Quote:
It's probably not the first time that record company executives have been likened to Al Capone, but this time a judge might have to agree or disagree.
A New Jersey woman, one of the hundreds of people accused of copyright infringement by the Recording Industry Association of America, has countersued the big record labels, charging them with extortion and violations of the federal antiracketeering act.

Through her attorneys, Michele Scimeca contends that by suing file-swappers for copyright infringement, and then offering to settle instead of pursuing a case where liability could reach into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, the RIAA is violating the same laws that are more typically applied to gangsters and organized crime.

"This scare tactic has caused a vast amount of settlements from individuals who feared fighting such a large institution and feel victim to these actions and felt forced to provide funds to settle these actions instead of fighting," Scimeca's attorney, Bart Lombardo, wrote in documents filed with a New Jersey federal court. "These types of scare tactics are not permissible and amount to extortion."

Scimeca is one of a growing number of people fighting the record industry's copyright infringement campaign against file-swappers, although few have used such creative legal strategies.

According to the RIAA, which filed its latest round of lawsuits against 531 as-yet-anonymous individuals on Tuesday, it has settled with 381 people, including some who had not yet actually had suits filed against them yet. A total of nearly 1,500 people have been sued so far.

The industry group says that "a handful" of people have countersued, using a variety of claims.

"If someone prefers not to settle, they of course have the opportunity to raise their objections in court," an RIAA representative said. "We stand by our claims."

Few if any of the cases appear to have progressed far, however. The first RIAA lawsuits against individuals were filed more than five months ago, although the majority of people targeted have been part of the "John Doe" campaigns against anonymous individuals this year.

Several individuals and companies have started by fighting the RIAA attempts to identify music swappers though their Internet service providers (ISPs).

The most prominent, known by the alleged file-swapper's screen name "Nycfashiongirl," resulted in at least a temporary victory for the computer user. A Washington, D.C., court ruled in December that the RIAA's initial legal process for subpoenaing ISP subscriber identities before filing lawsuits was illegal. Because "Nycfashiongirl" had been targeted under this process, the RIAA dropped its request for her identity.

However, that may have provided only a temporary reprieve. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group that is closely following the RIAA's campaign, the Internet address used by "Nycfashiongirl" was included in the batch of lawsuits filed on Tuesday against anonymous individuals, raising the likelihood that she will be drawn back into the courts.

Separate attempts to fight subpoenas are ongoing in North Carolina and St. Louis, where the American Civil Liberties Union and ISP Charter Communications are respectively challenging the RIAA's information requests.

In San Francisco, computer user Raymond Maalouf has taken the first steps toward fighting the RIAA's suits. His daughters were the ones that used Kazaa to download music, and one of them even wound up in last month's Super Bowl advertisement for Pepsi's iTunes promotion, which featured a handful of teens caught in the RIAA dragnet.

In documents filed with San Francisco courts, Maalouf's attorneys noted that downloading through Kazaa was openly discussed at Maalouf's daughter's school by teachers, and they downloaded songs used in classes. That should be a protected fair use of the music, the attorneys said.

At a status conference held in San Francisco early in February, Maalouf's case was just one of five RIAA lawsuits moving through the courts together, attorney Ted Parker said. However, several of those others involved defendants who appeared close to settlement, he added.

Even RIAA critics look at Scimeca's racketeering-based countersuit as a long shot. But it's worth trying, they say.

"It is the first I've heard of anyone attempting that," said EFF legal director Cindy Cohn. "I guess that is a silver lining of the fact that the RIAA is suing so many people, that there are a lot of lawyers trying to figure out ways to protect folks."
Link:
http://zdnet.com.com/

I've been on the record for some time saying that, under the HOBBS ACT definition of extortion...the RIAA has been engaging in the kind of extortion the Hobbs Act talks about, when one party is acting under "Color of Law"....quite interesting development....
Chant with me, will you...
RICO...RICO...RICO...
RIAA...RIAA...RIAA...
RICO...RICO...RICO...

FROM ANOTHER SOURCE...
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-5/107708869350700.xml
"The music industry considers Michele Scimeca a pirate. The Morris County mom has her own term for record executives:

Racketeers.


Information from our Advertisers



In what legal experts described as a novel strategy, Scimeca is citing federal racketeering laws like the one that jailed mob boss John Gotti to countersue record labels that accused her in December of sharing some 1,400 copyrighted songs over the Internet.

The Rockaway Township woman, who claims she was targeted for her teenager's school research project, is among hundreds of individuals sued by the music industry since last summer. Another 531 computer users were sued yesterday in "John Doe" suits filed in Trenton, Atlanta, Philadelphia and Orlando.

Labels are using "scare tactics (that) amount to extortion" in efforts to extract settlements, Scimeca alleges in legal papers sent to the U.S. District Court in Newark.

"They're banding together to extort money, telling people they're guilty and they will have to pay big bucks to defend their cases if they don't pony up now. It is fundamentally not fair," Scimeca's lawyer, Bart Lombardo, said yesterday. The Cranford attorney said he occasionally downloads songs for personal use and sees nothing wrong with that.

The counterclaim seeks unspecified damages from Sony Music Entertainment Inc., UMG Recordings Inc. and Motown Record Co. L.P. Their lawyers in Los Angeles referred requests for comment to the Recording Industry Association of America. "We stand by our claims," the RIAA said in a prepared statement."

It's sad how something that could easily be seen as extortion is called a "long-shot" but abuse of the DMCA isn't a "long-shot," but rather a reality being granted by the government.

I wish her the best.

And -- Go Charter!

