contributions. With you around, the signal to noise ratio is much more bearable.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (3, Funny)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025155)

Since you discovered Slashdot, Slashdot hasn't been the same either... and I mean that in a good way. Thank you for your contributions. With you around, the signal to noise ratio is much more bearable.

Yeah but which did I contribute, more signal, or more noise?

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

Alsee (515537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025573)

Yes :)

-

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026737)

The people seemed a little like lawyers -- but they clearly were not lawyers -- and many of them seemed to be smarter than lawyers.

If I was smarter than a lawyer, where would I be? ... in a really huge house with the bazillions of dollars I'd be making doing something even more lucrative than law practice!

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (3, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026879)

If I was smarter than a lawyer, where would I be? ... in a really huge house with the bazillions of dollars I'd be making doing something even more lucrative than law practice!

If you really believe that there is a correlation between intelligence and wealth.... then you haven't met the same people I've met in my life.

Re:Introduced me to Slashdot (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27044241)

The correlation is probably more between (intelligence U philanthropy) than intelligence alone. If you're smart, you can make yourself rich; if you're smart and care about nothing more than money, you WILL make yourself rich.

3 stressful years (4, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023259)

For 3 stressful years the RIAA was able to hold this citizen in fear.

Such extortionate practices should not be allowed.

*4* stressful years (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023269)

Correction: It's been almost 4 years since RIAA first sent the "Pay $5000 or else" extortion letter. Tyrants.

Re:3 stressful years (1)

Hybrid-brain (1478551) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024443)

For 3 stressful years the RIAA was able to hold this citizen in fear.

Such extortionate practices should not be allowed.

Which is why we few honest citizens left, should do the following. 1) Start a petition 2) Go after the RIAA family members 3) Hold said family members for ransom, and explain that if the RIAA does not step down from all cases and disband, then we will start chopping off parts of the people til each person is unable to survive. 4) If the RIAA does not back down because of a few dead bodies, then we will up the ante. We will start on a much more massive scale, kiddnapping, extortion, more chopping off of body parts. 5) Once the RIAA gives into our demands, after their families have been dealt with, we will all put them in a field and use them as target practice. 6) Once that is done, we will have posted video and post it everwhere and make it clear, should people ever try to reconvene the RIAA that these actions will take place again. 7) With the RIAA out of the way, the world will be a much safer place.

Re:3 stressful years (1)

inasity_rules (1110095) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025679)

Though interestingly enough this does set a precedent, even if not a legal one... Sure, sue me. But I will fight tooth and nail until you are forced to secretly settle with me. I'll quite happily keep silent about how much I'm getting, as long as its plenty...

(Disclaimer: I live in a country without a working legal system or an independant judicial system so anything I say on a legal matter may have no meaning)

Re:3 stressful years (1)

1,$d (635533) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026753)

"Such extortionate practices should not be allowed."

Such extortionate practices should be punished. Disallowing future misdeeds isn't good enough. The RIAA should be (legally) punished for bad behavior. Otherwise there's no real incentive for organizations like that to stop.

Probably a "Wash" (2, Interesting)

resistant (221968) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023329)

Without knowing the details of the settlement, I suspect the RIAA agreed to drop the entire case, in return for silence on the subject and a non-binding secret precedent. Ms. Santangelo and her family are doubtless by now dreadfully tired of the entire mess and anxious to see it go away, and the RIAA is doubtless in a thug lawyerish way dreadfully tired of the entire mess by now and anxious to sweep it under the rug, leaving them with freedom to continue their other cases without an embarrassing public precedent.

Of course, this leaves Ms. Santangelo and her family uncompensated for having been put through the mill, but that's the legal system for you.

Here's how to solve that. (3, Insightful)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023489)

So when an org. with a testosterone plasma cannon has to "settle and go secret", they are probably 3/4 in the wrong and only using bully powers to silence her.

