RIAA Sues Computerless Woman!

[Gizmo]

That's right, folks. Music piracy, exemplified by the illegal sharing of copyrighted works of music online (the practice of which is solely responsible for the Music Industry's declining revenues) has become so wide-spread and rampant that people who don't even own computers are now participating in it. At least, that's what one would conclude from reading this story at the Enquirer.

[danrok]

That'll teach her.

[captaincurran]

I've got one phrase for that article: What the H. E. Double hockey sticks are they smoking?

[SteveI]

I hope the defense attorneys take the number of songs claimed to have been distributed... and charge $1,000 per alleged act to defend. If the original claim was for 1,000 songs, that should entitle the defense attorneys to $1 million in legal fees from the RIAA

[Daniel ~]

Hey she Wanted to! I say jail her until she sings like a bird! If she wanted to she's bound to know others who have wanted to! It's time to draw the line on this. No longer should the Music industry be limited in it's action by the merely rational! (as if!)

[madcatmk3]

Espicialy since she new exacly what she was doing. Im sure when the came to get her she hid her fx-60 ,1000w,7800GTX in the cubord.

[Marshmellin]

Where is Denny Crane when you need him? Or, better yet, Alan Shore!

This is simply pathetic. However, there has to be a reason the RIAA picked her. How did they pick her name, her address, her...whatever it is they picked up on to charge her with this when she's never used a computer? That means she's never put her name out on the internet, her date of birth, or her location.

So, how did they manage to pick her name out?

Conspiracy theory: Someone stole her ideeeeeentity!

[Pitch]

I guess they assume 99.9% of the population has a computer. So they can just pick anyone at random and sue them. Since all computer users are criminals. >.>

[Marshmellin]

Originally Posted by Pitch

I guess they assume 99.9% of the population has a computer. So they can just pick anyone at random and sue them. Since all computer users are criminals. >.>

...which is highly illogical. One would think they'd need some kind of proof that shows she was the one who did it, not someone who was using her computer (You know, the one she doesn't have?) and that she had been actively seeking the files and that she had done it with either malicious intent or at least with a criminal spirit, knowing that it was illegal and wrong.

If the woman doesn't even own a computer, then someone obviously dropped the ball somewhere and didn't exactly do their homework.

[Daniel ~]

When you want your enemy to know of your ruthlessness you don't assinate their general, you kill your own son.... Don't you just love power politics? ":O}

[dsio]

The thing is they are completely unable to actually do anything about many mass piracy sites, so they go after some poor woman.

Then there is TBP.

MPAA / RIAA threaten this Swedish website under the DMCA and American law, thinking the swedes could give a rat's arse about American law and juristiction.

It really is hilarious reading the idiots that make legal threats against them, threatening them with American lawsuits, completely ignorant of the fact that outside of America, nobody cares about their laws or legislation.

TBP is one of the biggest in the world, but is 100% legal in every way, as under swedish law, they are NOT hosting any pirate or copyrighted material due to the way in which BitTorrent works.

And so, this woman gets sued. Great work.

[Pitch]

Originally Posted by Marshmellin

...which is highly illogical. One would think they'd need some kind of proof that shows she was the one who did it, not someone who was using her computer (You know, the one she doesn't have?) and that she had been actively seeking the files and that she had done it with either malicious intent or at least with a criminal spirit, knowing that it was illegal and wrong.

If the woman doesn't even own a computer, then someone obviously dropped the ball somewhere and didn't exactly do their homework.

RIAA Logical?

[Kaitain]

Originally Posted by dsio

MPAA / RIAA threaten this Swedish website under the DMCA and American law, thinking the swedes could give a rat's arse about American law and juristiction.

I remember reading some years ago about a similar one, shortly after the DVD content de-scrambler, DeCSS became widely-known. A Swiss site hosted the source, though I've long lost the link, which is a shame because the owner published all his communications with the MPAA on this one:

In summary, the MPAA contacted the admin to issue him with a "cease and desist" order under the DMCA, ordering him to remove the DeCSS source. He wrote back to explain that the law was inadmissable.

The MPAA contacted him again to say they had started legal proceedings with him in some State or other, which would be actioned if he did not comply. He politely explained that he was a Swiss, in Switzerland, and as such the American DMCA was not applicable to him, and would they kindly take a running jump off a cliff?

The MPAA wrote back again, with some vitriol, to state that if he failed to comply, they would subpoena his ISP to provide evidence against him. Again, he politely informed him that, as his ISP was Swiss, they were not obliged to comply. More letters were exchanged. Eventually, he got annoyed and sent them passages of Swiss law that stated that under their Fair Use Act, if he bought his DVD legally and wished to run it on a system that had the capacity to use it, but lacked the software, then he could take all measures, including cracking the CSS and reverse engineering commercial software to provide himself with the ability to view DVDs. Furthermore, under the same act, he was at liberty to distribute it.

I would love to have seen the face of the legal hack that had to explain to the MPAA that, not only could he not execute the suit, but American law doesn't work outside America, and local laws ALLOW DeCSS.

[danrok]

If you want to prosecute someone in another country, you need to employ a solicitor in that country who has studied that country's law. You would have thought these legal hacks would know this. The Swiss guy must have been laughing his socks off.

[captaincurran]

DSIO, since i'm outside of US duristriction, could you email/pm/im me the TBP link?

[Gizmo]

Originally Posted by danrok

If you want to prosecute someone in another country, you need to employ a solicitor in that country who has studied that country's law. You would have thought these legal hacks would know this. The Swiss guy must have been laughing his socks off.

No, they were counting on the Swiss guy being so intimidated by the threat of imminent legal action that he would take the stuff down without anyone ever knowing that they didn't have a legal leg to stand on.

[danrok]

I know what you mean. There was one guy who said, on the front page of the local newspaper, that he was going to sue my ass for slander over my protests at his treatment of elephants. In truth, I never even had so much letter from his lawyers. Subsequently, he was banned from bring his circus here again. His attempts at intimidation didn't get him very far.

[madcatmk3]

You can **** with who you want if it's legal where you are, except MS becuase that gets a swat team down you ass.