AfterDawn: Tech news

RIAA to sue Ray Beckerman

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 18 Sep 2008 14:36 User comments (37)

RIAA to sue Ray Beckerman The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has declared that the lawyer Ray Beckerman is a "vexatious litigator" and is now seeking monetary damages in an effort to punish him for his defense of a NY woman in a recent P2P case.
Beckerman, one of the few lawyers who defends alleged file sharers, is also a blogger and that point is at the heart of the new case. The RIAA says Ray "has maintained an anti-recording industry blog during the course of this case and has consistently posted virtually every one of his baseless motions on his blog seeking to bolster his public relations campaign and embarrass plaintiffs. Such vexatious conduct demeans the integrity of these judicial proceedings and warrants this imposition of sanctions."

Lory Lybeck, a Washington state defense attorney is in charge of a soon-coming class-action lawsuit against the RIAA laughed at the move and noted that this is the same organization that has sued 7-year old children, 90-year old grandmothers, a printer and even the deceased, all while using the unlicensed investigator Media Sentry.

"This is like irony and irony and irony," Lybeck said. "That's what vexatious litigation is."

"Irony is too tame of a word to describe the motion against Ray," Lybeck added. "Their whole 30,000-lawsuit scheme is founded on the purpose to run a PR campaign based on a fundamental starting place of an illegal investigation by unlicensed investigators and then a threatening letter...Ray is duty bound and ethically bound to zealously defend his client."

In response, Beckerman agreed, saying the allegations were "frivolous and irresponsible."

The case against Beckerman is also seeking monetary damages from the woman he defended in 2004, Marie Lindor, accusing her of destroying evidence.

"Here, sanctions are appropriate because defendant, her family, and her counsel engaged in a deliberate pattern of misconduct by providing false, misleading, and incomplete information as to the status of defendantís Internet service in August 2004, who resided in defendantís home during that time, the identity and location of witnesses with information about the case, and the existence and owner of the computer connected to defendantís Internet account at the time of infringement. ÖDefendantís misrepresentations caused plaintiffs and the court to waste substantial resources chasing empty leads and ultimately led to the destruction of critical evidence in this case. The actions of defendant and her counsel have caused Plaintiffs to engage in additional discovery at great time and expense, prolonged this litigation unnecessarily, and resulted in the destruction of critical computer evidence severely and irreparably prejudicing plaintiffsí ability to prove their case."

Previous Next  

37 user comments

118.9.2008 15:00

Someone should introduce the RIAA to Mr. Molotav Cocktail.

218.9.2008 15:12

Maybe the saying is now "If you can't beat them, sue them".

They lost to this man in court and now are attempting to sue him to try and cover themselves.

Maybe they are hoping if the win the case then all cases they lost against him will be overturned.

318.9.2008 15:46
tripplite
Inactive

wait a tick...isn't that the exact opposite of what your NOT supposed to do?? your giving the guy a personal reason to cut you down in future trials.....whereas before he was simply interested from a business stand point....

418.9.2008 15:59

Quote:
because defendant, her family, and her counsel engaged in a deliberate pattern of misconduct by providing false, misleading, and incomplete information
Isn't that exactly! what the riaa have done ?

518.9.2008 16:31

C'Mon, you have got to be kidding, LOLLOLOLOLO. The Really Inept Associaton of Analtypes sueing the man who's proven they're a lying bunch of thieves?

I hope the courts see this as what it really is, an attempt to ruin the reputation of the man who successfully proved that their claims were groundless and the amounts claimed as nothing more than extortion. These guys are just pissed because they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar and now the courts are taking their claims with more than a grain of salt. Before the defendent was guilty even if he or she was innocent in the eyes of the R.I.A.A., and their claims that they can sue for hundreds of thousands of dollars without any proof were all shown to be nothing more than lies.

These guys are now running scared and they know their end run around the justice system is coming to an end so they're trying to bring down the very people who beat them at their own game.

