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 Backs Down On "Unlicensed Investigator"

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the fight-fairly-now dept.

The Courts 191

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Texas grandmother Rhonda Crain got the RIAA to drop its monetary claims against her after she filed counterclaims against the record companies for using an investigator, MediaSentry, which is not licensed to conduct investigations in the State of Texas. The RIAA elected to drop its claims rather than wait for the Judge to decide the validity of Ms. Crain's charges (PDF) that the plaintiff record companies were 'aware that the... private investigations company was unlicensed to conduct investigations in the State of Texas specifically, and in other states as well... and understood that unlicensed and unlawful investigations would take place in order to provide evidence for this lawsuit, as well as thousands of others as part of a mass litigation campaign.' Similar questions about MediaSentry's unlicensed investigations were raised recently by the State Attorney General of Oregon in Arista v. Does 1-17"

cancel ×

191 comments

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

Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (5, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720816)

I'd love to see the discovery on that one.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

SmurfButcher Bob (313810) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720830)

Doesn't matter. No one connected with the RIAA mob has any accountability. Ever.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (4, Insightful)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720964)

No one connected with the RIAA mob has any accountability.

Even if RIAA loses money on this, it doesn't matter much. Until some RIAA board members are facing real prison time, they will use whatever tactics the manage to get away with.

direction is good though (2, Insightful)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721004)

things are changing, people are waking up to the danger and harm of these parasite cartels

House of Cards (2, Funny)

Cpt_Kirks (37296) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721074)

Their whole house of cards is coming down.

Actually, it is more like one of those building implosions. It starts slow, then...

The RIAA is getting hit more and more lately. More judges are finding against them. More people fighting back. More states and schools refusing to play along. 2008 may be the year they give it up.

Maybe.

Re:House of Cards (4, Funny)

Malevolyn (776946) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721356)

Old ladies are pwning noobs better than I can, these days.

Re:House of Cards (1)

kcbanner (929309) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721414)

Why would they give up, their still getting paid.

Re:House of Cards (1)

Nossie (753694) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721472)

are they? when large media conglomerates are already suggesting the amount of funding they give the RIAA?

Re:House of Cards (1)

pheco (957437) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721656)

wat

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2, Insightful)

jmnormand (941909) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722098)

Even if RIAA loses money on this, it doesn't matter much. Until some RIAA board members are facing real prison time, they will use whatever tactics the manage to get away with.
It matters if the share holders and parent execs of the media companies actually have enough intelligence to realize they are wasting what will amount to billions on a losing battle rather than spending the money to innovate and become more profitable. Until then all we can do is fight, fortunately we out number them a million or so to one...

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

Blkdeath (530393) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721424)

Doesn't matter. No one connected with the RIAA mob has any accountability. Ever.

And why should they? They're going after evil people who steal from the mouths of starving artists! If this keeps up, there will be no more music! Who'd want to produce if there's no money in it for them? After all, everybody knows the draw of the Rock Star lifestyle is what it's all about! And if they can't buy any Cristal Champagne and cocaine what will they do with their time between unpaid gigs?

Until we can get rid of the general public perception that "piracy == bad" and "recording industry == good" they aren't going to face penalties.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2, Insightful)

brouski (827510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721730)

Until we can get rid of the general public perception that "piracy == bad" and "recording industry == good" they aren't going to face penalties.

When is piracy not bad?

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2, Insightful)

jmnormand (941909) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722128)

when its perfectly legal fair use. which by the strict modern definition is still piracy. now if your talking the old school definition, well im not on a boat so...

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (4, Insightful)

ibbey (27873) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722696)

When is piracy not bad?

The problem is the loaded term "piracy". Is it bad to download a few songs from an artist that you've heard of but never heard? I've done that several times. In the vast majority of those cases, I would not have bought the artists albums if I had not downloaded their songs first. In some cases, I didn't like what I heard & left it at that. In several other cases I have since bought albums by those artists, and in at least a few cases, I now own every CD available from the artist. So would you call my "piracy" in these cases a bad thing, even though they ended up resulting in more money in the artists pocket?

Somebody needs to. (1)

Finallyjoined!!! (1158431) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720862)

And quick.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (4, Interesting)

TheMeuge (645043) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720870)

Someone should set up a fund for her to go after RIAA and MediaSentry over this.

Heck, I'd Paypal a few bucks over to see how this turns out. I figure another ten thousand people are with me. If we all chip in $20, that'd be enough to get this ball rolling.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

427_ci_505 (1009677) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720922)

That'd still only be $200,000.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721046)

Thank you, sir math nerd

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721346)

Would that be Sir Mathsalot, the knight in summing armor?

After all, multiplication is just repeated additions ...

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721418)

After all, multiplication is just repeated additions ...


Sure, and exponentiation is just repeated multiplication. Hence you should have no trouble calculating pi^(i*e) , right ?

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (4, Funny)

A nonymous Coward (7548) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721506)

Hence you should have no trouble calculating pi^(i*e) , right ?

Ask Sir Mathsalot, not me. I am but a knave.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

lar3ry (10905) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722328)

Um...

After doing the long way, I came up with -1.

No problem.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722438)

Nope. e ** (pi * i) is -1. I'm not sure what pi ** (e * i) is.

- Your friendly neighborhood pedantic, but not all-knowing math Nazi

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2, Informative)

VisceralLogic (911294) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722656)

Nope. e ** (pi * i) is -1. I'm not sure what pi ** (e * i) is.

For the record, pi^(e*i) is approximately -0.99955 + 0.02989i

For the further record, I found that using some complex math software I wrote in high school. :) (Why yes, I am a nerd... why do you ask?)