I guess now that they have to blindly file lawsuits, they filed one against someon who could defend herself

Hurray! A shout out to stubborn Italian-Americans who like to fight back.

I'm glad to see someone fighting back. It may be a longshot because there's no legal precident for it. Companies threaten with lawsuits and issue cease and desist orders all the time. if they win this could be a major blow on how all companies deal with legal issues

It's good to see RIAA get what they deserve.

Of course, they could win, and not get it, but still, it's good to see somebody standing up to them.

It's extortion, therefore not a longshot.
We must rely on the intelligence of the judge. Therefore it is.

Her attorney says he downloads too

From the New Jersey Star-Ledger:
Morris mom turns tables in music industry lawsuit
http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/jersey/index.ssf?/base/news-5/107708869350700.xml

Wednesday, February 18, 2004

BY KEVIN COUGHLIN
Star-Ledger Staff

The music industry considers Michele Scimeca a pirate. The Morris County mom has her own term for record executives:

Racketeers.

In what legal experts described as a novel strategy, Scimeca is citing federal racketeering laws like the one that jailed mob boss John Gotti to countersue record labels that accused her in December of sharing some 1,400 copyrighted songs over the Internet.

The Rockaway Township woman, who claims she was targeted for her teenager's school research project, is among hundreds of individuals sued by the music industry since last summer. Another 531 computer users were sued yesterday in "John Doe" suits filed in Trenton, Atlanta, Philadelphia and Orlando.

Labels are using "scare tactics (that) amount to extortion" in efforts to extract settlements, Scimeca alleges in legal papers sent to the U.S. District Court in Newark.

"They're banding together to extort money, telling people they're guilty and they will have to pay big bucks to defend their cases if they don't pony up now. It is fundamentally not fair," Scimeca's lawyer, Bart Lombardo, said yesterday. The Cranford attorney said he occasionally downloads songs for personal use and sees nothing wrong with that.

The counterclaim seeks unspecified damages from Sony Music Entertainment Inc., UMG Recordings Inc. and Motown Record Co. L.P. Their lawyers in Los Angeles referred requests for comment to the Recording Industry Association of America. "We stand by our claims," the RIAA said in a prepared statement.

Scimeca's case appears to be the first use of federal racketeering laws in the music copyright wars, said Cindy Cohn, legal director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an Internet advocacy group. Most defendants are paying music labels $2,000 to $10,000 to avert costly trials, Cohn said.

"It strikes me as a very innovative use of the law. Very innovative," said Gregory Mark, a law professor at the Rutgers School of Law-Newark.

The Racketeering Influenced & Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, was enacted in 1970 to prosecute organized crime and help victims seek compensation. But over the years it has been invoked, with varying success, in connection with alleged conspiracies ranging from GOP fund-raising to sexual abuses by Roman Catholic clergy.

AT&T cited the same laws when accusing WorldCom of phone fraud. In a case that reached the U.S. Supreme Court, the National Organization for Women unsuccessfully used RICO against an anti-abortion group.

That case hinged on an interpretation of the Hobbs act, a 1946 law aimed at thwarting gangsters from extorting interstate truckers. Scimeca's case also cites the Hobbs act: Paying the music labels would deprive her of money she could spend on interstate commerce, her lawyer explained. Because the so-called extortion papers were delivered via the postal system, and potentially affect Scimeca's bank account, her countersuit also cites mail- and bank fraud laws.

In December, the labels produced 41 pages of copyrighted songs from Pearl Jam, Korn, Godsmack and other artists, which they said were offered for illegal swapping over the KaZaA network by "DrEeMeR."

Scimeca told The Star-Ledger that was the screen name used by her 13-year-old daughter, a high school freshman, for a school project. But the family's Optimum Online Internet account was registered to the mother, whose name was handed over by Cablevision. An unrelated court ruling recently made such information harder for labels to obtain. So now they are filing John Doe lawsuits based on Internet addresses.

Scimeca said at the time that she and her husband could not afford copyright penalties of up to $150,000 per song. "Ignorance of the law is not a defense," admonished the notice she got from the labels' lawyers, who added that Scimeca's liability was clear and she should consider settling.

Scimeca's case may raise a valid question: Can labels take collective action against file-swappers? But her lawyer must convince U.S. District Court Judge William Martini that it merits a jury trial, said Mark, the Rutgers professor. "The hurdle is getting to a jury," Mark said.

A group in California tried using the RICO law to stop DirecTV from threatening people it suspects of stealing satellite services. But the company successfully argued its letters were protected free speech under a state law, said Jennifer Stisa Granick of Stanford University's Center for Internet & Society.

WHOA.

I looked at this and just... my jaw dropped, let's leave it at that. Someone is actually fighting back. Nice.

"It may be a longshot because there's no legal precident for it."

Yes, but there is also no legal precident form what the RIAA is doing.

true raoulduke, so true

"Ignorance of the law is not a defense," admonished the notice she got from the labels' lawyers, who added that Scimeca's liability was clear and she should consider settling."

It's all so clear now. It's almost like they don't even want it to make it court.

The RIAA would claim all it is doing is legal...
Well...
Everything Hitler did was legal in Nazi Germany

but there are plenty of illegal precidents. I believe the article Carla posted mentioned Al Capone

Capone was busted on tax charges (tax evasion)...
I still think that there is something dirty about the RIAA claiming
501 C 3 Status with all the apparent lobbying it seems they do...and
the way in which they are spending money...

The RIAA is not a non-profit organization.

I know my government likes their tax dollars. If they don't investigate RIAA's non-profit status, they'll continue losing out on major tax dollars.