I especially love their claims here, "sanctions are appropriate because defendant, her family, and her counsel engaged in a deliberate pattern of misconduct by providing false, misleading, and incomplete information as to the status of defendantís Internet service in August 2004, who resided in defendantís home during that time, the identity and location of witnesses with information about the case, and the existence and owner of the computer connected to defendantís Internet account at the time of infringement. ÖDefendantís misrepresentations caused plaintiffs and the court to waste substantial resources chasing empty leads and ultimately led to the destruction of critical evidence in this case. The actions of defendant and her counsel have caused Plaintiffs to engage in additional discovery at great time and expense, prolonged this litigation unnecessarily, and resulted in the destruction of critical computer evidence severely and irreparably prejudicing plaintiffsí ability to prove their case."

What case? They never had one and they know it. The reason they couldn't get that "information" so crucial to their case is real simple, there was none, but they aren't gonna admit that.

Look at their track record so far, it's all based on illegal hacking by Media Sentry, their so called experts can't tell if there's anything, music or otherwise on the offenders' hard drive. They've been suing anyone they feel they can get away with bullying and harassing on trumped up charges.

What I want to know is why the DOJ is not going after these morons like they did M$.

I sincerely hope that Mr. Beckerman countersues these bums and demands they put their money where their mouths are, cause they don't have any proof against him and this is nothing more than reprisal for kicking their asses in court.

618.9.2008 17:00
1bonehead
Inactive

Originally posted by Pop_Smith:
Maybe the saying is now "If you can't beat them, sue them".


The riaa is admitting defeat. This is the "hail Mary" approach

718.9.2008 17:11

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vexatious?jss=0

So I had no idea what vexatious meant...after looking it up I realize that their complaint is that "he's annoying".

/clap

818.9.2008 18:33

Haha this is the same as you favorite sports team losing and then trying to sue the other team because the other team gave away penalties a few times because they cheated.

918.9.2008 18:42

dont know what kind of drugs the riaa boys are doing but i gotta get me some.lol

1018.9.2008 18:52
1bonehead
Inactive

Originally posted by aldan:
dont know what kind of drugs the riaa boys are doing but i gotta get me some.lol


Me too !!!

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.

1118.9.2008 19:06

Originally posted by aldan:
dont know what kind of drugs the riaa boys are doing but i gotta get me some.lol

Give me some of that also :p

This is just too funny :D :D :D

1218.9.2008 19:32

These people are the biggest morons around currently. Like who the fuck sues a lawyer for doing his job. Baha, I hope they lose and get a counter suit which they have to pay the court fees because of a ridiculous case.

1318.9.2008 19:55

Never in history have I seen or read about an organisation so determined to make itself the most hated entity on the planet - truly breathtaking and worrying.

1418.9.2008 20:37

Originally posted by windsong:
Someone should introduce the RIAA to Mr. Molotav Cocktail.
or the atomic bomb

1518.9.2008 22:57

dude, watch the language.

ivymike, neutron bomb is better as it kills the people & leaves the buildings for others to use.

1618.9.2008 23:06

Sooner or later, The RIAA (& the MPAA) will meet their match and LOSE.

I will be getting drunk when that day arrives.

1719.9.2008 4:19

RIAA: Oh no, we lost and cant destroy an innocent womans life! What can we do?
Sane person: Just forget about it.
RIAA: No, we must sue the lawyer its his fault we lost.
Sane person: Thats just insane, thats what lawyers do, they defend their clients.
RIAA: We must sue everyone! After the lawyer were going to sue the judge and jury too!

Every time i read about the idiotic things riaa/mpaa do i cant stop thinking about what kind of a person comes up with the shit they do? Is it a monkey with a typewriter just hitting random buttons and sometimes making words? Is it a longterm patient of a asylum? Is it a man that was dropped on his head as a baby and is so stupid he even got kicked out of preschool? I just cant imagine a person that would come up with ideas like "lets sue the lawyer for winning against us".

