tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post2260440445746543971..comments2024-03-22T03:28:24.897-04:00Comments on Recording Industry vs The People: Battle Rages Over Counterclaims in Atlantic v. Andersenraybeckermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-55655722392286186352007-04-28T00:18:00.000-04:002007-04-28T00:18:00.000-04:00"Is it too late to add copyright misuse countercla...<I>"Is it too late to add copyright misuse counterclaims?<BR/><BR/>If there are thousands of songs involved in this lawsuit, it would be great to see the RIAA lose the rights to enforce on those songs.</I>"<BR/><BR/>It is my understanding (from reading several other decisions / filings in various cases) that you're allowed one 'free-be' ammendment up to some point (I don't know if there is a cut off) to your answers & counter claims / original claims. After the first you can still ammend but you need either the Courts or the opposition's consent to do so.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01015776048708755293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-77203452939450861512007-04-26T23:40:00.000-04:002007-04-26T23:40:00.000-04:00Is it too late to add copyright misuse counterclai...Is it too late to add copyright misuse counterclaims?<BR/><BR/>If there are thousands of songs involved in this lawsuit, it would be great to see the RIAA lose the rights to enforce on those songs.derivativehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04188845186429292741noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-88316457673908022832007-04-25T16:37:00.000-04:002007-04-25T16:37:00.000-04:00Scott Mentioned:I noticed that a couple HR&O partn...Scott Mentioned:<BR/><BR/>I noticed that a couple HR&O partners other than Richard Gabriel are working on this one. Maybe it's because the defendant's counterclaims have a lot more allegations of criminal conduct than I've seen in other cases posted to this blog. Perhaps the other attorneys have more experience in this area.<BR/><BR/>My Response:<BR/><BR/>I think it is very clear that this case is probably very important to the RIAA. For one, RIAA has already experienced a "not guilty" case (Capitol vs Foster) and had to pay attorney fees, meaning that MediaSentry's investigations are not 100% accurate to begin with. Additionally, the counterclaims in this case could open up another big can of worms for the RIAA, if Tanya Andersen were to win. In fact, it could even put the whole way the campaign works in jeopardy if the RIAA is ordered to adopt "innocent till proven guilty" and have to fornesically prove each case. <BR/><BR/>Scott, you also mentioned: <BR/><BR/>The Andersen counterclaim also speculates that MediaSentry is paid a bounty for finding plaintiffs. That basis for compensation can only encourage recklessness on their part.<BR/><BR/>If MediaSentry is making commissions of of each guilty verdict, and these settlements are made to give MediaSentry profit, this might be illegal (See Cook v Lockheed Martin IMS) where evidence from automated enforcement (i.e. Red Light Cameras) was not admissisable in court due to the fact that Lockheed Martin was paid a commission of each ticket. if you look here, RIAA, MediaSentry, and Settlement Support Center are doing the same thing here!<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>I hope the counterclaims stick. It seems that Andersen is moving into new territory.StephenHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14106243367366411553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-14556835697484467432007-04-25T07:27:00.000-04:002007-04-25T07:27:00.000-04:00So it seems they are making themselves so busy (ri...So it seems they are making themselves so busy (riaa) that they can't even keep up with themselves :) Goodpepperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11210437851354825157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-60779981743666408722007-04-24T22:44:00.000-04:002007-04-24T22:44:00.000-04:00scott, i think it's because(a) all across the coun...scott, i think it's because<BR/><BR/>(a) all across the country more people are fighting rather than giving in to the extortion demands<BR/><BR/>(b) gabriel's just one person and can't be in as many places as he needs to be<BR/><BR/>(c) i've seen several adjournment applications from him based on the fact that he was busy writing briefs in other cases.... in my 32 1/2 years in the litigation field i've never seen that before...raybeckermanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-91880956912127778792007-04-24T22:25:00.000-04:002007-04-24T22:25:00.000-04:00I noticed that a couple HR&O partners other than R...I noticed that a couple HR&O partners other than Richard Gabriel are working on this one. Maybe it's because the defendant's counterclaims have a lot more allegations of criminal conduct than I've seen in other cases posted to this blog. Perhaps the other attorneys have more experience in this area.<BR/><BR/>Or maybe Mr. Gabriel is starting to grow a conscience? He seems to be "Mr. Community Volunteer" at the firm. I wonder how many meals on wheels you have to serve to compensate for representing rich clients who vexatiously litigate against ordinary people of limited means, with evidence so obviously flimsy that they might as well have pulled defendant names at random from a phone book?<BR/><BR/>The Andersen counterclaim also speculates that MediaSentry is paid a bounty for finding plaintiffs. That basis for compensation can only encourage recklessness on their part.<BR/><BR/>I hope the counterclaims stick. It seems that Andersen is moving into new territory.Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08526488090778783271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-30600394819586392582007-04-24T17:48:00.000-04:002007-04-24T17:48:00.000-04:00If the RIAA would rather continue the suit, than l...If the RIAA would rather continue the suit, than look at the evidence that the defendant has proffered, and is certain will establish her innocence, they deserve to be punished big time for abuse of process, tortuous, vexatious litigation, if not outright barratry.<BR/><BR/>Oh the new words I've learned, reading about these cases.<BR/><BR/>Btw, are there recordings of the Settlement Support Center telephone calls? I would find it hard to believe they don't record everything, in the event that you inadvertently incriminate yourself, or someone else, during settlement discussions.<BR/><BR/>Just a note: On a computer, the term "program files" refer only to actually executable programs. These typically have extensions of .exe or .com. Every file on the computer is more properly considered a "data file", since it contains data – binary information, which can represent anything that can be stored in digital form. Data may be an executable program, meaning that program files are a subset of data files, but so are music files, picture files, and any other type of file. If Media Sentry is referring to the files on their screen shots as "program files", they are showing their ignorance of what computer files actually are.<BR/><BR/>In the first Defendant's Amended Answer and Counterclaims:<BR/><BR/>In paragraph 45, not only is the statement false because they cannot identify the who had committed any of the alleged facts, that information DOESN'T EVEN LET THEM IDENTIFY A SPECIFIC COMPUTER INVOLVED. This is why they have to inspect the hard drive afterwards, and establish that this hard drive was in a computer attached to the Internet at the specified time they gathered their evidence.<BR/><BR/>Leads one to wonder what would happen if there were two computers, both with KaZaA loaded, both having selected the same screen name (easy to do), and both with the identical identified MP3 files loaded (also easy to do). Given that these computers belonged to two different people, how would you pick the specific infringer? Neither computer might have actually been connected, since a third computer, also with identical software, username, and files copied over from a CD or other source, might have been the one connected. Like the Jane Seymour movie where she played identical twins (two Jane Seymours in the same movie is quite a treat), meaning that all witnesses identifications, blood, hair, and DNA couldn't pick the guilty one from the innocent one. Maybe instead of no hard drives with infringing content (and no evidence such content was ever distributed), a dozen such hard drives should arrive. Let them sort that one out, since they insist there was one, and only one, infringing computer.<BR/><BR/>Paragraph 48 alone should sink the RIAA in the eyes of any reasonable court.<BR/><BR/>In the Duke false rape case, defendants were assured that DNA would clear them if innocent. In Ms. Anderson's case, she was assured that a forensic examination of her hard drive would clear her if innocent. Plaintiffs/Prosecution has LIED in both cases. Iin Duke, that prosecutor is paying a price for his lies and obstruction of justice. Plaintiffs here deserve to pay a similar price.AMD FanBoihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11864029976202105778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-16296585492805971162007-04-24T15:33:00.000-04:002007-04-24T15:33:00.000-04:00I hope the judge does not dismiss these countercla...I hope the judge does not dismiss these counterclaims. She is clearly innocent, and is asking for her day in court to prove it.StephenHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14106243367366411553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-47247403997410863292007-04-24T15:12:00.000-04:002007-04-24T15:12:00.000-04:00Thanks again for this site, Ray,,It really is help...Thanks again for this site, Ray,,<BR/><BR/>It really is helpful, and wouldn't it be funny if there was one day a class action lawsuit Against the RIAA for misrepresentation?<BR/><BR/>Hmmm. Food for thoughtMark Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08713628570394054338noreply@blogger.com