Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

Ray Beckerman denies Impeding Universal Music investigation

5 July 2008 16:58 by Rich "vurbal" Fiscus | 7 comments

As we reported 2 weeks ago, Universal Music Group (UMG) wants to dismiss a long-running file sharing lawsuit against Marie Lindor. UMG's lawyers are trying to get the lawsuit dismissed without prejudice, which would mean they make no admission of being wrong, and are therefore not liable for Ms. Lindor's legal expenses. This is based largely on the claim of "false statements and misdirection" by the defendant and her lawyer, Ray Beckerman. They've even gone so far as to request that Ms. Lindor pay their legal costs.

Mr. Beckerman is well known for his blog detailing lawsuits filed in the RIAA's war against their customers. Not surprisingly he's written a response to the judge hearing the case in which he rebuts UMG's claims of victimization at the hands of the defendant.

He denies their assertion that he's attempted to block legitimate discovery attempts, saying his client made it clear to the plaintiffs from the beginning that she was available to be deposed at any time, and also that they instructed her children to cooperate as well.

There are a number of problems with UMG's claims about Ms. Lindor's supposed attempts to impede their investigation. The most important is simply that early on in the case it was established that the defendant hadn't engaged in any file sharing, and probably wasn't capable of doing so even if she wanted to. Given that knowledge they surely had a responsibility to drop their case against her unless they already had proof she was somehow responsible for helping the responsible party.

Instead they decided to continue pursuing the case in order to get access to information about other people who might have been responsible for the alleged copyright infringement. Had they dismissed instead there would have been no legal claim for them to depose her children or request that they turn over their own computers to be inspected by RIAA investigators.

Essentially the RIAA's position seems to be that once a defendant has shown the case against them to be without merit its that person's responsibility to assist investigators in figuring out who's really to blame. The law or legal principle that such a theory would be based on has yet to be identified.

If you don't have evidence that the defendant did what you claim it's generally accepted your case is done. It's your own responsibility to develop a different case against a different defendant.

Permalink to this article | Topic: Lawsuits & Legislation

Judge limits RIAA damage award for "Innocent Infringement" (11 August 2008)

Defendant says RIAA damages unconstitutional (29 July 2008)

MediaSentry investigated over North Carolina RIAA lawsuits (14 July 2008)

German court clears WiFi theft victims of responsibility for copyright infringment of others (10 July 2008)

Universal lawyers call MediaSentry investigators, not experts (9 July 2008)

MediaSentry denies being investigators to avoid licensing (7 July 2008)

Judge once again affirms award against RIAA in Tanya Andersen case (26 June 2008)

Music industry targets radio station piracy - demands more royalties (23 June 2008)

EFF shoots down "making available" argument in Jammie Thomas case (23 June 2008)

MPAA to judge: We don't need no stinking proof (21 June 2008)

RIAA prepares to drop long running P2P suit for a lack of evidence (20 June 2008)

RIAA challenges Jammie Thomas' excessive damages complaint (13 November 2007)

Lindor challenges RIAA '$750 per track' damages (10 November 2006)

RIAA sues woman that has no computer (5 February 2006)

« Previous news article
Onkyo bringing Blu-ray player to market

Next news article »
Image Entertainment to start DVD rental service

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
nobrainer (Inactive) 5 July 2008 17:33
It sounds like they have adopted the tactics of the US IRS(Inland revenue service) attack the poor and weak! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173 The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above! The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX. [ + quote] This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6 July 2008 13:38
DXR88 (Member) 5 July 2008 19:01
they have been doing this ever since they started, if they go after the rich people they would loose. or rather who could pay of who's lawyers. [ + quote]
varnull (AfterDawn Addict) 5 July 2008 19:08
Thanks to the staff writers for making these things a priority for our attention. When it comes to voting time I hope our US buddies make themselves heard and at least attempt to kick the lawmakers in the ass. Even the judges are getting sick of these multi billion dollar businesses abusing the system and wasting everybodys time with these non criminal and malicious lawsuits.;. There is only one bunch of criminals here.. the mpaa and riaa..... [ + quote] This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5 July 2008 19:09
japhy (Newbie) 6 July 2008 0:43
I agree varnull, I just wish we knew who to vote for, not all of congress are a bunch of bad guys. RIAA, is scared of the rich and those who will defend themselves. [ + quote]
nobrainer (Inactive) 6 July 2008 13:39
Kick their asses Marie Lindor, good luck to you in your quest for justice for the 3 years of hell the RIAA have put you through. The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI. The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above! The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX. [ + quote] This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6 July 2008 13:40
DXR88 (Member) 6 July 2008 13:47
w00t, you get'em girl. [ + quote]
Bozobub (Newbie) 12 July 2008 18:40
What staggers me is that the RIAA continues with these tactics, even though the backlash has already appeared. I guess they think all judges are morons..?! Considering how - properly so, IMHO - conservative judges are in interpreting the law, even a sunstruck waterbrain can see the RIAA has no legal basis to stand on. [ + quote]