1819.9.2008 5:45
cousinkix
Inactive

Quote:
Like who the fuck sues a lawyer for doing his job. Baha, I hope they lose and get a counter suit which they have to pay the court fees because of a ridiculous case.
If we are lucky the judge will jail them for contempt of the court and for wasting his time on a frivilous lawsuit. I would also refer Media Sentry to the Attorney general's office ans suggest that the be prosecuted for playing cops without a license as required by the law.

Quote:
dont know what kind of drugs the riaa boys are doing but i gotta get me some.lol
No you don't want any of their garbage. The record company's have been infested by a bunch of paranoid cokeheads since the 80's. Nose candy is expensive compared to most other drugs and the RIAA's victims must pay for their filthy drug habits...

1919.9.2008 8:22

Sound to me like they want to achieve the following:
a) scare off lawyers from defending people getting sued by the RIAA
b) recouperate the costs they made for the trial

That's not what they should be doing. They tried to sue people for illegal downloading but didn't have a strong enough case, lacking legally admissible proof. They should just leave it at that.

2019.9.2008 11:18

Originally posted by ddp:

ivymike, neutron bomb is better as it kills the people & leaves the buildings for others to use.
LOL, this was the funniest thing i ever read.
but seriously.. you wouldn't want a building that people died in.. and doesnt it take a while for the radiation to clear?

2119.9.2008 13:45

lxfactor, that radiation does not stay & the bodies can be picked up as soon as they drop dead.

2219.9.2008 14:33

Originally posted by ddp:
lxfactor, that radiation does not stay & the bodies can be picked up as soon as they drop dead.
I love the smell of napalm in the morning.

Er..I meant charcoaled RIAA suits.

2319.9.2008 14:37

Originally posted by ddp:
lxfactor, that radiation does not stay & the bodies can be picked up as soon as they drop dead.
Actually it's much cleaner isn't it - doesn't damage anything except people.

2419.9.2008 14:42

just the immediate buildings get damaged, how much i don't know.

2519.9.2008 14:49

Nerve gas though, and stuff like that, biological warfare, doesn't do any damage to property, only humans and animals.

Makes sense i suppose, less of a clean up after a war, although it is totally off topic. :)

2619.9.2008 14:51

Well, at least this guy can defend himself. It won't cost him anything in legal fees.
On the other hand, the RIAA has to pay their own attorneys for a case they have no chance in hell of winning. Congratulations RIAA, you have found a new way to screw yourself. Way to go!

2719.9.2008 21:08

wow! i dunno what to day! this guy did his job just like the RIAA lawyers r doing! Maybe he can sue them for same thing after they are done!

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 19 Sep 2008 @ 21:09

2819.9.2008 23:07




Nuff Said

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 19 Sep 2008 @ 23:08

2919.9.2008 23:19

Welcome to America!

3020.9.2008 11:28

Why don't they sue the judge in that case? Or even better... Why don't they sue the Congress of the United States for not passing laws in their favor? Makes more sense to me.

3120.9.2008 15:07
DPensee
Inactive

The RIAA needs to be slapped down hard by the court system. The precedent has to be set once and for all letting them know that they can't bypass proper rules of evidentary procedure, and freely violate individual privacy, because the market is changing, their profits are down, and those dinosaurs are crying out to the heavens in effect, "We can't die! We've made such much money marketing ephemereal art that we refuse to accept that it's an obsolete 20th-century concept that doesn't work in the digital age."

Oh, and again, how much of these damages are trickling down the artists whose rights these lawsuits are alleged to protect...?

3220.9.2008 16:17

Howdy, DPensee, in answer to your question, none of the monies secured by this farce have gone to the artists this bunch claim to represent and whose interests they claim they are looking after. Instead, they have told the artists that there is NO MONEY as they had to pay their lawyer's fees. Now since we here all know just much of a lying sack of excrement this group is and has been shown to be, I wonder just how much longer this will go on BEFORE the artists themselves start suing this bunch for stealing what is rightfully theirs.