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

Mr. Freeman (933986) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721442)

I think his point was that "only $200k" isn't very much when you take into account how expensive it would be to hire lawyers capable of fighting the RIAA. Considering the fact that the RIAA has an assload of money and in-house lawyers, it might take a lot more than $200k to beat them.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

Nossie (753694) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721528)

ok how about ...

$200k in donations...
the support of the many indie labels out there
and a 100,000 strong class action... to finally prove that the *IAA are a cartel and extort money out of their customers akin to drug dealers?

One person with 1 or 2 lawyers w/ 200k is not going to go far with the mighty media mafiaa and their company sized legal departments... but if you also have the support of 100,000 other rather pissed off customers tied together with those two layers and 200k you could blow the lid right of the scam and the judge/jury would not be able to deny the show of public force.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

Scruffy Dan (1122291) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722144)

"If we all chip in $20, that'd be enough to get this ball rolling."

And that is the problem. Unless you have lots of money, many legitimate legal options are completely out of your reach.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720924)

I agree.. I don't know if she has to drop her cross-complaint just because the RIAA's bailing.

-jcr

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721094)

I'm wondering the same thing? She filed a counterclaim, if she filed it, is it only contingent on the original claim still being there?

I mean, it sounds like it's like if you decided to sue someone, and they said "You know what, I'll just drop everything because I don't want the judge to pass a verdict." However, I thought the Defendant couldn't drop the suit, the Plaintiff who brought the suit, is the only one who could drop it???

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

Tuoqui (1091447) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721448)

IANAL but I think both parties have to be in agreement to drop a suit. The RIAA gets away with dropping so many suits because the defendants simply do not want to continue the fight and just get back to their normal everyday lives so they go 'sure lets drop it'.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (3, Informative)

nomadic (141991) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722232)

IANAL but I think both parties have to be in agreement to drop a suit. The RIAA gets away with dropping so many suits because the defendants simply do not want to continue the fight and just get back to their normal everyday lives so they go 'sure lets drop it'.

Generally a party can dismiss its own case. If the opposing party has filed counterclaims, however, the case still proceeds on those.

Re:Is she going to sue MediaSentry? (1)

Technician (215283) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722730)

In item 4 of the settlement may make it impossible for her to persue Media Sentry.

Any challange of the validity either directly or otherwise may be in violation of the terms of the settlement. I think she is doing good to delete her files, cancel her internet account or prohibit anyone from using her connection including family members, and walk away.

Making a contribution to the EFF may even be in violation of the terms. That sucks!

it gets worse :( (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21720824)

So . . .

I sat naked on the bench in the health club locker room, staring at the tiles on the floor between my feet, but really looking at nothing. I was waiting for Jamal to decide to come up and talk to me. He was this muscular teenage nigger who frequented the club and had ruined my life in the last few weeks. I was ordered to sit naked on the bench without a towel or anything to cover my nakedness. I had to keep my legs spread and my cock and balls visible for the anyone In the locker room who wanted a look. I knew instantly that it had been a mistake to sign up at the inner city health club which was eighty percent black, but It was near my house and cheap which was even more important.

The harassment had started on my first visit. Dark skinned, muscular black boys bouncing around the locker room with their huge dicks and pendulous sacks of balls swinging, high fiving each other and laughing and rapping, and there I was, this moderately built white guy of thirty two.

I will never forget coming back from the shower and one chocolate skinned thug of about eighteen let out a "weeeeeeeow" kind of sound and then said very loudly to me, loudly enough for all his pals to hear, "White man, how the hell can you fuck wit such a small dick?" They all roared with laughter and I turned bright red. Before I left that first time, I med Jamal. He eased up to me while I was packing my gym bag. He is one good looking darkie, I will say that for him. He flashed me a big white toothed smile and said he hoped I wasn't thinking of quitting the club. He said he was friends with the manager and they had my address and shit, and it would be really unfortunate if I decided to quit. Then he laid one large basketball player sized hand on my shoulder and said that he would see me at the same time the next day.

Well, that's how it started. It got worse each time I went to the club. Jamal and the other niggers got me to get towels for them, had me scrub their backs in the shower, even made me pick their dirty stinking jock straps up off the floor. They sent their filthy jocks and socks home with me to wash for them.

Now let me state here once and for all, that I am in no way at all gay. I don't think I ever even had a gay thought. So all of this really repulsed me. They would brush up against me so their big fat black dicks rubbed my body. They would make constant jokes about me being a faggot.

So I had it out with Jamal. I told him I was married and in no way gay, and I wanted to quit the club. That mention of my wife was the biggest mistake of my life. Jamal demanded to see a photo of her. Her name is Kathleen. After that, all they talked about was "Kathleen the Cunt" in the locker room.

"Da mailman probably shoving his dick in her right now while you is at da club." They would say things like that. Jamal would ask, "Do you suppose she ever took black dick up the ass?" I told them she didn't like anal, and they should keep their foul mouths to themselves. They beat the shit out of me.

I didn't go to the club for a week. All the windows were broken on my car, and my newspaper was stolen, and somebody pissed all over our door. I received a package at work, and when I opened it, there was a pile of shit in a box. I was going nuts with anguish. I thought of going to the police, but I knew I would face even worse if I did. So I went back to the club. That was two months ago. A lot had happened in those two months.

Now I sat waiting for Jamal to speak with me. He walked up, stark naked. The first thing I saw were his huge brown feet next to me. I looked up at his long muscular legs. How could I miss the seven inch flaccid dick, thick as a flashlight and the ball sack that looked like it had oranges in it. It was fucking obscene. His stomach was hard and tight. His ass was one of those round tight nigger bubble butts. His chest well defined with large nipples. He had a killer smile, thick nigger lips, and dark flashing eyes that often looked drugged. He had only recently gotten out of reform school for molesting a girl on the playground.

"So, my man, how's that little dick of yours hangin'?"

I spread my legs wider so he could see my pathetic shriveled white prick and small ball sack. If I didn't keep myself on display for them at all times, they would have a wet towel snapping session where my scrotum was the target. It hurt like hell and was totally humiliating.

"So, bro, is everything set up for tomorrow?" He stood close to me...so close that his huge flaccid hunk of fuck meat brushed my shoulder. His dick was so huge, it was just fucking obscene, and that was in its flaccid state. He had not showered yet, and his body reeked of the nigger stink of his workout.

"Please. Please don't do this. I know I agreed, but that was after you had beaten me almost senseless. Please, isn't there some other way?"

He lifted one leg and put his foot on the bench next to me. His gigantic balls swung back and forth in their fleshy sack.

"Dere is no other fucking way, man. You don't wanna even think of what we gonna do to you next time you disobeys us. Dere is no other way. Now it so happens dat I needs me a new girlfriend, and your wife fills da bill."

I felt my stomach turn over. I tried to relax, to breath deeply, but I felt like I was choking. This teenage nigger thug was talking about my wife. Kathleen. He had announced to me that he wanted her to become his girlfriend! Jesus Christ!

At first I had bluntly refused, letting my anger and disgust show. All the niggers in the club gathered around me, about fifteen of them, and Jamal announced that I was racially prejudiced and didn't want him dating his wife. They started to slap and punch me.

"It's not that. Honest to God, I swear, it's not that you are black. It's that she's my wife!"

Jamal roared with laughter. "Any bitch need more dick than you got! She probably sucking da boys at work every day anyway." He looked at the photo of her which he had taken from me. "Yeah, she got real cocksucker lips, she shore do!"

"Oh God no, she doesn't like blowjobs." I was crying in front of all of them.

"No, you gots it wrong. She like dick. Dat pussy is ready for some nigger seed!" Half the niggers surrounding me were getting hard ons, and I don't there there was one under eight and a half inches.

For weeks I had argued, begged, pleaded, tried to bargain with Jamal, but he only wanted one thing. My wife's virgin asshole. Once I stood up to them and told them I would go to the police. They had dragged me naked and screaming into the health club bathroom and forced me to eat turds out of the toilet bowl. I was sick for two days. The next time I went to the club, Jamal had made me suck his dick. That was the first time I saw it erect. Over twelve inches of throbbing leaking nigger cock. I had a panic attack and literally tried to run out of the club. They held me down on a bench and Jamal fed me his black fuck meat. His balls almost suffocated me. His dick choked me. He even made me suck his ass. What could I do? I agreed to let them have my wife. I know, I am an awful man. A sinner. It is unforgivable, but I am scared out of my wits.

"So, tomorrow, I comes over to yo house dressed up real good. You introduce me to yo bitch wife. Now when I sees her, dis is how I wants her dressed. A very tight tee shirt dat says printed on it, "I Love Nigga Dick!" She will wear no bra under it so I can see the tips of her titties through the material. Den she is to wear a short skirt, only I don want her to wear no panties under it. From now on, yo wife is forbidden to ever wear any panties. We want dat sloppy cunt and ass ready and available at all times. I want you to have some really top drawer booze at yo house ready for me. I am not sure what I will want, so you better have enough to satisfy me, whatever my taste might be. Who da fuck knows, I may want a cosmo, or maybe some of dat Louis XIII Brandy dat costs three hundred dollars. You better have it all. After I has a drink, you pretty little bitch and I gonna sit on da couch and get acquainted. Dat means you as da husband get to watch me finger her cunt and play wit her titties. You gets to see her meet my big fat old dick and even lick and suck it a little. I always insists on sex on da first date, cause how else you know how a bitch perform, right? Shit, I insist on sex on every date. I mean dat is da only reason for da fucking date..to plow some pussy! Right? Otherwise I'd rather hang wit da home boys. Now she gonna be a little uptight and scared at firs...right? Specially when she see my dick and she know dat huge motherfucker is gonna plow her virgin ass! Oh yea, if she got to shave her pussy. I wanna see bald pussy."

While he said all of this to me at the health club, his dick got thicker and thicker and long strings of pre-fuck started to hang from the fat pisshole.

"Please don't hurt her...please." I was shaking in my naked agony.

"Hurt her? No why the fuck would I hurt my new girlfriend? I gonna love her. I gonna show her da pleasures of lovemaking. Shore, it gonna hurt a little da first time I ram my twelve and a half inch motherfucking dick balls deep into her asshole. Shore it gonna hurt when I pounds her as hard as I can, and den pull out and shove it as hard as I can up her cunt. Shore dat gonna hurt a little, but dat is jus' part of fuckin'. You understand dat. Right? Better to hab some nice boy like me who wants her for his girlfriend fucking her, den every pasty white motherfucker at work who don't give a shit about her.

"Now don't you worry, I gonna take her into the bedroom to fuck her cunt and ass. I think dat is private. I mean, you can watch da first time she suck my balls and lick my dick and such. But fucking is between a guy and his girlfriend. I wants you dere at the start...at the sucking part, cause she is gonna be scared like I say, and you can calm her. Tell her it is a natural part of life, and she just gotta learn to please a man.

Now I am gonna want to use your master bedroom. You can sleep on da couch. I wants a nice big bed and luxury for fucks. I gotta fuck at least three times a day, usually more. Now of course I still going to be bangin' other cunt, but I will fuck your wife regularly cause she is my number one girlfriend. My special bitch. I ain't gonna introduce her to my bros until after I fuck her for a week or so. Den when she broken in, I gonna share her with all da boys from dis here health club. Dere about twenty of us here as you know, so she gonna be pretty busy sucking nigga dick and getting ass and cunt fucked. We gonna do mos' of it over at yo house. You have lots of food dere at all times fo my brothers when dey comes over to fuck your wife. Since she be fucking most every day all day and night from now on, I suggest she quit her job. Dat way, she don't even need to think about work and she can concentrate on nigga cock all da time."

"Please, please use condoms...." I had tears running down my face.

Jamal roared with laughter. "Condoms? Shit...no. We never use condoms. It ruins da fuck. Dat bitch gonna be pregnant in a couple of weeks at mos'. You gonna be da daddy of a nigga chile! And who knows. If she stay tight enough, maybe we fuck her for three or four years, you know, pass her around, pimp her out. Shit. She could hab five or six nigga babies! We don' allow no abortions. She gonna breed. Now my brothers and daddy be comin' over lots to fuck her too, so you better have lots of keys to yo house made, or jus' leave the fucking place unlocked. She don't leave da house without permission. I would hate it for both of you if some black bro comes over for a good hard fuck, and she not dere! Now I know you worried about her. Don' be. After a few days of getting nigga dick, she gonna love it so much, dat all she gonna live for. I seen it in white bitches lots of times. Someday she gonna thank you for all dis. I mean how many girls her age so lucky to get ten to fifteen black cocks a day? Long as her pussy and asshole hold up, she be happy. One thing, she gonna hab to be a really good cocksucker, cause One thig is dat when da boys in my hood meet up wit guys from other gangs...we got dis thing. We hab our girlfriends suck da cocks of all da members of the other gangs, as kind of a peace signal, you know, a sign dat we is kewl and everything is okay. So she gonna pretty much hab a dick in her mouth twenty-four seven for da next few months. She gonna be sucking on nigga dick even when she getting fucked by my bros. Dis house gonna be pretty packed full of black boys! Now, after a bitch has sucked fifteen to twenty dicks a day, she often get a real tired jaw and swollen lips and a sore tongue, so you gonna have to tell her no matter how tired she get, da last dick of da day she suck, gets jus' as good a suck as da first one in da morning. You gotta make sure she understand that. I can't have no bad reports from rival gangs dat my bitch can't suck!

Now we gots one more problem. Da bitch gonna be so busy getting fucked and sucking dick, she ain't gonna hab no proper time to clean up da dicks after dey fuck her cunt and ass! You know it da bitch's job to clean a dick wit her mouth after a brother fuck her. I mean, you can't expect a brother to walk around wit pussy slime or ass juice on his dick. But she gonna be so busy, she ain't always gonna hab time to clean up, so you my friend is going to have to step up to da plate to help her. You gonna be the official dick cleaner. You gonna lick and suck da dicks clean after dey fuck yo bitch of a daughter. I want you naked on you hands and knees at all times around da house, ready to lick and suck dick clean. And you gonna do a fine job too, I just know it. You get all dat stink off da cock. Maybe you can entertain da brothers waiting next in line to fuck yo daughter too by lickig dere balls and assholes. I never thought of dat until just now. Hot damn, dat is a good idea, ain't it? So dey don't get bored while dey waitin. And den, to keep your wife fresh and tight, after every three or four fucks, you gonna crawl in and suck the nigga cum right outta her pussy and asshole. Think how great dat is. You gonna get to suck your wife's pussy and asshole! How lucky is dat? You gonna clean out her cunt real good with yo tongue so it is ready for da next nigga.

We gonna be da happiest family you ever seen! Now come on, white boy, suck my dick, can't you see it dripping all over da floor?"

I put my mouth over the head of the huge leaking hunk of fuckmeat, and resigned myself and my wife to our new destiny.

Re:it gets worse :( (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21720962)

At least its not gay...

Re:it gets worse :( (-1, Troll)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720996)

Personally, I consider sucking a dude's dick and ass to be gay, but different strokes for different folks.

Re:it gets worse :( (1)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721134)

That wouldn't cover myself, but I can ensure you that I am quite gay...

 

More important question (1, Insightful)

bconway (63464) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720842)

Is MediaSentry licensed to investigate in the state in which they actually performed the investigation? The location of the plaintiff's IP is irrelevant, it could be next door, it could be in Alaska.

Re:More important question (3, Informative)

stonemetal (934261) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720930)

They filed the lawsuit in texas so the investigator has to be licensed in texas. See the connection there, Texas law equals need Texas license to conduct investigation.

Re:More important question (4, Funny)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721156)

Riaa probably doesn't feel it is fair to have to obey all these different licensing restrictions. They probably want to use the results of the investigations as they choose since they paid good money for the results. Fortunately, they can only legally use investigators the way we can use songs and other copyrighted materials.

Ah.. it is so nice when the worm turns.

Re:More important question (5, Informative)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721844)

Apparantly they aren't licensed [p2pnet.net] to investigate in any state:

"The illegality of the private investigations is also known to defendants," says Lybeck in the court document.
Most states require licensing or registration of private investigators. In Oregon, unlicensed investigators are subject to civil and criminal penalties. These licensing laws are well known to reputable investigators. On information and belief, MediaSentry and his investigators are not and have not been licensed to conduct private investigations of private citizens in Oregon or any other state. Their investigations are illegal.
For years, the RIAA and its member companies have been using flawed and illegal private investigation information as part of their co-ordinated scheme and comment enterprise to threaten, intimidate and coerce payment from private citizens across the United States.

Re:More important question (1)

bigpicture (939772) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721894)

The investigation took place inside the computer of the person they are suing. That would be in the State in which that person lives, irrespective of where MediaSentry is located or licensed. It will probably all be about where the information resides.

Re:More important question (1)

jmnormand (941909) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722162)

yes but the physical location of the infringing hard drive, being the source of the copyrighted works, could be some what important. im no lawyer but i suspect that may play a role in such a case...

Re:More important question (5, Informative)

stanley232305 (1204194) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722542)

This is a good example of the law not keeping up with (or addressing) issues brought on by technological advancement. Maybe providing the law will abate uninformed opinions:

  1702.101. Investigations Company License Required

Unless the person holds a license as an investigations company, a person may not:

(1) act as an investigations company;

(2) offer to perform the services of an investigations company; or

(3) engage in business activity for which a license is required under this chapter.

***

  1702.104. Investigations Company

(a) A person acts as an investigations company for the purposes of this chapter if the person:

(1) engages in the business of obtaining or furnishing, or accepts employment to obtain or furnish, information related to:

(A) crime or wrongs done or threatened against a state or the United States;

(B) the identity, habits, business, occupation, knowledge, efficiency, loyalty, movement, location, affiliations, associations, transactions, acts, reputation, or character of a person;

(C) the location, disposition, or recovery of lost or stolen property; or

(D) the cause or responsibility for a fire, libel, loss, accident, damage, or injury to a person or to property;

(2) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, evidence for use before a court, board, officer, or investigating committee;

(3) engages in the business of securing, or accepts employment to secure, the electronic tracking of the location of an individual or motor vehicle other than for criminal justice purposes by or on behalf of a governmental entity; or

(4) engages in the business of protecting, or accepts employment to protect, an individual from bodily harm through the use of a personal protection officer.

(b) For purposes of Subsection (a)(1), obtaining or furnishing information includes information obtained or furnished through the review and analysis of, and the investigation into the content of, computer-based data not available to the public.

***

  1702.381. Civil Penalty

(a) A person who is not licensed under this chapter, who does not have a license application pending, and who violates this chapter may be assessed a civil penalty to be paid to the state not to exceed $10,000 for each violation.

(b) A person who contracts with or employs a person who is required to hold a license, certificate of registration, or security officer commission under this chapter knowing that the person does not hold the required license, certificate, or commission or who otherwise, at the time of contract or employment, is in violation of this chapter may be assessed a civil penalty to be paid to the state in an amount not to exceed $10,000 for each violation.

(c) A civil penalty under this section may be assessed against a person on proof that the person has received at least 30 days' notice of the requirements of this section.

  1702.382. Injunction

(a) An attorney for the department, the attorney general's office, or any criminal prosecutor in this state may institute an action against a person to enjoin a violation by the person of this chapter or an administrative rule.

(b) An injunction action instituted under this section does not require an allegation or proof that an adequate remedy at law does not exist or that substantial or irreparable damage would result from the continued violation to sustain an action under this section. A bond is not required for an injunction action instituted under this section.

  1702.383. Action for Civil Penalty or Injunction

If a person has violated a provision of this chapter for which a penalty is imposed under Section 1702.381, an attorney for the department, the attorney general's office, or any criminal prosecutor in this state may institute a civil suit in a Travis County district court or in a district court in the county in which the violation occurred for injunctive relief under Section 1702.382 or for assessment and recovery of the civil penalty.

They should have dropped the suit entirely (5, Interesting)

stox (131684) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720874)

If I am reading this right, IANAL, blah, blah, blah, RIAA is simply dropping monetary damages. They have not dropped the suit. I don't see how this will effect the counter-claims. Hopefully, Grandma will ream their tail ends so bad that their heads will fall through.

Go Grandma! Go!

Re:They should have dropped the suit entirely (1)

whoever57 (658626) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720938)

If I am reading this right, IANAL, blah, blah, blah, RIAA is simply dropping monetary damages. They have not dropped the suit. I don't see how this will effect the counter-claims.
IANAL, but if you read the pdf document, it does not explicitly say that the RIAA is dropping its claim for damages either -- but I think that because both parties request entry of final judgment on the basis that there will be an injunction against the Granny, that ends the matter for both sides -- the RIAA can no longer claim money for past actions and the Granny can no longer claim compensation for anything done by the RIAA relating to this.

I wonder if she could start a new suit against MediaSentry though?

Re:They should have dropped the suit entirely (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721220)

affect, not effect

Re:They should have dropped the suit entirely (1)

Lord_of_the_nerf (895604) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721352)

There could be an ongoing theme here. Has anyone looked into whether their ambulance chasers have been disbarred?

An effective weapon for now... (5, Funny)

Chabil Ha' (875116) | more than 6 years ago | (#21720990)

...but the Borg will adapt.

More iilegal action (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721044)

RIAA also backed down on suing this [myminicity.com] city

What's the significance of a license (2, Interesting)

slashqwerty (1099091) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721064)

I am curious what the significance of a license is. I assume a licensed investigator has to take a test and possibly be bonded. How does that affect their ability to collect evidence or impact their credibility in court? One would expect most states to have similar licensing requirements. If MediaSentry is licensed in some states certainly they must follow the general guidelines that Texas requires of licensed investigators. Also, since copyright infringement is a federal issue why does it matter what Texas law says?

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

Ruke (857276) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721150)

IANAL, but I'm thinking it probably has something to do with the legality of MediaSentry collecting evidence. I can't break into your house, take photos of you torrenting the new Linkin Park CD, and use that as evidence in court.

Re:What's the significance of a license (4, Informative)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721178)

If MediaSentry is licensed in some states certainly they must follow the general guidelines that Texas requires of licensed investigators.

What if Texas applies rules to investigations that protect Texans, but not others, from certain practices, or if certain things are permitted under Texas regulations but prohibited elsewhere?

I think it would be unlikely for a judge to say "Okay, we'll accept agencies licensed in Texas", because you then loose the ability to enforce investigators operating in your state to conform to the guidelines of your state - anybody could go get licensed in the most lax state for the area of investigation that is their primary focus.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

entrigant (233266) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721496)

Then that sucks for the person living in *that* state. There are strict rules for where one must prosecute, and since the defendant lives in Texas and committed the crime in Texas the case is tried in Texas with all applicable state and local laws in the city in Texas in which she lives.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722494)

Yes, but the point is that MediaSentry is not licensed to investigate in Texas. If you want to prosecute someone there are certain standards you have to meet in collecting evidence. Being a licensed investigator is probably one of them.

Maybe we're both saying the same thing? I'm not sure what your point is.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

ral8158 (947954) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721236)

It's all about how they collected the evidence; though. You can't just go around and stalk people or whatever and then ignore state law because you think they've violated a federal law.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

drmerope (771119) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721320)

Do you realize that following someone is not 'stalking'. Stalking has a mens rea [wikipedia.org] requirement in most states: to be guilty of stalking you must have the intention of inflicting emotional distress upon your target. Intention is the hardest mens rea to prove.

... and something a third party investigator can safely be clear of.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

ral8158 (947954) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721406)

I didn't necessarily mean to literally stalk, I just meant to say something like, "collect information about." "Investigate", even.

Re:What's the significance of a license (5, Informative)

sjames (1099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721284)

I am curious what the significance of a license is. I assume a licensed investigator has to take a test and possibly be bonded. How does that affect their ability to collect evidence or impact their credibility in court?

It is considerably significant. If you are licensed, then you know that it could be revoked if you behave unethically or illegally. If you are licensed, it is an indication that as far as anyone knows, you haven't behaved unethically or illegally in the past. That DOES tend to enhance credibility in court.

The license needs to be in the particular state since otherwise, in addition to shopping for the most lax state, some might cheat by getting licenced in one state and doing all of their dirty deeds in another state outside the jurisdiction of the licensing board.

It matters in a federal case because you're not allowed to present illegally gathered evidence in court. Investigators are required to obey all relevant federal, state, and local laws.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

Duhavid (677874) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721750)

"If you are licensed, it is an indication that as far as anyone knows, you haven't behaved unethically or illegally in the past. "

So, could the issue of MediaSentry performing an investigation of this sort
where they were not licensed to do so have any effect on their licensing
elsewhere?

Re:What's the significance of a license (5, Insightful)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721862)

They aren't licensed anywhere.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

RareButSeriousSideEf (968810) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722460)

So does this mean that the RIAA's past cases are subject to review if the defendant caved on the basis of MediaSentry evidence?

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722590)

IANAL (but wouldn't it be fun?) so take me with a large grain of salt, but it seems like most cases I hear about settle out of court. I suspect the settlement screws you in terms of "review", because you can't appeal a case that didn't occur. Right?

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

RareButSeriousSideEf (968810) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722680)

Good question; I'd love to hear from an IAAL-positive individual on this.

What does one do when they find that the legal threat that scared them into submission might have been a load of crap after all?

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722004)

That would really depend on the particular rules in other places and if they hear about it or not.

Re:What's the significance of a license (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721766)

If you are licensed, then you know that it could be revoked if you behave unethically or illegally. If you are licensed, it is an indication that as far as anyone knows, you haven't behaved unethically or illegally in the past. That DOES tend to enhance credibility in court.

Well, if that's the case maybe we should consider a license requirement for attorneys ... oh wait.

Not surprising (4, Interesting)

Stanislav_J (947290) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721092)

They probably thought it was better to drop one case than to risk a precedent-setting decision that would have invalidated hundreds of other similar "investigations" and perhaps result in some sort of class-action suit.

Re:Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721248)

bah, civil litigators should not be free to choose their battles. Why? Because the people who they sue aren't free to choose their battle when they get sued - people should either be free to turn down a law suit or all litigators should be expected to go after all other potential cases that have the same or greater prima facie evidence of the same or similar infringement, and if the plaintiff wants to drop the case, they need the permission of the defendant.

Re:Not surprising (1)

LiENUS (207736) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721298)

I'm sure the defendant was all too happy to have the RIAA drop the case. The RIAA picks targets who just want to get the case done, they aren't going to go after someone with ideals and any form of solid ground to stand on any time soon.

Re:Not surprising (1)

Stradivarius (7490) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721720)

IANAL, but from what I read they did not actually *drop* the case. What happened is that the RIAA and the defendant agreed to a judgment being entered against the defendant, in which the sole penalty was that the defendant agreed not to infringe on the RIAA copyrights in the future, and to delete any improperly obtained files from her system.

Escaping a RIAA lawsuit with no monetary damages is no small accomplishment. But it's not quite the same as having the suit dismissed, since a judgment against you means you were found guilty (well, "liable" I guess since it's a civil rather than criminal matter). If you're innocent, as the article claims she is, this is still a loss. It's just not nearly as painful as it could have been.

Re:Not surprising (2, Informative)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721798)

They probably thought it was better to drop one case than to risk a precedent-setting decision that would have invalidated hundreds of other similar "investigations" and perhaps result in some sort of class-action suit.
The RIAA is counting on the defendant to not sue for a declaratory judgement.

You don't even have to be sued to do this. If you think someone is going to sue you over something, you can premptively ask the court to decide [some issue]. This allows potential defendants to take the initiative.

Anyone in Texas (or any other state for that matter) who has received one of the RIAA's form letters should sue for a declaratory judgement that MediaSentry is not licensed for private investigations in [Your State Here].

Re:Not surprising (1)

dpninerSLASH (969464) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722206)

Exactly. The fact that an organization the size of the RIAA, with its nearly unlimited resources, would effectively throw up their hands and walk away should speak volumes to other victims and consumers in general, and I'm certain the brightest legal minds in the US are reviewing this case with a fine-toothed comb to discover exactly what the perceived weaknesses were.

Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721170)

Ray is definitely fighting the good fight in taking a lead on all the RIAA nonsense, but one thing miffs me quite a bit. Why is it that every time he writes about someone who got sued, it's always "Texas grandmother So-and-So" or "Mother-of-two Blah Blah" or "Penniless, Starving Immigrant Family With Two Unwell Cats" or whatever? What difference does it make in this case that she's a grandmother? I see nothing in the summary of the TFA that explains why this is in any way relevant.

I mean sure, it's useful to keep in mind that there are human beings involved here, but any more than that is a fairly obvious attempt at clouding objective discussion by appealing to sympathy. It annoys me constantly, and I would think any semi-intelligent person would see right through this. If the facts are so firmly on the defendants' sides as Ray would have us all believe, why is it necessary to resort to such blatantly manipulative appeal to emotion? /CF

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (4, Insightful)

Tuoqui (1091447) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721390)

And yet every time a big faceless corporation tries to dehumanize someone in order to win a case by preemptively labeling someone as guilty of copyright infringement.

If the RIAA was so sure about their cases as they would have you believe then they would take each and every case to court instead of offering these $3000 get out of jail free cards and backing out of any and all cases where they may look like they will lose.

But hey its fine for them, its just not fine for the grandmother/disabled person/single mother of two to try to shame the RIAA into dropping their case by giving them some bad publicity.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721394)

You make a good point, but you did it anonymously, therefore you will be modded into the ground. Step up.

Not only emotion... (5, Interesting)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721486)

Part of this is to show the sheer innaccuracy of the RIAA lawsuits in the first place.

I'm making a list. To my knowledge, they've sued:

  • Several pre-teen girls, who could not possibly afford either to buy the music legitimately or to pay the settlement.
  • Several grandmothers, who are unlikely to even know what P2P is.
  • At least one dead person.
  • At least one person who has never, in her life, touched a computer.

There's probably more, but I haven't been paying attention.

If the facts are so firmly on the defendants' sides as Ray would have us all believe, why is it necessary to resort to such blatantly manipulative appeal to emotion?

If the facts are so firmly on the defendants' sides, why not appeal to emotion?

Just understand, pointing out the people involved -- especially when those people are unlikely to be capable of piracy, much less want to -- is not always an appeal to emotion. Sometimes, it's simply an appeal to common sense -- which is why you will occasionally see articles tagged "suddenbreakoutofcommonsense", for when the RIAA/MPAA is losing.

Re:Not only emotion... (1)

Achromatic1978 (916097) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721688)

who could not possibly afford either to buy the music legitimately

Apropos of anything else, apropos of your beliefs on this subject, do you really want this to be allowed as an acceptable reasoning? "Your Honor, I move to have the case dismissed on the grounds that I only obtained it illegally because I couldn't possibly afford to purchase it legitimately".

Re:Not only emotion... (1)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721872)

In terms of damages, it should be considered. The assumption is that if they hadn't downloaded it, they would have bought it. Sometimes that assumption makes sense and other times its ridiculous.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721822)

Emotion is relevant in some decisions, and irrelevant in others.

For example, it is irrelevant in the decision of whether the RIAA should be allowed to use unlicensed PIs. It is irrelevant to the question of whether Rhonda Crain is guilty of violating the RIAA's members copyrights.

It is relevant to whether you think the RIAA is contemptible for taking small fry it thinks are too poor or unsophisticated to put up a good fight and trying to make an example of them.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (4, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721856)

Emotion is relevant in some decisions, and irrelevant in others. For example, it is irrelevant in the decision of whether the RIAA should be allowed to use unlicensed PIs. It is irrelevant to the question of whether Rhonda Crain is guilty of violating the RIAA's members copyrights.
There's no "emotion" in this equation: no license = evidence upon which case is based is inadmissible = no case.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722510)

There's no "emotion" in this equation: no license = evidence upon which case is based is inadmissible = no case.
I think I see where you're headed. If the "evidence" they are using is either illegally obtained, or legally obtained from dubious "experts" as we've seen you prove, then their cases are all weak at best. Sooner or later they have to be hit hard for flooding the court system with frivolous lawsuits.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721832)

Well, I guess it's because Ray wants us to know who the targets of the RIAA attack dogs are, and also to point out that some of the people they accuse often don't know anything about piracy, sometimes don't have P2P software and even occasionally don't own computers. This illustrates how shoddy the investigative work leading up to these lawsuits is, and how they continue to push on with their attacks even against innocent but defenseless defendants, forcing them to settle for what often appears to be extortion money.

If you think it's partly for the sympathy vote, however, you might be correct. On the other hand, the RIAA their counterparts in the movie industry routinely tell us how piracy hurts the poor artists, sound engineers, grips, and buffet table assistants - I'm sure they do that for the same reason. People would probably have less sympathy if they instead thought piracy was hurting only people like Michael Eisner, who (according to Forbes in 2005) was making $95,576,000 over 5 years. In fact, they might even think that instead of laying off the "best boy", he could personally part with a few dollars to cover the $60,000 salaries of a few of them.

You can say it's an obvious attempt at clouding objective discussion, but is it any different than the propaganda coming from the plaintiffs in these actions?

Oh, and the last, and probably most influential reason why these stories are titled like this is because it gets people to read them. And lets face it, that's really what Ray and the Slashdot editors want!

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (4, Interesting)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722080)

What I want is for the truth to get out there, and I want this reign of terror to end. The most important single factor in almost all of these cases is the huge economic imbalance in each and every case. In an ideal world that would not be relevant to the outcome, but is there anyone out there who thinks we are in an ideal world?......

Raise your hands.

I don't see any hands.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722454)

Well, I guess it's because Ray wants us to know who the targets of the RIAA attack dogs are, and also to point out that some of the people they accuse often don't know anything about piracy, sometimes don't have P2P software and even occasionally don't own computers. This illustrates how shoddy the investigative work leading up to these lawsuits is, and how they continue to push on with their attacks even against innocent but defenseless defendants, forcing them to settle for what often appears to be extortion money.
Plus it is relevant that their victims are almost always defenseless.

Plus it is relevant what impact the RIAA's terror tactics is having on every day people.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722148)



Because court is about winning and losing; not objective reviews of fact.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1)

MacWiz (665750) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722290)

a fairly obvious attempt at clouding objective discussion by appealing to sympathy. It annoys me constantly, and I would think any semi-intelligent person would see right through this.

At least it's an actual fact, in contrast to the RIAA's fiction-based pleas for sympathy -- "they're stealing our stuff," "downloading is theft," and the most recently added, "ripping a CD to mp3 is copyright infringement."

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (2, Funny)

hedwards (940851) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722324)

Mainly because it's a much more open and shut deal than a 20 something geek gets sued for downloading Celine Dion. Granted that should be illegal just on taste grounds, the later case is much more reasonable to bring to court than somebody that's barely computer literate and less likely to be able to fight back.

The grandmothers, deceased, teens and such are much better examples of the unreasonable nature of the lawsuits. A teenager is going to have to cough up his college money to pay, if he even have that to pay. And filing a counter suit/fighting it is unlikely to be a realistic option for them.

Re:Why try so hard to appeal to emotion? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722488)

Taste issues notwithstanding, a "20 something geek downloading Celine Dion" case has prima-facie credibility problems to begin with.

well (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721432)

I have always questioned RIAA's methods of collecting data to sue people, most of their info is just Circumstantial evidence. Most people settle cause they don't want to fight a company that has money to tie this sham up in court for month's. Even with their army of lawyers it was only a madder of time before one of the defendant would get a lawyer that would find a crack in their case and blow it open with C-4. I knew their case's were a flop when they would avoid Harvard.

Just wait: (2, Interesting)

Lost Penguin (636359) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721592)

RIAA has a bill in the pipeline to become law;
FBI would investigate copyright violations, or possible a new federal copyright cop squad.
Your tax dollars at work....

Re:Just wait: (2, Informative)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721802)

Criminal courts have higher standards and the right to a jury.

Re:Just wait: (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722094)

Criminal courts have higher standards and the right to a jury.
they have the right to a jury in any civil suit with damages above $20 IIRC.

though the standards for the jury are different. IIRC, it has to be unanimous in a criminal trial vs. a mere majority in a civil trial.

also the fact that you have the right to a lawyer in a criminal trial.

A word to the wise (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21721808)

Never enter in litigation against a stubborn senior citizen with too much time on his or her hands.

Case closed (4, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#21721842)

In response to several questions that have been raised:

1. The case is now closed, counterclaims and all.

2. I have a hunch MediaSentry is not licensed anywhere.

3. The injunction is a consent decree. It doesn't carry with it any implied finding of liability at all. It's merely a promise, by a 70-something lady who never heard of filesharing, that she will not in the future engage in unauthorized filesharing of plaintiffs' recordings.

Re:Case closed (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722058)

What is up with your username, anyway? What are you, some sort of country bumpkin?

Re:Case closed (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722134)

How is it that the RIAA is always allowed to withdraw from a case, in order to avoid setting a disadvantageous precedent, without consequences? Does the casino let you take your chips of the table in the middle of the game because the hand is going badly for you? You can fold your hand, but you cannot withdraw without consequences (i.e. loosing your chips). The difference here is that the accused is forced to play the legal game by the accuser (i.e. the RIAA) and so there should be no privilege for the accuser to withdraw without consequences. Perhaps, for the benefit us laypeople, you can explain this one for us. Thank you.

Re:Case closed (3, Insightful)

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722152)

How is it that the RIAA is always allowed to withdraw from a case, in order to avoid setting a disadvantageous precedent, without consequences? Does the casino let you take your chips of the table in the middle of the game because the hand is going badly for you? You can fold your hand, but you cannot withdraw without consequences (i.e. loosing your chips). The difference here is that the accused is forced to play the legal game by the accuser (i.e. the RIAA) and so there should be no privilege for the accuser to withdraw without consequences. Perhaps, for the benefit us laypeople, you can explain this one for us. Thank you.
The defendants have neither the money nor the stomach for going to war with a multinational cartel of 4 huge record companies.

There's a sting about to happen (4, Interesting)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 6 years ago | (#21722060)

for a while I was thinking of working as a private investigator. More than one PI agency is wildly looking for digital investigators to do copyright investigation.

I have a job, but I'm "on a certain list" so these kinds of job offers come across my desk.

It's not good, and it's not pretty. Someone with Serious Pockets is looking to screw a Lot Of People over copyright re: file trading.

It's all coming out of the "heartland USA". I moved out of the states a while ago. But "people know me" so I get rumblings/job offers before others do. If this investigation goes down as it seems, it will be ugly.

For whom? Well teh music industry of course. They're a bunch of fucking morons with a business model that bears no resemblance to what the market is requiring. So rather than grow a lobe for profit (vis the Ferengi) they would rather do the American Thing and sue everyone into the dirt. Morons.

So: word up: the morons are on the march...

RS

Re:There's a sting about to happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722596)

So: word up: the morons are on the march...

Have been for seven years...and from the looks of things, it ain't gonna stop anytime soon.

Well, gee, doesn't Louise count?
Only to ten, Mudhead

Don't mess with... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722352)

...Texas Grandmothers!!!

Re:Don't mess with... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21722534)

Don't mess with Texas Grandmothers!!!

I'd never do that. Mostly because it would involve me setting foot in Texas, and I can't stand the place, or the people. Especially the people.
Load More 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>