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 Not Done With Jesse Jordan

CmdrTaco posted more than 11 years ago | from the billion-dollar-organization-vs-kid dept.

The Courts 488

digime writes "In a recent Slashdot article it was reported that 19-year-old college student Jesse Jordan gave up his life savings to the RIAA for running a campus search engine. He has recovered over 83% of his savings lost to the RIAA, and his search engine is back up. "The RIAA started yelling and tried to rescind my order of dismissal after they signed it because of comments that I made on CNN.", Jordan says on his site. "A very well-known top lawyer at the RIAA, while making threats of further legal actions, referred to himself as a 'dentist' that I would not want to 'have another visit with'"

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

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266860)

any hott girlz up for a steamy nerd cyber session meet me in irc channel #nerdpimp

Re:FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266881)

I am actually a guy but i'll pretend to be a grrl if you be the grrl next time.

frosted piss cream (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266862)

frosted piss cream

Yeah! (4, Funny)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266866)

Stick it to the man!

...so you can lose all your money again.

Hey, today it's Sunday! (-1, Offtopic)

Kwelstr (114389) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266937)

Too many upseting stories... give us a break! Maybe somebody can post something uplifting??? Pretty please with sugar on top?...

Re:Hey, today it's Sunday! (0, Troll)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267093)

Too many upseting stories... give us a break! Maybe somebody can post something uplifting???

The world is an upsetting place. Even on sunday.

Pretty please with sugar on top?

What a childish non-sequiter. I'll never understand why people use that phrase. "Please" is simply a word, and can neither be "pretty" nor can it be topped with sugar.

Re:Hey, today it's Sunday! (0, Troll)

Dysproxia (584031) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267129)

Pretty please with sugar on top?

What a childish non-sequiter. I'll never understand why people use that phrase. "Please" is simply a word, and can neither be "pretty" nor can it be topped with sugar.

Not childish! It was in Monkey Island, therefore it is a serious pop culture quote.

Re:Yeah! (4, Insightful)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267033)

Maybe the RIAA would back off a bit if most of their legal attack squad and mayhaps their fearless leader all had glorious meetings with a large bullets.

...which is exactly why organized crime families should run p2p networks.

No new CDs (3, Interesting)

nafmo (147094) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266867)

Well, I've given up buying new CDs because of the bully tactics from the recording industries.

Re:No new CDs (2, Insightful)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266888)

Hey now, the RIAA is just the Recording Industry Association of America. There are plenty of foreign labels like Century Media, Spinefarm, and Nuclear Blast that have plenty of artists to offer.

Re:No new CDs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266986)

Agreed, I still buy a lot of music, just not from those assholes.

Re:No new CDs (3, Insightful)

nafmo (147094) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267005)

I know, but in the age of the USian megacoprs owning almost every recording company on the planet, it's hard to figure out which ones are the good guys.

If there are any. I'm not sure, it seems like most recording companies are getting buyer-hostile these days.

Re:No new CDs (4, Insightful)

Arker (91948) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267090)

The European companies are just as bad. Indies might be ok, but most of them are pretty deep in bed with the biggies just to survive too. I only buy from bands directly. There are actually some really good musicians out there selling CDs pressed on their own computer. Go to gigs. If you like em, buy their CD.

Could if be, FP?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266870)

FP is the thing to do
FP kicks the hell out of you

Re:Could if be, FP?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267108)

Well... FP is NOT the thing to do 'Cause all the trolls before you kicked the hell out of you. Nice try, Mr. Offtopic.

Dentist... how appropriate (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266875)

I think it is time for someone to pull the RIAA's teeth

Mafia (4, Insightful)

Esion Modnar (632431) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267047)

More and more, I associate the *AA with the Mafia. Their real source of power is intimidation, usually through carefully chosen lawsuits against financially unprepared defendants. (First Amendment? Not if it goes against *AA interests! *AA uber alles!! Sieg heil!)

Oh, and strategically placed "campaign contributions".

If that bit about "visiting the dentist" is accurate, I hope he gets his teeth knocked out in some unfortunate freak accident with a ballpeen hammer.

Re:Dentist... how appropriate (5, Insightful)

deranged unix nut (20524) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267104)

Where can we get a list of RIAA mailing addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses?

Re:Dentist... how appropriate (1)

CineK (55517) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267110)

do you remember that movie with dustin hoffman running into the nazi dentist?
It was Marathon Man directed by John Schlesinger.
I wonder if that lawyer had this kind of dentist on his mind ;)
here is the review of that film [fwfr.com]

It is time for a major BOYCOTT (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266879)

And a clearly-spoken public campaign to discredit these scum at the RIAA. The "dentist" can go fuck himself. The threat by this "top" RIAA attorney is assault and he needs to be criminally prosecuted.

From Slashdot? (4, Insightful)

Wind_Walker (83965) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266947)

Yeah, right. Just like we're boycotting Blizzard because of their bnet.d hassles... oh wait, we ran a story on the release and expansion of Warcraft III.

Well, the MPAA is horrible and is taking away rights! But hell, here comes X-2, The Hulk, Lord of the Rings, etc.

The Slashdot crowd is all about boycotts, except when it makes life inconvenient for them. Then they'll pony up to the bar faster than... something that ponies up to the bar really quick.

Faster than (0, Troll)

matithyahu (560061) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267068)

A Super-quick bar pony upper?

Re:From Slashdot? (2, Interesting)

jwilcox154 (469038) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267096)

Except, this has nothing to do with the MPAA, this is the RIAA we're talking about. Oh, about Boycotts, I have not bought any cds in the past 2 Years "Except, perhaps, blank CDs", I get my music in Analog form now "I.E. 8-Track, Vinyl Albums, Cassette", and not a single penny goes to the RIAA.

The problems are 1. The Teens and Pree-Teens cant "or at leat think they can't" do without the cookie cutter boy and girl bands

2. Even if everyone were to stop pirating their music, the RIAA would still blame the loss of sale on pirating. "And, I imagine the RIAA would consider my activities of copying music from an analog format to a digital format for my own personal use a form of piracy."

...Teach him! (3, Interesting)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266880)

That'll teach him that democracy and freedom runs rampant in the good ol' US of A.

What I have to question, do *AA laywers live for bad-press by the nerds of the world? Sure, people are still buying their tripe but the non-nerd part of the world will figure it out eventually. Weird....

Tom

Re:...Teach him! (2, Insightful)

The Only Druid (587299) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266987)

Um, this has nothing to due with flaws in the American system. If his comments to CNN violate the terms of the settlement, then the RIAA is fully in its rights to rescind all benefits from that dismissal.

Now, I am not sure - glancing at the interviews and the dismissal agreement - whether or not he's violated it or not. Frankly, thats for someone with a more precise legal background to handle than me. But thats the key issue: we simply cannot rant against the RIAA unless we first confirm that they're doing anything wrong.

thr0d ps1t (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266885)

One of the big problems with our legal system is that it is easy to bully someone with a frivolous lawsuit when they can't afford the time or money to defend themselves. As the defendant pointed out, a lawsuit against AltaVista would have just as much justification behind it (little to none) but they didn't go after them because AltaVista can afford to defend themselves.

Re:thr0d ps1t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266941)

This is exactly what happens in criminal justice -- where poor people cannot defend themselves & get appointed attorneys who fall asleep by the court.

Re:thr0d ps1t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266993)

Absolutely! We are in the process of defending a peice of property ( the house I am living in! ) from a set of frivolous lawsuits. If it was not for the fact that I only rent it and do not own it I would have already had to move. Fortunately for me it is a family property that I rent for 900 a month But the estimated legal costs to defend it are more than the value of the property by about 9 grand. I dont have 100k to defend it but the family does. Of course as soon as the case is over we will prolly have to sell it to recoup the costs, meaning I will have to find another place to live again. The only winner will be the lawyers. As neither party will be able to afford the property afterwards.

Re:thr0d ps1t (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267015)

(Score: -1, no shit)

This is insightful? Duh!

Re:thr0d ps1t (1)

dbrutus (71639) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267059)

The problem of rich or super-motivated plaintiffs bringing defendents to their knees via lawsuits is the essence of the motivation behind the tort reform movement. Unfortunately, the trial lawyers who make a mint off the current system have united to become the largest funder (bigger than unions or minorities) of the Democrat party. Good luck getting tort reform passed until there's 60 Republicans in the Senate (or close to it).

The search engine is NOT back up (5, Informative)

moonbender (547943) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266891)

The article says: "He has recovered over 83% of his savings lost to the RIAA, and his search engine is back up."

Apparently, that is not correct, as it says the following on the search engine's website [chewplastic.com] (also linked in the article):
The ChewPlastic Campus Search Engine is currently available to the public as a demonstration of the site as it was. NOTE: The files listed through the results on this site are fictitious - they DO NOT EXIST. This means that you cannot download them because they are fake computers on a fake network. While there is a small assortment of files listed in the search engine, they are not meant to represent the actual assortment of files available during the Search Engine's operation.
He does, however, say "I am legally allowed to run my search engine - it is not forbidden by my dismissal. I have a first amendment right to free speech.", so maybe he intends to bring the search engine back up for real ...

Re:The search engine is NOT back up (4, Funny)

RickHunter (103108) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266945)

The search engine that's up right now looks to be him thumbing his nose at the RIAA. Try doing a search for "Metallica" or "Linkin" (or other popular band names) and take a look at the results. Searching for "linux" also produces amusing output.

I approve. Very nice way to show that he's not intimidated by their legal protection racket.

Re:The search engine is NOT back up (1)

dbrutus (71639) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267071)

And isn't this the entire point of the exercise? The RIAA (and MPAA for that matter) aren't looking for legal remedies for a particular instance of lawbreaking, they're looking to create a mass of cowed serfs who take their hats off and bow when their lords and masters pass by them.

Using the legal process as an intimidation tool is just how the lawyers like it. We need tort reform now!

Mirror (5, Informative)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266893)

Dismissal [fissionwear.com]

I don't think Jessee will mind a mirror of the settlement PDF.

Re:Mirror (5, Informative)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267016)

The site is getting slashdotted, here's the post from his blog too:

I have posted my Order of Dismissal (settlement) to the lawsuit filed against me by the RIAA. As stated in the settlement, I settled solely to avoid the costs of litigation. There is a very long story behind my settlement.

I am truly appalled by the RIAA's unprofessional conduct in dealing with my case. A very well-known top lawyer at the RIAA, while making threats of further legal actions, referred to himself as a "dentist" that I would not want to "have another visit with". I will not be intimidated by the RIAA - they're just going to have to put up with me.

The RIAA started yelling and tried to rescind my order of dismissal after they signed it because of comments that I made on CNN. Despite the $12,000 figure in my settlement, the other terms of the settlement were carefully negotiated over the course of several weeks.

"My fundamental view is that people should not be able to walk away from a deal they've made.", says RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen in response to California issues over artist contracts. It would seem to follow that the RIAA should understand the concept of a legally binding agreement. If an artist signs a contract and then later decides that they don't like the terms of that contract, the labels should understand now because that is exactly what they did with my dismissal (my dismissal is a legally binding agreement).

It is time to call the RIAA to task on their clear hypocrisy on many issues. I am legally allowed to run my search engine - it is not forbidden by my dismissal. I have a first amendment right to free speech. On the surface, the RIAA claims to support the right to free speech - but only when it benefits their bottom line. When their victim speaks out against them, they step up the intimidation.

They were so desperate to undo my dismissal that they were resorting to blatant lies. I have even been accused of tricking the RIAA into signing my dismissal.

Unfortunately for the RIAA, their basis for undoing the dismissal was so ridiculous that the judge didn't even take up my offer to mediate with the RIAA over their issues with the dismissal - he decided to enter the agreement.

A number of documents surrounding this issue will soon be published. For now, read my order of dismissal.

"on, over, through or via" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267111)

The dismissal is hilarious.

As anyone with any net saavy knows, you don't access files "on, over, through, or via" a site when it gives you a URL. The browser shows the URL and *you*, the user, get the file (or not).

'HTTP for Lawyers' anyone?

I love America (3, Insightful)

TripleA (232889) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266894)

Keep in mind that it is companies like this, aggressive, immoral capitalists, that run the USA through their lobbying organisations. No wonder daddy's boy has also started his way to bullying the world into WW3.

Re:I love America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266943)

Hey now, everyone knows George Bush is just a puppet of the Illuminati.

Re:I love America (1)

Angry White Guy (521337) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266958)

I thought it was the Lindburgs?

Re:I love America (1)

gearheadsmp (569823) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266962)

And he's obviously got his priorities fscked up, because he was jerking off with Iraq while he could have been "rectifying" the North Korean issue.

Re:I love America (1, Interesting)

dbrutus (71639) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267124)

Oh, no, N. Korea's an entirely different situation. Who are the Iraqi version of the S. Koreans? you know, the guys with more population, a hugely bigger economy, and right on the border with this lunatic nation of their co-ethnics?

S. Korea, Japan, and the PRC could take apart N. Korea by themselves if they wanted to. But who was able to do it in Iraq's neighborhood and clean up the local bully? Iran? Please. They sacrificed a generation of their children to Iraqi gas and minefields. Saudia Arabia? ROFL! Kuwait? you're kidding, right? Turkey's really the only candidate and they just aren't interested, as taking responsibility for Iraq would set back their ambitions of joining the EU for decades. They've got enough trouble with Cyprus.

But fear not, there are interesting moves afoot in N. Korea and Rumsfeld's likely to soon announce some force structure changes that have already been leaked to the press that remake the old status quo. He's pulling forces back off of the DMZ and it's driving the N. Koreans nuts. How can they justify their repressive measures (which in reality are there to stop revolt) when the great boogie man is pulling his troops off their borders. It also scares the piss out of S. Korea because they have to come up with the replacements for those troops at the DMZ. The extra cost should focus their minds pretty well on the cost of playing friendly with a psychotic regime.

double offences (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266896)

isnt there some double jeopardy law/ammendment in the usa that prevents this?

Double Jeopardy (5, Insightful)

nuggz (69912) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266940)

Not if you do it twice.

Re:double offences (3, Informative)

kfg (145172) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267117)

As the other poster notes double jeopardy does not apply to multiple counts.

More to the point, double jeopardy does not apply to civil cases between litigants. It only applies to criminal cases.

Money can be argued over forever.

KFG

Jesse's Business Model (4, Funny)

telstar (236404) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266899)

1) Get sued for $12k
2) People donate money
3) Get sued again for $90b
4) People donate hella money
.
.
5) Profit?

Re:Jesse's Business Model (1)

chief-dot (197143) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267119)

He's kinda temporarily profiting anyway.

As part of the dismissal he had to pay $12K but he only pays $5K now and $2.3K next year and $2.3K the year after etc. etc.

So he's ahead for the next couple of years at least :)

Oooh scary. (5, Funny)

paroneayea (642895) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266901)

A very well-known top lawyer at the RIAA, while making threats of further legal actions, referred to himself as a 'dentist' that I would not want to 'have another visit with'
So wait a minute... dentists are supposed to be the ones working for you. So, it seems to me that he's saying he's not the kind of guy you'd want to hire twice. Nevertheless, his comment sounds a lot like this:
Booga booga booga!

Re:Oooh scary. (1)

gearheadsmp (569823) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266974)

Or better yet, notify the "Dentist" that he's going to end up as a statistic - suicidal dentist!

Re:Oooh scary. (3, Funny)

Associate (317603) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267055)

Better yet. Why doesn't the ADA sue the lawyer for implying there is something wrong with being a dentist?

Search engine might be "back online," but... (3, Insightful)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266906)

"06/19/03: The ChewPlastic Campus Search Engine is currently available to the public as a demonstration of the site as it was. NOTE: The files listed through the results on this site are fictitious - they DO NOT EXIST. This means that you cannot download them because they are fake computers on a fake network. While there is a small assortment of files listed in the search engine, they are not meant to represent the actual assortment of files available during the Search Engine's operation."

Oh, how useful.

Re:Search engine might be "back online," but... (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266930)

Actually its a fiendishly cunning RIAA honey trap

Silent Majority (1)

deunan_k (637851) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266909)

Go for it man! You'll never walk alone! (Damn, feels like a Liverpool FC fan)

We are all rooting for you! It's just that most of us rather not be in the open. I mean, we do have balls, large brass ones.. two of 'em! but let's not provide 'em a target if you can help it.

Re:Silent Majority (1)

Tim Doran (910) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267023)

Go for it man! ...though you may never walk again...

*sigh

A Dentist? (2, Funny)

agentZ (210674) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266915)

A dentist? Like in Cryptonomicon? Uh oh...

Re:A Dentist? (1)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266960)

No, like in Gremlins 2: The New Batch.

Man, that Gremlin was the coolest dentist ever.

Re:A Dentist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267056)

My first thought was THE RUNNING MAN.

...f*ckin' nazis...

Actually, he's worse than that, coz he's also a lawyer.

Re:A Dentist? (1)

andreMA (643885) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267082)

Or maybe Marathon Man. Hmms... dentists seem to get a bad rap in a number of movies. I wonder how they pissed off the RI^H^HMPAA?

Wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266916)

Must have a hard time walking around... with those large brass things in his pants. :-D

Fight the good fight!

Re:Wow (1)

Angry White Guy (521337) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266944)

I will not donate any more money to him so that it can go back to the RIAA, but I will chip in on a plane ticket to Europe...

The RIAA are legal terrorists (5, Interesting)

Tuxinatorium (463682) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266918)

These are the folks who ashcroft should be worrying about.

Re:The RIAA are legal terrorists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267091)

these are the people that pay Ashcroft to support his Terrorism fight...

Way to go slashdot... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266919)

This idiot really seems to be learning. When the RIAA gets his ass thrown in jail, are you guys going to donate days of getting fucked up the ass to this poor idiot?

Re:Way to go slashdot... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266942)

"...are you guys going to donate days of getting fucked up the ass to this poor idiot?"
  • Based on the male/female ratio at RPI, I'd say he's probably already had his fill ... no pun intended.

Re:Way to go slashdot... (1)

metamechanical (545566) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267036)

Hey, the ratio here isn't THAT bad. I mean, I have a girlfriend, as do many of my friends. Granted, they all go to different schools, but I think I've proved my point sufficiently.

The Dentist (1)

Scoria (264473) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266929)

referred to himself as a 'dentist'

There isn't anything comparably ominous to The Dentist: "Once I'm done with these here teeth, son, I'll be exploring the lower territory with my drill..."

Where's teh EFF ? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266932)

This seems right up their alley... this kid was running a general purpose search engine. It indexes everything it finds. It returns results. He made no money off of it. He was intimidated into settling, pure and simple.

Can I run a search engine now? Exactly HOW are google and alta vista immune from similar suits? Simple -- they can pay lawyers who could kick the crap out of the RIAA.

It's a travesty of justice. I wish one of the multi-letter organizations would help this guy.

Re:Where's teh EFF ? (2, Informative)

yack0 (2832) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267050)

>Can I run a search engine now? Exactly HOW are
>google and alta vista immune from similar suits?
>Simple -- they can pay lawyers who could kick the
>crap out of the RIAA.

How? They can afford lawyers. College students can't. It's really quite as simple as that. Set the precedent in the court with someone unable to defend themselves and then you can start getting the bigger fish. The same thing happened with Divine, Inc. [divineintervention.us] . Thing is, Divine went Chap 11. So whoever buys their property will do it all again. Lucky us.

Re:Where's teh EFF ? (1)

Wavicle (181176) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267075)

I'm not sure if the EFF and this guy have talked, but I can think of a few reasons why the two might avoid involvement: First, any time you go through litigation, there is a chance you'll lose, which could mean bankruptcy as well as loss of life savings. Second, the court already shot Napster down so it is kind of a touchy area.

The question that would be raised at trial would be "What are most of the files being searched for?" In Google's case, it's probably sex or Britney Spears. In this guy's case it is probably mp3/ogg.

hmmm.... (4, Insightful)

The Tyro (247333) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266934)

If I read your dismissal action correctly, you are prohibited from trading/transmitting/etc/etc/ad nauseum any sort of copyrighted works via your phynd service.

It also states that the "defendant shall not engage in or sell" software that encourages copying, trading, blah, blah, blah.

How are you keeping your Phynd service up again(or are you just offering it for download)? Is it your contention that your software is intended to do nothing of the sort (ie. just a tool to be used for good OR evil)? That's the only loophole I can see in that document... anyone better with legalese than myself find something different?

I'm a little confused here.

Re:hmmm.... (1)

cliffiecee (136220) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267042)

...you are prohibited from trading/transmitting/etc/etc/ad nauseum any sort of copyrighted works via your phynd service...

He isn't. [chewplastic.com]

Re:hmmm.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267072)

"prohibited from trading/transmitting/etc/etc/ad nauseum any sort of copyrighted works via your phynd service."

Does that include anything written by the person himself, which is by default copyrighted?

RIAA behaving like criminals (4, Insightful)

bani (467531) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266948)

...well, the RIAA was caught price fixing, and settled rather than face conviction, so I guess it's only expected that they should behave like criminals :)

What an idiot (4, Funny)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266951)

It is time to call the RIAA to task on their clear hypocrisy on many issues. I am legally allowed to run my search engine - it is not forbidden by my dismissal.

Ha! Looks like you fools who donated could have saved yourself the trouble and made your donations straight to the RIAA.

the law sucks.. (4, Interesting)

SystematicPsycho (456042) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266952)

What sucks about the legal system is that anyone can make something up and file a law suit against you, and if you don't have the funds to deal with and defend the allegation then you're screwed in court.

The RIAA was probably looking to make an example out of this person(making examples out of people is what they love) and probably got unlucky with this guy. The best weapon that these guys _think they have against activity they don't like is a detterant (making examples out of people for fun and profit). They'll do it again at a time of their choosing, they've got the dough and the legal beagles to screw with you.

Lawyers are like legal hitmen, give them enough money and they'll do anything you want - desperados, got to feed the family.

Re:the law sucks.. (1)

AntiOrganic (650691) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267002)

I'm not so sure on that. I think had he given this the time to take this to court, the EFF would've almost certainly stepped in to help this guy.

violating copyright ok now? (1, Flamebait)

Milikki (103463) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266957)

Has anyone considered that violating copyright is a crime, and that criminals deserve the punishment they earn by comitting crimes?

Really now, how can everyone bitch about M$ being this big organization that violates law and does whatever it wants, then turns right around and violates laws themselves and says "its my constitutional right" or "music wants to be free".

C'mon people, lets get consistant out there!

Kevin

Re:violating copyright ok now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266971)

Jesse never violated copyright.

Re:violating copyright ok now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266985)

Violating copyright is not in its self a crime. It only becomes a crime if you do it for profit.

Re:violating copyright ok now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266995)

Nice troll. The guy didn't get in trouble for copyright infringement, he got in trouble over making it easier for others to do it, maybe inadvertantly, maybe by design, but he dindn't brak any laws. He just couldn't afford to prove that he didn't.

RTFA and the previous one, and the.... (5, Informative)

botzi (673768) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267000)

Hello???
The guy was not violating any copyrights....
He's running a search engin, remember?He is NOT, repeat, NOT, hosting the files. Talking about search engins, there's one you should know about.... it's here [google.com] .... Oh wait.... If you search for ANYKNOWNARTIST.mp3... there's a 25% chance that the robot has indexed a page with a link to the file... Well, damn those criminals, lets sue them....
As stated in a post above, the RIAA have exactly the same legal right to go after Altavista, Google or whatever.

Re:violating copyright ok now? (1)

finkployd (12902) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267012)

And he violated copyright exactly HOW?

Finkployd

You're a troll. And an ignorant fuck, too. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267014)

Duh?

move the site (4, Interesting)

rf0 (159958) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266966)

Would not moving the site and the contents outside the US help avoid this or would the person still be responsbile?

Rus

RIAA wants search engine down? (5, Funny)

jakub_sad (530314) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266968)

The RIAA has nothing to worry about, Slashdot has taken care of it FREE OF CHARGE!

Just wait.. (4, Informative)

Lysol (11150) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266969)

until Mary Bono - wife to the late Sonny Bono, who was the father of the blessed Copyright Extension Act - get's into office. Out with Hillary and in with Mary who called the RIAA her 'ideal job'.

Jesus, what a family legacy..

RIAA makes example of him... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6266970)

... he makes example of RIAA, RIAA makes another example of him, blah blah blah. Why don't they just get it over with and have one of their labels sign him to a 3 album deal - that way they can fuck him whenever they want!

Pro Bono? (3, Interesting)

wbren (682133) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266980)

Isn't there any top lawyer who would take this case on for free? It seems like he could fight them if someone would step up and help him with legal needs. It also seems like a great publicity opportunity...

Community insurance ?! (2, Insightful)

teorem (256725) | more than 11 years ago | (#6266996)

So, he recovered 83% of his lost savings through donation.
Good for him, nice of the donators !
But I don't think we ("the community") will be able to support a lot of people in its situation.
Does it mean that we (all of us) should find in our usual insurance contracts if they cover our responsibility wrt to our programming activities ?

Re:Community insurance ?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267074)

Does it mean that we (all of us) should find in our usual insurance contracts if they cover our responsibility wrt to our programming activities ?