You can bet your bottom dollar that all monies secured by this farce have since made its way to the RIAA's offshore bank accounts so they can have the latest in cars, condos, cocaine and chicas of the evening. This whole thing is nothing more than a last ditch attempt by a dying industry to grab the brass ring that used to belong to them but is now out of reach and getting further and further away each day with the ongoing lawsuits brought by them and their illegal enforcement arm, Media Sentry.

I'm hoping Ray Beckerman sues these pathetically, moronic, POS for libel and slander, after all they've accused him of doing the very thing that they have from the beginning by saying, "the defendant, her family and her counsel engaged in a deliberate pattern of misconduct by providing false, misleading, and incomplete information as to the status of defendantís Internet service in August 2004, who resided in defendantís home during that time, the identity and location of witnesses with information about the case, and the existence and owner of the computer connected to defendantís Internet account at the time of infringement. ÖDefendantís misrepresentations caused plaintiffs and the court to waste substantial resources chasing empty leads and ultimately led to the destruction of critical evidence in this case."

This reads like the entire history of what and how they, the RIAA and MEDIA SENTRY, have operated since the very beginning.

3320.9.2008 17:27

ok I'm no lawyer, judge, or to be honest a smart person.
But this kinda seems like it would fall under the double jepordy clause thingy wouldn't it??
anywhos......
so now if this goes to court..............
lets say I get in a car wreck and go to sue the other driver at fault, for some reason I lose can I go and file suit against the lawyer that reprpesnted the person at fault.
I mean comon now this makes it so lawyers gotta worry about not only for their client but also fear that there will be a suit filed against them.......
Total and complete elephant mess, the type that you need a backhoe to clean-up, not a shovel.

3421.9.2008 12:00
susieqbbb
Inactive

Ok and how can you prove she got rid off evidence i am sorry to say this is why we have warrents that state they are allowed to take the persons computer did the riaa take the persons computer no they left it there.

So it is the Riaa's fault not the lawyer that saw what the riaa was doing and how it was screwing everyone.

And if media sentry is so great then please explain to me why they are still unlicensed???

I thought that if a bussiness was not licensed in the united states that the bussiness could face jail time or tax aduits so how lame is that

3521.9.2008 14:46

The RIAA is so full of BS that it is coming out of their ears.. this is way over the line.

3621.9.2008 15:23
DPensee
Inactive

Why doesn't the Supreme Court bring the RIAA to task for "Profiteering Through Litigation and Coercion"? The RIAA's new business model of extortion based on inferred intent by suing the very markets that support them for revenue will hasten the implosion of the music industry infrastructure they are so desperately trying to supplant.

3722.9.2008 4:28

This truly is a NEW LOW...even for the RIAA cockroaches.

Quote:
The RIAA says Ray "has maintained an anti-recording industry blog during the course of this case and has consistently posted virtually every one of his baseless motions on his blog seeking to bolster his public relations campaign and embarrass plaintiffs. Such vexatious conduct demeans the integrity of these judicial proceedings and warrants this imposition of sanctions."
Basically they're saying that Ray is not entitled to an "Opinion" with that statement. I can see if he was posting about information that was deemed to be "Confidential" by the Courts or has been sealed or the info was sensitive to the outcome or prejudicial to potential jurors, but none of this is stated in the claim for sanctions or monetary damages.

What a Proverbial "Crock-0-Shite"!!!!
These idiots seriously need to be taken down a few notches and I hope the Courts will do just that with this frivolous & "VEXATIOUS" litigation, if I can use their own terms...oh...maybe the RIAA has the copyright on the word VEXATIOUS.

vexatious, vexatious, vexatious...there, sue me you useless teets, except I live in Canada...ha-ha.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive