Mom, and Now Judge, Stand Up to RIAA 670
Nom du Keyboard writes "First there was the mother, Patricia Santangelo, who has refused to roll-over to RIAA demands to pay their extortion fee because they claim to have identified her IP address as involved in Kazaa file sharing. Now Judge McMahon doesn't seem to be letting the RIAA have it all their way either in this case. Godwin's Law summarizes the rebuke of Judge McMahon to the RIAA lawyer now that a court case has been filed. A transcript of the entire court appearance is also available."
Finally..... (Score:4, Insightful)
About time (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally..... (Score:3, Insightful)
There will be nothing to stop us this time... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally..... (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, not everyone (Score:4, Insightful)
I know many peopel who don't knwo what kazza is, or more importantly, how it works.
Re:Judge Colleen McMahon, nominated by... (Score:5, Insightful)
While Clinton signed the DMCA, the RIAA were the ones that decided to use it for extortion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion [wikipedia.org]). Luckily, a judge that Clinton appointed is trying to put a stop to that. Checks and balances...more than just an idea?
Good cough none the less
Re:She lives under a rock! (Score:4, Insightful)
So back in your face fuckwad...
Why don't you pull your ass out of your world of warcraft fantasy world, turn off the computer, walk outside and TALK TO PEOPLE.. you might just find that very few people care that much about computers, software and gadgets and of those few that do, maybe 3% have any real understanding of "what it's all abut".
And just how much time do you think a single mother of 5 has to devote to figuring out all the nifty shit a computer can do when she has work, bill, and five pesky kids to watch over and feed? Hell, I bet she uses her computer to do her taxes, pay bills and chat with family when she has time to use it at all.
So to you and others like you, wake the fuck up and get out more because you're a borderline sociopath who's clearly lost touch with the real world.
Re:Finally..... (Score:5, Insightful)
First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
Gandhi
Re:Judge Colleen McMahon, nominated by... (Score:3, Insightful)
Better yet (Score:5, Insightful)
Better yet, what she said was, Don't expect me to lure the virgin into the forest. Once you've brought her to me, she's under my protection, I decide, not you and your gang hidden away in the forest.
Re:The Anwser is the ACLU (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? I wasn't aware of that. And here I got legally married by a district magistrate and didn't even know he was working for God. And all those papers I filed, did they go to God too?
Is God responsible for insurance coverage and cost differences based on marital status of a household?
Marriage is not only a religious institution. Historically, it's been used as a way to determine inheritance, cement alliances, transfer property, and establish responsibility and rights for others. Saying it is only a religious institution is a fairly narrow view. It can also be legal, cultural, societal, economic, and religious.
An embarassment, really... (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately, the RIAA goes about it in such a thuggish way that it's just an embarassment, and makes it impossible to support them. It's like saying that guns are dangerous and some people might have some without a license, and then breaking into every house within five blocks and performing a search. The ends here just do not justify the means.
Re:OMGOMGOMG (Score:2, Insightful)
Crap, unclosed tag (Score:3, Insightful)
---
All you have to do is tell your kids "don't break the law." It's just so easy isn't it? (You guys all have kids, right?) Well it would be easy, if the U.S.C. wasn't so huge; and we didn't need law degrees to understand it and all its implications.
Here's an idea - a new book called U.S.C. 2005, For Kids!, or maybe a weekly cartoon show would be better. Anyway, then parents might have a chance when it isn't merely enough to to know right from wrong. The test isn't "son, did you know this was right or wrong" it's the U.S.C.
When I was or was not phreaking as a 'kid' I had a pretty good sense that it was or could have been wrong (essentially fraud, trespass). However, earlier than that, when I was playing games (or drawing pictures with Doodle or Print Shop) on the C-64 I didn't think/know it was breaking the law to (hypothetically) copy games/softwares at the CUG. Even though copying was rampant back in those 'hobbiest' days, it didn't make it any more legal. What's the statute of limitations on this kind of stuff? (That would be covered in my book/cartoon! How long you have to keep it secret!)
What I'm saying is -- I don't think I could rely on a 6- to 11-year-old's sense of copyright infringement even if they have a sufficiently developed sense of 'right and wrong'. (It might be obvious not to hit Suzie, but it might be harder to tell about making a certain noise before dialing a phone number or duplicating a certain disk.)