This would also be a big blow to the RIAA.

this all depends on how the judge leans.
If he/she is conservative, were screwed, the first precedent will allow extortion to reign.

if he/she is liberal we could see some real fireworks here.

if you look at it from a practical point of view they are sueing people to "scare them back into stores".
this is less extortion and more like blackmail to me.

someone review the laws on blackmail

Why isn't the "Keep These Hands Off!" poster under the poster section!? I want that poster =) Seriously. But not until I have more than 3 dollars in my wallet. /end off-topic

It is nice to see someone is not just rolling over on this one. It also looks as if you escaped the old subpoenas by them dropping them they would be after you again on the John Doe subpoenas (nycfashiongirl). The will continue to come after the same people over and over till they get you.

I would just like to see someone challenge the copyrights and have them have to produce originals of the documentation of each copyright. That would be fun.

Where is leflaw on this? I thought his firm was going after the riaa on rico statues too.

NBC IS AIRING SOMETHING IMPORTANT! KERRY WAS A ROCK STAR IN HIS TEENS!

this could be very bad news for p2p. he will likely side with the industry against us!

hmm. about that nycfashiongirl thing.. isnt there a double jeopardy clause or something.

you cant be tried twice for the same thing?

It's not only likely, but he already said he's for the lawsuits and will strengthen copyrght law, therefore ruining it more than it is now.

That double jeopardy thing only counts for crimes. This is not a crime.

Kerry is a f'ing idiot. He's bad news for everything.

$@#$(

So I'm voting for Bush?
Please.. somebody beat out Kerry for candidacy.

wow.... scimeca said that this was for a school project to get 1400 songs; what kind of project is that! And her attorney also downloads music for personal use! That's even better!!!


Because the so-called extortion papers were delivered via the postal system, and potentially affect Scimeca's bank account, her countersuit also cites mail- and bank fraud laws. -----that's stretching the suit alot.

You can still vote for another Democrat even if they don't win the Democratic nomination. They can still run, and I believe Kucinich will still be in the race.

Vote for anyone just to keep the votes away from Kerry and Bush. It would be hilarious to see both frontrunners lose. But Kerry hasn't won the nomination yet, so we'll see.

It's just like any election. The two people in front of the nation aren't the only two candidates. Remember the Green Party? They don't drop just because they don't become a frontrunner.

VOTE KUCINICH FOR PRESIDENT!

undeath: ...but he already said he's for the lawsuits and will strengthen copyrght law, therefore ruining it more than it is now.

He DID???

It is the start of many more to come. My Left toe has the feeling in it again lol

undeath - I'll go with you on this one, even though I'm not familiar with Kucinich.

I will not vote for Bush, Kerry, or Edwards - the three worst candidates ever (besides Al Sharpton, hahaha). Nor will I give the Libertarians an ounce of my consideration.

I'll go with Kucinich.

where did he say this?

"scimeca said that this was for a school project to get 1400 songs; what kind of project is that! "

How about the average length of a hit song?
Maybe a study of tempo vs sales popularity?
A study of profanity in the music business?
Or maybe it was just a good old fashioned piracy contest!! We used to have them all the time when I was in school.

Of course, back then, we would just make fake album covers because no one knew how to make a vinyl record in my neighborhood.

i want to know where kerry said he supported the lawsuits. where is the article or nexus transcript?

That's weird. I submitted this article. Maybe there was a hiccup in the system. I think I'd like to donate to the person suing them on these grounds. Does anyone know of a way to do it that doesn't have to go through Paypal? I'm still a little wary b/c of the Paypal scam I heard about a few months ago.

Where do we contribute to this woman's legal bills? Yahoo! Yes, I'm also interested in what kind of "school project" was involved. But if it could in any way be construed as legit, then the RIAA might be sunk, because educational use is one of the aspects of "fair use." This case might get a lot of publicity, as well. I bet if this goes forward we'll be reading about it in Rolling Stone. They have been reasonably friendly to P2P. In a recent issue they reviewed some of the pay-for-download services, and on the same page they offered some free P2P alternatives. I give them credit -- in some small way they are still rebels.

"THR: The RIAA recently filed suit against several hundred file sharers. How far should copyright holders be allowed to go to protect their products? And do you think that file sharers should be held liable?

Kerry: I think any kind of mass file sharing that goes beyond the normal college-dorm, room-to-room, person-to-person, friend-to-friend kind of sharing is a violation of the law. I believe in copyright. I think we would have complete disorder in the marketplace if you don't enforce copyright. Copyright is the way you create order out of chaos in the marketplace. Otherwise, you diminish the value of intellectual property and artistic property, and you wind up not enforcing the rules by which people are compensated for their work. I think the U.S. has been very lax in dealing with China and other countries on intellectual property regulations, and I have long argued that we ought to be enforcing those measures very, very strictly. Now, I have worked hard with the industry to try to find some ways to create an appropriate technology that allows people to share. The problem, obviously, in a digital world, is that one tap of a button on a Web site and you can transmit to millions of people a perfect copy. So I think we have to find a technological fix, and frankly, it has been economic self-interest that has prevented people at arriving at an appropriate compromise."

Taken from:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/business/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2077032

There's your proof. How dare he talk about something he clearly doesn't understand. A perfect copy? Come on...

Wow the pirates vs the gangsters.
yarrrgh forgetaboutit...

stop using that "abusive language" we are merely p2p swappers. they, however, are by true legal definition gangsters, which is strange since we dont meet the defninition for pirates

I submit that from now on, the riaa should now and forever be known as riaa gangsters or riaa racketeers!