The solution is to publish using the glorious powers of the net encrypted synergistic simultaneous codexes against every single unreleased act they have which, when joined against the innocent song lyrics of the nicely broadcast music, tells the whole story in subtitles on every retail demo tv in the world.

Oh, Hi Echelon. You're a nice little compy. But Slashdot has prior art.

Re:Here's how to solve that. (1)

iammani (1392285) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023681)

Just curious, was that generated by a bot using NLP?

Re:Here's how to solve that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023731)

Neurolinguistic Programming or Natural Language Processing?

Re:Here's how to solve that. (3, Funny)

arth1 (260657) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023893)

Just curious, was that generated by a bot using NLP?

Would you like if that was generated by a bot using NLP?

Re:Here's how to solve that. (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024517)

How does it make you feel thinking about a bot using NLP? Imagine a warm, bright light that shines on your face which is a bot using NLP. Feel it sink through your forehead, making you feel all warm and relaxed. Feel the power of the bot using NLP.

here's how I read it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27030067)

Imagine a *worm*, bright light that shines on your face which is a bot using NLP.

Re:NLP (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024065)

Classy.

I'm not sure I'm being imsulted or whether I am the harbinger of Vernor Vinge's Singularity.

Re:NLP (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024073)

P.S. The typo rules out bot.

Re:NLP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27025075)

P.S. The typo rules out bot.

That's what you WANT us to believe... Bot!

Re:Here's how to solve that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024377)

I don't normally talk about how there can be no argument that Iammani's rude harangues disgust me. However, in this case I'm going to make an exception.

I figure it's okay because Iammani has the gall to teach stuck-up concepts to slashdotters. Permit me the prelude caveat that most people want to be nice; they want to be polite; they don't want to give offense. And because of this inherent politeness, they step aside and let Iammani supplant national heroes with the worst kinds of sex-crazed, daft madmen there are.

Every time he tries, Iammani gets increasingly successful in his attempts to substitute rumor and gossip for bona fide evidence. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well. If interdenominationalism were an Olympic sport, he would clinch the gold medal. Lastly, for those who read this post, I hope you take it to heart and pass this message on to others.

Re:Probably a "Wash" (1)

belmolis (702863) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023747)

a non-binding secret precedent.

Trial court decisions and settlements are never binding on anyone else anyhow. The principle is that decisions of a higher court are binding on the lower courts within its jurisdiction. If, for example, the Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit issues an opinion, that opinion is binding on the federal trial courts within the 2nd Circuit, but not elsewhere. Since a trial court has no lower courts within its jurisdiction, its decisions are binding only on the parties to the particular case. They extend elsewhere only in the limited circumstances resulting from estoppel.

Re:Probably a "Wash" (1)

budgenator (254554) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023921)

She probably got something money wise, which will be cutoff if she talks about the case publicly.

Re:Probably a "Wash" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27024389)

I would gladly contribute to a fund to reimburse her for that loss if she did post those details.

Anon as I've moderated.

I don't know this lawyer mumbo jumbo (1)

PJ1216 (1063738) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023375)

What does settled in principle mean?

Re:I don't know this lawyer mumbo jumbo (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023481)

What does settled in principle mean?

They've agreed on basically what the settlement terms will be but havent formally committed themselves through a binding set of words.

Re:I don't know this lawyer mumbo jumbo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27025035)

I suspect that the settlement has already been put into words and actually been filed with the court, and the only thinfgmissing is the judge accepting and signing it off.

Re:I don't know this lawyer mumbo jumbo (2, Funny)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023537)

What does settled in principle mean?

It means that no principles were involved.

Re:I don't know this lawyer mumbo jumbo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023589)

It means you have a very small penis and you like little boys.

Re:I don't know this lawyer mumbo jumbo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27023899)

No, that's your mom, remember.

Time to stop RIAA's misuse of legal systems (2)

el_jake (22335) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023543)

Time to stop RIAA corporate conglomerate racketeering. There misuse of legal systems and there use of gangster like methods has completely gone wild. It can't be accepted anymore in a democratic society. Corporations are not higher ranked entities, we citizen must act.

Re:Time to stop RIAA's misuse of legal systems (5, Insightful)

arth1 (260657) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023861)

Time to stop RIAA corporate conglomerate racketeering. There misuse of legal systems and there use of gangster like methods has completely gone wild. It can't be accepted anymore in a democratic society. Corporations are not higher ranked entities, we citizen must act.

Yes, corporations are higher ranked entities here in the land of the free.

As long as we have a system where politicians are allowed to receive money from corporations, the politicians will, of course, pass laws favoring their campaign contributors.

And, as long as we have a system where corporations are given all the rights of, but not all the duties of a citizen, the individual will always have to fight a pitched fight.

One day, the average American will figure out that if he doesn't want to give power to the government because a government might not have your best interest at heart, the alternative is invariably that corporations seize the power, and corporations will never have your best interest at heart.

Re:Time to stop RIAA's misuse of legal systems (2, Informative)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023933)

As long as we have a system where politicians are allowed to receive money from corporations, the politicians will, of course, pass laws favoring their campaign contributors. And, as long as we have a system where corporations are given all the rights of, but not all the duties of a citizen, the individual will always have to fight a pitched fight. One day, the average American will figure out that if he doesn't want to give power to the government because a government might not have your best interest at heart, the alternative is invariably that corporations seize the power, and corporations will never have your best interest at heart.

Brilliant comment, arth_1. Hope you get modded to +5 for that insight.

Re:Time to stop RIAA's misuse of legal systems (1)

Deltaspectre (796409) | more than 5 years ago | (#27025409)

Looks like someone rolled a 20 on their Insightfulness check

Re:Time to stop RIAA's misuse of legal systems (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024555)

As long as we have a system where politicians are allowed to receive money from corporations, the politicians will, of course, pass laws favoring their campaign contributors.

Amen. Private contributions to individual politicians are bad - many other countries have realized that a long time ago (genereally it's called bribery.) Such money needs to be funneled through an organization that spreads the money equally between candidates, typically the party.

Re:Time to stop RIAA's misuse of legal systems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27025903)

So long as SCOTUS's ruling that $$ = Speech, that won't change.

That was one of the dark days for America. (IMO, etc..)

I really wish there was a way we could un-politicize the Supreme Court. To do that, I think the biggest thing that needs to be done is remove the Judge's Law (Judiciary Act of 1925) ability of SCOTUS to decide which cases it hears. Or at least pick another party (that has to respond to the People in some form) that can force SCOTUS to review a case it doesn't want to...

RIAA Recording industrusty authoratatives AAAAAA. (1)

kingcobra0128 (1131641) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023685)

RIAA should just go away taking their fans to court is so wrong. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Ban Confidential Settltments (4, Interesting)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 5 years ago | (#27023759)

Confidential settlements should be illegal - entirely! The courts are a public institution and once you drag people into them it affects the public. The public deserves to know who won and who lost here - and in all such cases!

Re:Ban Confidential Settltments (1)

claire_rand (1464671) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024011)

the whole point in keeping the settlement private is so that others can't drag it into other cases and point to whats been agreed before. i don't think actually banning such orders is productive, since they would simply be replaced with agreements similar in effect, which could be harder to regulate. i do think there may well be a 'leak' here though, and i can guess which side it will come from

Re:Ban Confidential Settltments (1)

wfstanle (1188751) | more than 5 years ago | (#27027071)

You just have to phrase the prohibition so that there is no way around it. As for as setting a precedent, that is a not argument. As far as I know, settlements do not create a judicial precedent.

Re:Ban Confidential Settltments (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 5 years ago | (#27027911)

the whole point in keeping the settlement private is so that others can't drag it into other cases and point to whats been agreed before.

Sure, but that's not the court's problem. If you don't want the public to see your dirty laundry, then don't air it in a public place (such as a courtroom).

In this case, where the RIAA has many cookie cutter suits going and threatens many more, it is very much in the public interest that any weaknesses be exposed. If for no other reason, so that the courts need not waste more of the public's money re-inventing the wheel dozens of times over.

No comment clauses in settlements (1)

wfstanle (1188751) | more than 5 years ago | (#27024451)

I'm tired of settlements where one or both parties agree not to talk about the case. I'm especially tired where only one side is prevented from speaking out after the case is over. What usually happens is that the side that can still speak out then spins a story about the case to the public and the other side is prevented from replying. At the very least, since all court documents are presumably public records, the judge should not be allowed to seal the court documents. I'm not talking about criminal cases where there might be a good reason to do so. Just ban gag orders in civil cases. The public has a right to know what is going on in their courts and settlements should not be allowed to restrict that right. If you don't want to the particulars of a case to be public, then don't sue.

Secret Settlements Should End (1)

serutan (259622) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026095)

Is anybody else tired of following highly public legal cases for several years, only to have them end in secret settlements? Highly litigious entities like the RIAA have full access to their own records of how they settled past lawsuits, but their new opponents have no such information. This hardly seems fair. The outcomes of lawsuits become, in effect, laws we have to live by, and people have a right to know the law. I think there should be a threshold for lawsuits, maybe a certain amount of court time. If it takes longer, the outcome should be made public. After all, the public pays much of the actual costs of operating the court system. I think we're entitled to find out how these stories end.

Re:Secret Settlements Should End (2, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27026209)

Is anybody else tired of following highly public legal cases for several years, only to have them end in secret settlements? Highly litigious entities like the RIAA have full access to their own records of how they settled past lawsuits, but their new opponents have no such information. This hardly seems fair. The outcomes of lawsuits become, in effect, laws we have to live by, and people have a right to know the law. I think there should be a threshold for lawsuits, maybe a certain amount of court time. If it takes longer, the outcome should be made public. After all, the public pays much of the actual costs of operating the court system. I think we're entitled to find out how these stories end.

I agree. And I have no doubt that the RIAA uses its financial might to determine which settlements are confidential and which aren't. Those they want the public to see, are public. Those they want to keep confidential, are confidential. It's important information not only to the public, but also to the defendants in other cases, and lawyers representing them.

But the thing is I can't imagine the law being changed. Our courts are overloaded. The courts need for cases to be settled. And some settlements just wouldn't happen if one or the other of the parties couldn't insist on confidentiality.

Re:Secret Settlements Should End (1)

Therefore I am (1284262) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028241)

Perhaps if we generated some likely compensation scenarios the RIAA would feel that they had to publish the real figures to offset the damage caused by rumour-mongering............... I heard, on good authority, that she was granted free music for life plus a CPI index linked annual pension of $150,000. Scchhh! You didn't hear it from me.

Chicken and egg issue (1)

cheros (223479) | more than 5 years ago | (#27029037)

The courts are overloaded because the system is being abused. Until such time as the courts start acting in a decent way against those that are abusing the system the situation will continue to exist - to the benefit of the abusers.

I vaguely recall that there was a concept of "justice" wrapped up in this..

All IMHO, of course, IANAL..

Re:Chicken and egg issue (1)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 5 years ago | (#27030989)

The courts are overloaded because the system is being abused. Until such time as the courts start acting in a decent way against those that are abusing the system the situation will continue to exist - to the benefit of the abusers. I vaguely recall that there was a concept of "justice" wrapped up in this.. All IMHO, of course, IANAL..

Well perhaps YANAL but YAR.

Re:Secret Settlements Should End (1)

autophile (640621) | more than 5 years ago | (#27029855)

Isn't it true that a settlement introduces no new caselaw because, in effect, the case is cancelled? In which case the "outcome of the lawsuit" mentioned above does not become a "law we have to live by"?

Re:Secret Settlements Should End (1)

JohhnyTHM (799469) | more than 5 years ago | (#27030123)

Those they want to keep confidential, are confidential.

*cough*wikileaks*cough*

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>