Hmm, this is probably why the *AA's are trying so hard to indoctrinate -- er, educate -- children in their schools.
don't look a gift horse in the mouth (Score:4, Insightful)
you think she's stupid?
i think she's innocent
innocence has a funny way of appearing stupid to cynics in this world, you know?
but more important than that should be to you is this: it is upon this poor woman's back that an EXTREMELY cynical enterprise, the RIAA lawsuit mill, might actually be broken
so don't look your gift horse in the mouth
you should BLESS this woman and THANK her for being technically clueless!
there is a certain amount of knowledge in this world that is assumed to be necessary for you to survive: you have pay your taxes, you need a driver's license, etc.
but i hardly see that what you are saying is true at all: that the knowledge "p2 is bad" is common or even necessary
Re:Judge Colleen McMahon, nominated by... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:RIAA - High Priests of Virgin Sacrifice (Score:1, Insightful)
The judge's bias (Score:5, Insightful)
Since IANAL, I can't answer that, but let's look at the transcript. The judge tells the defendant to try to find a lawyer, and allows time for this, squashing the plaintiff's attempt to get material from the defendant under oath before the legal advice is available. Then she tells the defendant she wants her to fight the case, and tells the plaintiff's lawyer that he has to present his case in court now they've started a lawsuit. Throughout, the judge is fairly clearly in favour of the defendant getting a fair day in court.
The one thing she doesn't do is give any indication of whether she thinks the defendant should actually win the case, and to my legally untrained mind, that seems to be the only thing that would have been inappropriate. In fact, I find it rather reassuring and highly appropriate that a judge was heavily in favour of a defendant fighting against a fair case in court, and not being intimidated into doing things that aren't in their best interests without the benefit of counsel.
Questioning the ID10T5 at the RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)
And I go out and buy a CD of music...
Then I go out and download every scene on that DVD from KAZAA or (insert your favorite file sharing thing here)...
Or I download every song off the CD from (share system)
Have I broken the law?
How do they know that I didn't buy it, how do they know that I don't have rights to make copies or download copies of something I have purchased...???
Hmmmm...methinks that something is smelling, and it wasn't beans and cabbage...
Needs a decent disclaimer (Score:1, Insightful)
"Warning, downloading music illegally may put your family in jail".
Im sure there is some kids who really just dont know its wrong. They figure, hey, they play music on the radio and it costs me nothing , why can't i just download a song I want to hear?
Quote of the week (Score:5, Insightful)
From [stereophile.com]http://www.stereophile.com/news/082205riaa/ [stereophile.com] ...
I wonder what the markup is on commercially produced CDs and DVDs ... 8000% ??
Such ... irony ... the recording industry complaining about the high price of pirated content ... cannot ... suppress ... gales of laughter ...
Not a lot about nothing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Why read the summary? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The judge's bias (Score:3, Insightful)
That's awfully close to saying that the defendant should win.
She's also already made her mind up that there's a group of cases that all seem alike. That may not be legally problematic, but frankly divulging such information seems like it's crossing a line that most judges don't cross at the beginning of a case.
Certainly, it's possible and probable that the judge was thinking that the cases often had endings that didn't further the goals of objective judicial justice. But to start making sweeping statements about a particular plaintiff at the very beginning gives too much of an appearance of predjudice.
Re:What is the Value of an IP address? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:An embarassment, really... (Score:5, Insightful)
As an example, Ben Franklin was an inventor, yet he was an opponent of "intellectual property." Out of all the things he invented (the Franklin stove, bifocals, etc.) none of them were patented.
Not necessarily. In my experience, most people who download music would have just done without otherwise.
You seem to have some problems constructing a logical argument. Specifically, you tend to assert that A implies B, even when it doesn't. Perhaps you should read up on logical fallacies [datanation.com] so as to actually be able to convince thinking people. Pay special attention to begging the question [datanation.com].
Re:who gives a fuck? (Score:2, Insightful)
Speaking of the summary (Score:2, Insightful)
First there was the mother, Patricia Santangelo, who has refused to roll-over to RIAA demands to pay their extortion fee because they claim to have identified her IP address as involved in Kazaa file sharing.
"Extortion fee?" They identified an IP address from her computer that was infringing on their copyrighted materials, and so they legally went after her. I don't see "extortion" thrown around when people are demanding to sue companies that violate the copyright of the GPL.
I just think people use the RIAA as a scapegoat too often just to justify piracy. Five years ago, Slashdot, editors included, were ADVOCATING that they go after individual downloaders and lay off the companies like Napster. Five years later, they're doing just that, and suddenly that's wrong too.
Re:What is the Value of an IP address? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Finally..... (Score:5, Insightful)
I too... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm an author too, I write software. I'm an intellectual rights advocate as well. I advocate considerably shorter copyright terms and an entire restructuring of the patent system. Copyright is completely broken by the existence of copyright terms lasting for life + 75/95 years. Copyright should last a maximum of 28 years. Given the extremely efficient means of distribution and production that we have today as opposed to 200 years ago, I would even support shorter terms. Special interests and politicians like Sonny Bono have stolen what rightfully belongs in the public domain. In doing so, they have created an environment where the people at large see no reason to respect the system. Because the system is so imbalanced, people feel no shame infringing on an author's copyright. Who here would refuse to sing "Happy Birthday" [snopes.com] to their child in public on grounds of infringing Time Warner's intellectual property?
Additionally, they've created an environment where innovation is no longer possible. An author cannot build on the work of others because once written, the work is monopolized perpetually. Due to the system we have now, innovation is dragging to a halt. The systems that made this country mighty are now killing it. Look at how horribly broken the patent system has become. Numerous 'businesses' exist solely to patent everything thinkable and sue anyone who dares to create. Empty shell companies do nothing but collect 'Intellectual Property' and sue others who attempt to make an idea into reality.
The fundamental reason for copyright, patents and the whole morass of 'intellectual property' is to encourage innovation and progress, not to impede it. The only way to restore intellectual rights is to restore balance to the system. Even if they weren't suing grandmothers and children, I'd feel no pity for the RIAA. They and their lobbyists have only brought this upon themselves. Massive and flagrant infringement is the symptom, not the disease.
Re:The judge's bias (Score:2, Insightful)
And there is no reason that the judge couldn't disqualify herself from the actual trial, once she's given the defendant the chance to actually defend herself.
Re:The judge's bias (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The judge's bias (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Finally..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Gandhi
This is annoying, and almost offensive. To compare Gandhi in any way to the selfish and morally devoid mantra of "I want this for free, so I'm going to construct a philosophical framework that lets me justify stealing it" is completely off-base. The very fact that you're making a comparison like this, and have been modded up to (Score: 5, Insightful) shows me just how few people on slashdot have actually stood for any cause that mattered.
Re:Nail on the head (Score:3, Insightful)
No. It doesn't. Automated file sharing has been around for over 10 years and the media industry still turns a profit every year.
Re:one might think.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the saying "Takes one to know one" is fairly relevant in this case
Re:Finally..... (Score:3, Insightful)
The point is that the *AA is going around suing anybody they possibly can, regardless of whether or not the people being sued have used file sharing. The *AA has no real evidence, and persists in harassing, threatening, and using strong-arm tactics to extort money from people who usually can ill-afford to pay. This is about the modern day protection racket. They are a bunch of thugs, and we all need to stand up against them.
Re:Finally..... (Score:3, Insightful)
More like you starve to death on the streets because communism continues to flop about instead of dying completely. Look at Poland vs Russia. In one country they bit the bullet and did away with practically all the old communist institutions, had two years of extremely high inflation and a lot of anxiety, made it past and now all is reasonably well. In the other country they kept 80% of the communist institutions and tendencies and are STILL struggling.
Re:About time (Score:2, Insightful)
That would only be relevant if the original poster was being sexist in assuming that the speaker was male and that a male talking about a mom fighting a case must be sexist.
Anyone can be sexist, including towards the same sex.
Re:Finally..... (Score:4, Insightful)
The "justification" was already written by the likes of Thomas Jefferson before the relevant laws and preceeding constitution were written.
Also, this issue has far broader implications than just whether or not some kid can download yesterdays's top 40 hits. This is why the problem of suppressing this form of information exchange was explicitly addressed by the founding fathers.
Copyright is a balance between competing public and private interests, not just a simple virtual land grab.
Me downloading the Beatles catalog is not stealing. It's merely acting consistent with the original intent of copyright law.
But why stop at just music. There's also great literature and textbooks to consider. Under your morally simplistic view of things, all the great works of our civilization would end up forever and irrevocably trapped in a mire of ownership interests.
You're only even alive today, and able to experience a nice soft live, because a few Irish monks 1500 years ago decided to pirate everything they could get their hands on.