Do I have a second on this????

undeath, that doesnt mean hes going to attack us. he says its up to the marketplace to find a technological solution. in other words he isnt going to be repealing the dmca, but he also leaves the answer ambiguous enough for it not to really be an answer.

i mean.. person to person .. doesnt that = p2p?
where is he going with this?

You're right undeath, it sounds like he really doesn't understand it. It really frosts me that he said that. If Kerry becomes the nominee, we have to start bombarding him with information. His pandering to Hollywood, the RIAA and "business interests" will not go unchallenged.

Oh, and GO DENNIS!

we need to get that video of that speech to him about the undermining of our rights to unregulated use.

that is one thing that could change his mind. it is NOT the same old song

1400 songs do you know what kind of logistics it would take to download 1400 songs. That is 116 hours of music, say 3x for downloading speed that is almost 350 hours (almost 2 1/2 weeks!) to download all 1400 songs The lawyer should ask if the toadies actually downloaded all 1400 songs. If the whole was not downloaded the evidence would not be admissable?

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/business/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=2077032

THR: The RIAA recently filed suit against several hundred file sharers. How far should copyright holders be allowed to go to protect their products? And do you think that file sharers should be held liable?

Kerry: I think any kind of mass file sharing that goes beyond the normal college-dorm, room-to-room, person-to-person, friend-to-friend kind of sharing is a violation of the law. I believe in copyright. I think we would have complete disorder in the marketplace if you don't enforce copyright. Copyright is the way you create order out of chaos in the marketplace. Otherwise, you diminish the value of intellectual property and artistic property, and you wind up not enforcing the rules by which people are compensated for their work. I think the U.S. has been very lax in dealing with China and other countries on intellectual property regulations, and I have long argued that we ought to be enforcing those measures very, very strictly. Now, I have worked hard with the industry to try to find some ways to create an appropriate technology that allows people to share. The problem, obviously, in a digital world, is that one tap of a button on a Web site and you can transmit to millions of people a perfect copy. So I think we have to find a technological fix, and frankly, it has been economic self-interest that has prevented people at arriving at an appropriate compromise.

I'm sooo writing a book called Copywrong....

http://www.google.com/search?q=john+kerry&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&start=20&sa=N
hollywoodreporter

Hawk, I just posted that. Hehe.

EFF just got $1.2 million from some dude. Thats not bad.

your one up now undeath

uhh.. i just had a conversation with one of kerry's volunteers.. good luck getting anything through their thick skulls.

were better off voting bush! >.

No, we're NOT better off voting Bush, but we have to keep up pressure on Kerry.

1. Kucinich
2. Edwards
3. Sharpton
4. Kerry

That's the order of the Democrats. I'd be most happy with Kucinich, and Edwards would be a good choice. Make a wise decision...

it aint happening.. im still grilling a volunteer trying to get valuable material to kerry, but of course he is still insulated from the public in that typpical elitist senatorial fasion. =(

Racketeers. I like it.

Code, Now where is that pic of Cary Sue wearing mickey mouse ears and carrying an uzi?

To the extent almost all modern pop music uses some digital sampling, what I'd like to see a defendant do is seek to depose all of the artists, producers, and engineers that worked on every song downloaded, plus ask for access to the master tapes, on the theory that any uncleared sample means the label might not own the copyright. That would certainly get a reaction.

I am the one fighting back. I would like to say thank you to all who are supporting my cause. I don't think of myself as a rebel but it is something that has to be brought out into the open. If we don't stop them now where will it end? Will they go after the forwarded emails of funny pictures of distorted Artists or silly signs outside of businesses? Just ask yourself, Who or What's next?

Some of you have offered help, any help will be appreciated and can be directed through my attorney Bart Lombardo in Cranford, NJ.

Thank you again!!!

Thank you for fighting back. We all fully support you, of course, and wish you the best. It's an honor to have you here =) I know many of the members here will try to help.

Interesting that the ACLU is involved. This could be fun.

Ms. Scimeca, have they filed an Amicus Curiae in your case yet?

Good luck.

This is music to my ears!!!! Leave it to a women to fight the oppressions of a man's world. They have done before they shall do it again.

CodeWarrior ,

"Capone was busted on tax charges (tax evasion)...
I still think that there is something dirty about the RIAA claiming
501 C 3 Status with all the apparent lobbying it seems they do...and
the way in which they are spending money..."

It's EXTREMELY important to bring this case (against RIAA, on the tax charges) to the IRS !!! What are the penalties of abusing the 501 C 3 by lobbying? Do they include jail time, or fines, or the order to pay the overdue taxes (those one organization hasn't paid while illegally using its 501 C 3 status) plus the interest ??? Has anyone here asked IRS for this already ??? How may one do so (denounce them to some official, start an tax fraud or criminal case, other method) ???

I'd be glad to see your answer here. It's really good to inspire people to fight the RIAA in this way.

Cheerz,
Critto

"Ok, here's the deal: You give us a sum of money, and we leave you and your family alone. Think of it as protection."

The thought that the RIAA's tactics are very familiar to racketeering can not possibly be that original, since it's occured to me. Somehow we have a system in this country that makes extortion both illegal for one group, and perfectly legal for another. I don't mean to be naive here but somehow that just doesn't seem right.

Add to that, the information provided based on ISP's is not always accurate and people who haven't done a thing wrong get squeezed. While the burden of proof rests on the RIAA in court, the settlements offered to make the whole thing go away are often less than the cost of legal representation would be. Whats to stop the RIAA from threatening to sue anyone it wants just to generate settlements?

Good luck to this defense tactic. If it manages to last I might even donate money to help further this cause.

My biggest problem with this election is that I have to choose between many people, all of which I don't see as leaders I just see people accepting money to profit themselves at the sake of the normal man and not really caring about the country.
Don't get me wrong, I know that's a general statement, but everytime I look at our leaders I see how much money they will take to sway a vote. What happened to a leader doing what's best for the group (or the country) even if it doesn't profit the leader?

~Let them knock on my door, I will knock back with a bat~
Shout out to all us Italians!

Skrewd1

Congratulations on your bravery, you have all of our support. All we can say is "Go Get Em!" You just may be making history here. ~~pepe~~

I am REALLY glad to see someone finally fighting back. Go get those THUGS!

NO politician will ever be P2P friendly. They are in politics for ONE reason.....to line their pockets with the most $$$$ possible. And the RIAA will most certainly be glad to help them out in that regard. Select your candidate for some other reason besides their views on P2P and filesharing.

Code, I can not understand why you are against downloading RIAA music. We HATE them right? What gets them angrier than downloading their music? I try to download not only for myself, but for friends, co-workers, etc. My view is: any time I can make a CD for a friend, that is one less CD they will purchase and it helps the boycott. I have not purchased a CD since Napster was shut down, and I encourage others to join the boycott. I started downloading in the first place because my kids were constantly asking for new CD's for Xmas, birthdays, etc. They would listen to one song on the CD for a week or so and then get bored with it quickly (since most of today's pop music is crap to begin with). I just couldn't see spending $18.99 over and over for them to listen to one lousy song.

I will always hate the RIAA for taking Napster away. What could be any more fun than the original Napster? Not just the music, but the people. I made friends from all over the world and it was really a wonderful experience. I was exposed to music that I never would have heard on the radio. And it actually caused me to purchase MANY MORE CD's because of that exposure.

They are fighting a losing battle and they will never win. I will continue to download as much of their music as I want and I am not afraid of them. If I am sued, I will fight them as well.

Peace to all my P2P brothers......

DEATH to the RIAA and all it's minions!

"In documents filed with San Francisco courts, Maalouf's attorneys noted that downloading through Kazaa was openly discussed at Maalouf's daughter's school by teachers, and they downloaded songs used in classes. That should be a protected fair use of the music, the attorneys said."

Hmm. Not sure if this kind of arguement will fly in court, but it is an interesting angle.

Reminds me of my oldest son's 3rd grade teacher, who, a couple of years ago, gave each of her pupils a Christmas present: a customized CD with each kid's favorite songs on it (that is, each kid submitted to the teacher a list of songs they would like to have on a CD, and --- voila! they all got a customized 'Christmas wish' CD!

Of course, this was before the lawsuits started being filed.

CookieTosser,

The reason you shouldn't download their music is that they can't complain about filesharing hurting sales when nobody is downloading or buying their music. If they don't want people to get their music, then we should listen. That's why we don't do it.

"Ignorance of the law is not a defense," admonished the notice she got from the labels' lawyers.

Until all people coming out of High School are lawyers, don't feed me this line of shit, you know how many laws out there people don't know about? Did you know you can not have oral sex in the state of Virginia? I don't think that is stopping anybody. Plus I will NEVER, NEVER vote for that asshole Kerry, hey dipshit do yourself a favor, quit worrying about people listening to music, and worry about nixing NAFTA ok? If you'd pull your head out of your ASS, you would be more worried about 7,000+ people losing their jobs so Seimans (A German software company) can ship the jobs off to India and China, want to know WHY we are so laxed on Chine, because they are now taking all our JOBS YOU FUCKING ASS HOLE. I got laid off back in September, I go to school at night for a second career and still have not even found full time work, BUT SUE THE FUCK OUT OF ME KERRY, CARY AND ALL YOU NAZI MOTHER FUCKERS, I MAY HAVE NO JOB THANKS TO YOUR POLITICAL BULLSHIT, BUT I SHARE ALL MY MUSIC WITH PEOPLE JUST LIKE ME WHO THANKS TO THE LIKES OF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY MY RENT AND CAR PAYMENT. FUCK OFF AND I HOPE ALL YOUR FAMILIES DIE A SLOW AND HORRIBLE DEATH.

And besides, you can't exactly go about fighting them if they've got ammunition against you.

Yeah, when I was downloading using Napster, I was 14 or so. I had no idea that what I was doing was in violation of anything until Napster was sued. These kids probably don't understand fully the possible ramifications of what they're doing. At least not until they get targeted.

i love being Italian American! =)

Yes, if i wasn't just starting a new job, moving into a new place and just well, broke... i'd without a doubt give this woman financial support.

undeath

If they reallly want people to think that filesharing is hurting their music sales, then why do they post stories, like the one about Norah Jones latest album selling over a million copies (story at CNN) in less than the first week it was out? or is that information leaked by other agents? Or is that a string of lies as well? And if THAT be the case, why do they lie to make their sales look better if they want public sympathy concerning their hurting due to file sharing?

What a strange lot they are. ~~pepe~~

Here is the website for attorneys Frieri Conroy & Lombardo in Cranford, NJ.
http://www.frieri-conroy.com/index.html

As per her request, you can send donations for Michele Scimeca's defense to them.
777 Walnut Avenue
Cranford, New Jersey 07016
Phone (90 653-1441

'bout time somebody did this. Its just a matter of time before the RIAA's house of cards all comes a-tumblin' down.

That's the stupidity of this entire campaign. It'll lose in the end, guaranteed.

"Will they go after the forwarded emails of funny pictures of distorted Artists or silly signs outside of businesses? Just ask yourself, Who or What's next?"

Oh. My. God. : )

Since copyright infringement is acceptable here, I am going to reprint this from another site:

the magnitude of dumbfuckery in this country is rivalled only by how much lawyers are willing to compromise for that $2500 retainer + expenses.

i'd imagine her first few goes at finding a lawyer to pursue this suit went something like this:

#1

idiot woman: "i want to sue the RIAA for extortion."

lawyer: "er...extortion is a crime, actually. you, as a private citizen, can't prosectute criminal behavior. i suggest you campaign to be appointed District Attorney, then you could pursue your extortion claim without looking like a giant fucking retard."

#2

idiot woman: "i want to sue the RIAA for extortion."

lawyer: "you're obviously suffering from late stage syphillis, but i'll humour you. has the RIAA made false or libelous claims in a civil suit against you that may be able to present to a federal circuit in support of an extortion charge?"

idiot woman:"actually...no. i did download a bunch of music, which they're suing me for.

lawyer:"well, it is pretty well established that civil copyright infringement is a strict liability tort. seems like the RIAA is well within its rights to punk you. is there anyway you could fuck right off?"

#3

idiot woman: "i want to sue the RIAA for extortion."

lawyer: "is there anyway you could fuck right off? i got some idiot who shoplifted a CD to use in class who's trying to claim Fair Use. i'm gonna milk that mongoloid for all he's got."

tsk, tsk, tsk. Do you think she (idiot woman indeed!) was the one who came up with the extortion theory? Where is this site from which you copied this hypothetical conversation? We need to have CodeWarrior, et al. educate them.

there's a clue -- humour spelled the Brit way -- or possibly Canadian or Aussie.

It is from the Velvet Rope. The woman may not be an idiot, but she is definitely acting like an idiot because she is going to waste all her time and lose in the end. The lawyer is using her to gain a more public profile for himself. I said the RIAA would lose in the Verizon case and they lost. Now I'm saying this woman does not have a snowball's chance in hell. She found a lawyer who has turned her righteous anger and is using it for his own personal benefit.

She may seem stupid, but she is indeed doing the right thing by standing up to them.

absolutly robute. I agree. No RIAA flunky who disguises themselves as a music lover on this site can get in the way

You are obsessed with me. I am flattered! Keep following me around, I love it. Wait, I thought you were going to ignore me? LOL

"No RIAA flunky who disguises themselves as a music lover on this site can get in the way"

Get in the way? I think it's great. It will shut up plenty of idiots when the RIAA wins this one. I will link to this thread when Ms. Scimeca gets her ass handed to her in court and laugh at you once again! Some things never change. : )

Wow, you call her an idiot like she's not reading this.

She posted to thank us for our support about halfway up.

Way to be a fucking dick.

"Wow, you call her an idiot like she's not reading this."

Actually, what I said was:

"The woman may not be an idiot, but she is definitely acting like an idiot"

Gotta go, please continue bashing me. : )

I don't think you need any of my help to look like a moron. Just post again later.

"Actually, what I said was:

'The woman may not be an idiot, but she is definitely acting like an idiot'"

"It will shut up plenty of idiots when the RIAA wins this one."

If her supporters are idiots, then what is she for coming up with the idea?

Gotta go, please keep smiling at the end of all your condecending posts : )

The correct spelling is "condescending". How that's for condescending? Now I really gotta go. : )

Sherm I think he believes the whole world is a courtroom and he's the only judge who know's what the laws mean.

Obsessed? No I just happen to read the same threads you do. sometimes it's hard to ignor stupidity. I notice now you've abandoned your legal posturing and just resort to name calling. way to go Carey Sue... er I mean Mroop (sorry didn't mean to give away your identity)

Sherm, He mentioned on a previous thread how the RIAA was within it's rights to protect the copyrights they own. which mean they are within their rights to use the laws that they helped create. that implys they are within their rights to payoff congress to influence and make those laws. and has nothing but derogitory statements toward anyone who disagrees with that view.

Sounds Like someone who works for or supports the Recording industry to me.

mroop, you're an idiot.

"How that's for condescending?"

Actually, it's not very good. Maybe saying "How's that . . ." would have helped.

It's hard to fuck up being an asshole, but you just did it. Way to go. We have a real mental giant on our hands here.

And you still haven't answered any of my questions.

compmore - I don't care who he works for. I run into pricks like him everyday. It's like these people have some kind of confidence problem or something and they compensate for it by shoving their inflated ego in your face. It looks like we're getting to witness something rare: an old man who suffers from this affliction. And here I thought it just some of us young people.

mroop, don't forget to answer my questions. There's two. You may have conveniently forgotten about the first since it's not really possible for you to answer it without sounding stupid. I'm sure you'll find a way to fuck it all up though, since it's what you do for a living. But go ahead and give it a shot anyway. You wouldn't want to come off as being someone who is extremely cocky and avoids the issue both at the same time. That's even worse than trying to be an asshole, but then screwing up at it.

moopie, I used to think that you were just trying to clarify the state of the law (your interpretation of it anyway) to those of us who aren't schooled in the fine print. The sense I get now is that you are fine with the law/status quo, and this dismays me. I think you need a spanking

Hello again, I am very proud to have the support of all of you on this site. I would like to thank you for your kind words and thoughts. They are giving me the strength and inspiration necessary to continue with my fight. Win or Lose at least I am standing up for what I believe. I realize that I will get pros and cons about the issue at hand and I am ready. I am just happy to know that I don’t have to go it alone.

As far as “mroop” is concerned, I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion. What I don’t understand is if you do not support the views of this website “boycott-riaa.com” why would you be a registered user? On the other hand, falsely quoting people is slanderous and libelous and even more illegal than the matter at hand.

As for “carla60626” thank you for going the extra mile and providing this board with the name and address of my lawyer and for your sake I believe it is worth repeating:

Here is the website for attorneys Frieri Conroy & Lombardo in Cranford, NJ.
http://www.frieri-conroy.com/index.html

As per her request, you can send donations for Michele Scimeca’s defense to them.
777 Walnut Avenue
Cranford, New Jersey 07016
Phone (90 653-1441

Let’s stick to the issue and not make this a personal battle of words.
Thanks again

In a worst-case-scenario examination of the RIAA's base, insensitive, heartless tactics of personal destruction, I am reminded in some ways of the brutal, cold-blooded murder of an 18-year-old Chinese delivery boy last Friday (the 13th!) in the Rochdale Village section of Queens, New York, by two thugs for a mere $30, just so they could get a pair of Air Jordan sneakers. The specifics, as I realize, are different; but the common thread is the cold, depraved indifference to the consequences of the actions of the respective predators and the sometimes irreparable and irrevocable harm they cause to their victims and / or the victims' families, all so they could continue "living for the moment." To wit: The RIAA and its stooges, lackeys and enablers could not care less that their tactics (disproportionately aimed at the poor, the weak, the vulnerable and others in the utmost fringes of society, that aspect of which you mostly never hear about because God forbid Joe and Jill Q. Sixpack were to view these victims as human beings!) are ruining lives and diminishing their quality of life; simply put, they want it all. So much for "the greatest generation," per Tom Brokaw; this is "the GREEDIEST generation."

And since the money "earned" (ahem) from their stealing from would-be music fans (including, in some extreme cases, cleaning some victims out of their entire life savings) is not geared in any way towards enriching the quality of life or otherwise benefit society, but rather going towards ruining more lives and forcing consumers into what amounts to inferior, second-class, perpetually subservient status, I think it is high time that the RIAA's "tax-exempt" status (per their "non-profit" charter) be revoked. After all, if they're going to continue destroying poor and working families as they are, let them pay a tax on their confiscatory, retributory tacticology.

Michelle you are right and I'm one of the worst offenders. usually I have no anomosity toward people. this anomosity you see displayed toward Mroop from many of us is a cumulation of months of hearing his degrading and insulting talk toward others. He does have a right to his opinion as we have a right to ours without being insulted by it. Unfortunatly he has provoked many (myself in particular) into the personal attacks you now see. probably intentionally as he seems to relish it. I should be above it and count myself no better when I fall into his trap. Thank you for pointing that out and very best of luck in your lawsuit.

Agreed. I wish people like you were more common, Michelle.

You're trying to do the right thing by stopping them, and it seems as if you don't care about insults towards you.

I wish you luck, and I hope you win this, not because of any emnity towards RIAA, but because of your courage.

Anyone who is brave enough to face an angry demon deserves the protection to defeat it.

Think he's going to answer my two questions? =)

I doubt it.

Thanks Michele. Don't mind us, our bickering only sharpens our skills and increases our knowledge.

This message board has discussed the possibility of a RICO action (see http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/8530) and I'm thrilled that someone is actually using it. Has your lawyer looked into pursuing a class action with others targeted by the RIAA? Please let us know how things go. (And I for one would love to see the pleadings.)

This is starting to bug me: people are saying that RIAA is suing P2P users for "downloading." When, in fact, they claim they are suing people for uploading. Am I just being too picky about this? So far I don't think they have tried to sue anyone for having infringed MP3s on their hard drives, only for having MP3s in their shared files directory for others to upload.

Even mroop used this inaccurate language in his post. And he never makes mistakes. ha ha.

Anyway, as far as I know it is uploading that is under fire. Leeching on P2P is still safe. Is it not?

"moopie, I used to think that you were just trying to clarify the state of the law (your interpretation of it anyway) to those of us who aren't schooled in the fine print. The sense I get now is that you are fine with the law/status quo, and this dismays me. I think you need a spanking "

Let me clarify. I pick and choose depending upon how I feel with each particular issue. I was against the subpoena process without the approval of a judge that was recently held invalid in Verizon v. RIAA. I believe that copyright holders should be able to sue infringers, which is what the law currently states. I am against "legal payola" which is the current "independent promotion" scam that exists between the radio stations and the record labels. So I wouldn't say I am for the status quo or against the status quo - it would depend upon the particular issue.

"mroop, don't forget to answer my questions. There's two."

I'm not sure what the questions are, but I would be happy to answer them if you would restate them.

"What I don’t understand is if you do not support the views of this website “boycott-riaa.com” why would you be a registered user?"

As noted above, it depends on the particular issue being discussed. I don't think I have to march in lock step with the drones in order to be a registered user.

"On the other hand, falsely quoting people is slanderous and libelous and even more illegal than the matter at hand."

Falsely quoting you? I think you better speak with your mouthpiece before you accuse me of libel. In fact, if you are accusing me of libel then I think you may be libeling me. Watch out, I have a mouthpiece too. : )

"Anyway, as far as I know it is uploading that is under fire. Leeching on P2P is still safe. Is it not?"

Leech away, dude. : )

carla60626 if you or anyone else would like to email me directly you may reach me at

suedmom@yahoo.com

so we're all drones. I see

whoops there I go again stooping to his level. sorry everyone

"This message board has discussed the possibility of a RICO action (see http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/8530)"

this led to a dead link.

"I believe that copyright holders should be able to sue infringers, which is what the law currently states."

No copyright holder of any book has sued someone for using a xerox machine.
No copyright holder of any musc has sued someone for using a dual cassette deck.
In fact, the individual public has NEVER been regulated as if they were a company IN THE HISTORY OF MAN!
what gives them this right now? a law? an unjust law passed in 1998 which was passed under the table by special interests for special interests?

Right and wrong are not set out by laws, they are set out by society.
There are laws which prevent spitting on the sidewalk. There is even a law which says you cannot carry an ice cream cone in your pocket!
i know mroop has spit on a sidewalk once in his life, and im going to sue him for it!

Give em hell Skrewd1. I don't think you will win, but believe it when I say we are rooting for ya!

Shmoo, of Electric Gypsy
Support Local and Independent Music!

Cookietosser said:
"Code, I can not understand why you are against downloading RIAA music. We HATE them right? What gets them angrier than downloading their music? "

The RIAA doesn't want us to have anything to do with their music...so that's fine with me. To show them there is no demand for their product is the best revenge in my mind.

mroop said:
"Since copyright infringement is acceptable here, I am going to reprint this from another site:"

Although some may disagree...I don't believe I have said copyright infringement is acceptable...I feel the laws need to change though...such that digital media may be copied for non-commercial usage .

As for the lady suing the RIAA...I applaud her for her courage, and believe that a good attorney could make a case for a CIVIL RICO action against the RIAA....at any rate, the discovery propounded upon them would be interesting....

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." --Albert Einstein

awehr:
Take off the parenthesis ')' at the end of the URL and it will work.

"what gives them this right now? a law? an unjust law passed in 1998 which was passed under the table by special interests for special interests?"

Copyright law has always permitted individuals to be sued for infringement.

"whoops there I go again stooping to his level. sorry everyone"

I told you that you were obsessed. You can't help yourself.

"I feel the laws need to change though...such that digital media may be copied for non-commercial usage."

I respectfully disagree. Should I be able to stand outside a cd store and hand out thousands of copies of free cd's to whoever is about to walk in the store and make a purchase? I would hate to own a cd store under those circumstances.

If you were clearly not on the property of the CD store, and hand out
"thousands of copies of free cd's to whoever is about to walk in the store"
of non-infringing CDs, that seems fair and legal mroop.

I don't believe any jurisdiction has a law against handing our free CDs..
or AOL would have more trouble than they already have.

"I would hate to own a cd store under those circumstances."
Me too...if you charge for what others can get for free...you are generally at a disadvantage IF the quality and all other factors are equal.

Not sure how that addresses directly my statement...
""I feel the laws need to change though...such that digital media may be copied for non-commercial usage."

That's the way I feel. It's a true, self verifying statement since I am the final arbiter and trier of fact on how I feel about something .

handing out...not handing our

mroop...as a follow-up...video stores generally have movies on their shelves around the time they are airing on HBO, Cinemax, etc. Under the AHRA of 1992...
I can make a videotape copy of that film as it is transmitted legally to my television. Thus, one would expect a decrease in the rentals of that movie...but doesn't seem that Blockbuster is getting their shrinkwrap in a bunch over it .

Bottom line to me is this...
In spite of Hack Valenti's statement that the VCR was to the movie industry like the Boston strangler was to a single woman, and despite the fact, as I understand it, he is still of that mindset and believes the AHRA was wrong,
the movie industry in general, has enjoyed a windfall of profits from the rental of videotapes, and now, DVDs. The reason is that they found a way to capitalize on the technology. I have zero sympathy for any of these "braniacs" making big bucks in the music industry who are too friggin' stupid to find a way to make the best and cheapest distribution network in the world, namely P2P , profitable for themselves. Geez louise, they have more "legitimate" (what a laugh) outlets to sell their RIAA crap via downloads now...

Look...if they depended on me for income, they would go broke. Not because I am getting their shyte for free by downloading, but because as of June 2003, I'm not having anything to do with their products. I know, they don't care...and you know what? That "I don't give a shyte" attitude is reflected in their product, their relationship with customers, their relationship with their employees, and yes, their relationship with the customer.

obsesed against aroogance and cocky pompas attitudes. I wear that badge with pride. At least I aplogized But maybe when you grow up young man you'll learn a little respect for others

mroop (moron),

The two questions were:

1. Concerning your "work for free and see how it feels" comment. Who have we discussed that is working for free? I was just wondering if you made a mistake and posted that on the wrong message board.
Because it doesn't make any sense here.

2. You said: "Actually, what I said was:

'The woman may not be an idiot, but she is definitely acting like an idiot'"

But you said.

"It will shut up plenty of idiots when the RIAA wins this one."

So then I asked,

If her supporters are idiots, then what is she for coming up with the idea?


It's almost as if you post without having any knowledge of what anyone is saying, including yourself. And how can she not be an idiot if people that support her are idiots? Are you somehow trying to convince us that the person who comes up with an 'idiot' idea and and seeks to apply it is somehow less deserving of the label 'idiot' than anyone who supports that person?

I also have a request: Pass me some of that good shit you're smoking. From the looks of it, it seems that while it may make you stupid, it simultaneously makes you too proud of yourself to care.

come, it's been 4 months..

come on rather =)

What about msn and yahoo messenger
and icq etc etc.

When they have got rid of p2p programs wil they go after the above.?