TJB: The RIAA Is Hi...
 
Notifications
Clear all

TJB: The RIAA Is Hiding From The Court How It Investigated The People It's Accusing!

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
521 Views
Signe
(@signe)
Posts: 45
Estimable Member
Topic starter
 

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/15/0049244&from=rss

Remember who is behind this. The chairman and CEO of the RIAA is kike Mitch Bainwol and former Republican lobbyist. He took this position in 2003 succeeding jew Hillary Rosen.

In your Amerikwa when something looks like a swindler, talks like a swindler, and acts like a swindler but has a corporate charter - it's NOT a swindler.

In a stinging rebuke to the RIAA's opposition papers, and in further support of the motion by the University of Oregon to quash the RIAA's subpoena seeking the identities of the students, in Arista v. Does 1-17, the Oregon Attorney General has filed reply papers which call for immediate discovery into the RIAA's tactics, and which point out to the Court that

--Carlos Linares, upon whose declaration the subpoena was issued, had no first hand information whatsoever;
--the RIAA's "data mining" investigation does not reveal how the files were obtained or whether they were ever shared with anyone;
--the RIAA papers did not show that any infringing activity actually took place;
--MediaSentry appears to have been conducting an investigation without an investigator's license, in violation of ORS 703.405 and ORS 703.993(s), which is a crime;
--in Atlantic v. Andersen, based on the same theories and investigative techniques as those used here, they had been found by the Court to have stalled and resisted discovery, before abandoning their case rather than oppose Ms. Andersen's summary judgment motion;
--the RIAA appears to have been abusing the judicial process by obtaining information through subpoenas which it then hands over to "collection firms" using them "to leverage payment of arbitrary sums of money, based on threats and evidence from the data mining";
--the RIAA concealed a material fact from its original ex parte motion papers, which sought to create the aura of an emergency and the need for immediate ex parte action -- the fact that the University had informed the RIAA in July that the requested information had been gathered and would be preserved;
--the RIAA lawyers falsely implied that the Attorney General's office had failed to "meet and confer" with them prior to making the motion to quash, even though the AG's office had in fact conferred with the RIAA's lawyers;
--the deposition testimony of the RIAA's expert witness Doug Jacobson in UMG v. Lindor tends to indicate that the RIAA has already accessed private information on the computers of University of Oregon students; and
--the RIAA has failed to provide an affidavit of the individual who actually conducted the 'investigation'.

RIAA :[]:[]


 
Posted : 15/12/2007 12:27 pm
Share: