tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post7589123446564597705..comments2024-03-22T03:28:24.897-04:00Comments on Recording Industry vs The People: New web site, Fair Trade Music U.S.raybeckermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11063235302436280455noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-2452052011143926782008-08-14T12:31:00.000-04:002008-08-14T12:31:00.000-04:00What is most interesting about these letters from ...What is most interesting about these letters from the Plaintiffs is that they all state, alongside the spoiliation warning, that they already have enough evidence to prove their case. This same language is used in the letters from HRO as well as Shook Bacon.<BR/>Kathleen Williamson, Esq.Ask Roccohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17708425491512144720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15479871.post-37445683111909259032008-08-07T13:42:00.000-04:002008-08-07T13:42:00.000-04:00Ray, I have a question about the process. "On June...Ray, I have a question about the process. <BR/><BR/>"On June 21,2006, Plaintiffs sent a letter to Defendant's then wife, Pamela Howell,<BR/>advising her that she had been sued for copyright infringement but had not yet been named as a defendant."<BR/><BR/>"The June 21,2006 letter expressly advised Defendant of the duty to preserve evidence:"<BR/><BR/><BR/>Since no lawsuit had been filed, was the "Defendant" under any legal obligation to preserve evidence?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com