No, it just means we have to release it anonymously, or from a country other than the US.

--

Looks like Orrin Hatch blew up his box. (4, Funny)

Mordant (138460) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267007)

'Fatal error: Call to undefined function: message_die() in /opt/chewplastic/htdocs/db/db.php on line 88'

Current load: 212 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267009)

531 minutes and 45 seconds
Max allowed load: 11
Current load: 212.

Hehe!

Page Generation: 95.88 Seconds (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267011)



Legal Issues: Order of Dismissal
Saturday, June 21 @ 01:46:07 EDT by chew (96 reads)
I have posted my Order of Dismissal (settlement) to the lawsuit filed against me by the RIAA. As stated in the settlement, I settled solely to avoid the costs of litigation. There is a very long story behind my settlement.

I am truly appalled by the RIAA's unprofessional conduct in dealing with my case. A very well-known top lawyer at the RIAA, while making threats of further legal actions, referred to himself as a "dentist" that I would not want to "have another visit with". I will not be intimidated by the RIAA - they're just going to have to put up with me.

The RIAA started yelling and tried to rescind my order of dismissal after they signed it because of comments that I made on CNN. Despite the $12,000 figure in my settlement, the other terms of the settlement were carefully negotiated over the course of several weeks.

"My fundamental view is that people should not be able to walk away from a deal they've made.", says RIAA CEO Hilary Rosen in response to California issues over artist contracts. It would seem to follow that the RIAA should understand the concept of a legally binding agreement. If an artist signs a contract and then later decides that they don't like the terms of that contract, the labels should understand now because that is exactly what they did with my dismissal (my dismissal is a legally binding agreement).

It is time to call the RIAA to task on their clear hypocrisy on many issues. I am legally allowed to run my search engine - it is not forbidden by my dismissal. I have a first amendment right to free speech. On the surface, the RIAA claims to support the right to free speech - but only when it benefits their bottom line. When their victim speaks out against them, they step up the intimidation.

They were so desperate to undo my dismissal that they were resorting to blatant lies. I have even been accused of tricking the RIAA into signing my dismissal.

Unfortunately for the RIAA, their basis for undoing the dismissal was so ridiculous that the judge didn't even take up my offer to mediate with the RIAA over their issues with the dismissal - he decided to enter the agreement.

A number of documents surrounding this issue will soon be published. For now, read my order of dismissal.

http://jessej.chewplastic.com/dismissal.pdf

But no music (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267061)

Notice that the search engine makes you choose a file type, where mp3 is not one of them.

Looks like he is obeying the settlement.

Jordan hasn't decided fate of search engine (5, Informative)

mrtaco01 (683619) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267064)

I am a reporter for the Washington Times and I interviewed Jesse Jordan on Friday night and he said, "I dont think they want me to run the site anymore, but we shall see about that.It's still a question I haven't really answered, I do plan to follow the agreement."

He also explained the reason the Phynd search engine is "up" right now is so people can see how it worked and let people decided for themselves if he broke the law and so media members, like myself, can see how it worked and have a better idea of how to describe it in articles.

Boycott SCO (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267073)

off topic -1

Text of the site.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6267078)

Here's what you missed --

You Are:
XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX
Database age:
536 minutes and 16 seconds

Max allowed load:
11
Current load:
372.

Look for Sort:
In the Index of hits/page:
Advanced Search

System load levels indicate a network update is in progress, try back in 30 minutes.

This is an insult to this fine vocation! (1)

Hexedian (626557) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267089)

Dentists of the world unite! We will not let this offence go unpunished!

The fiends ... erm, lawyers, at RIAA have no right to compare themselves to you, great practicers of the marvelous world of dentistry!

Sue the bastards. (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267101)

That's intimidation, and you should sue the bastards for harassment.

-jcr

So wait a sec (0, Troll)

doormat (63648) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267122)

He is putting up his search engine again with fake results. So even if he is in the right legally, where is he going to get the money??? He thinks we're all just going to keep donating? He folded once because he didnt want to pay for an attorney. Whats he going to do if he gets sued again??

someone wise once said.. (1)

Argonath (679076) | more than 11 years ago | (#6267131)

'if you are strong, pretend weak. And if you are weak, pretend strong'.

RIAA is clearly falling to latter category considering its raging around and harassing nearly helpless (and innocent) individuals. This beast should be taken down.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?