First Rule About RIAA Court Cases: You Don't Talk About RIAA Court Cases

from the seems-a-bit-extreme dept

Fri, Aug 11th 2006 1:48pm — Mike Masnick

Just Another Joe writes in to point out that the RIAA is up to its typical excessive behavior. In one of the many RIAA lawsuits over unauthorized distribution of music online, the defendant's lawyers are trying to depose RIAA representatives -- but the RIAA is refusing, unless they have a blanket gag order that would ensure that none of the information in the depositions is made public. Kind of makes you wonder what they're hiding. Speaking of hiding, with the RIAA dropping plenty of cases where they realize they may actually lose the case (usually, because they sued the wrong person), a whole bunch of legal groups joined together to file a statement supporting the idea that the RIAA should be responsible for paying the legal fees of the person they falsely brought to court. It seems only fair.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

35 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Neal, 11 Aug 2006 @ 2:20pm

can we say class-action
Seems to me it's about time some enterprising law firm eyeballs the RIAA's tactics, its numerous innocent victims and smells a class action against the RIAA itself. Real lawyers seeking to milk the RIAA out of all that settlement money it has stolen.... bet they'd find a way to get the information. Sure the victims would never be compensated, but the RIAA would stop dead in it's tracks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Mixer, 11 Aug 2006 @ 4:47pm
  
  Re: can we say class-action
  The parties that really need to be taken behind the woodshed are the judges that let these farcical lawsuits get into court in the first place. It's past time that rules of evidence should be strictly observed so as to make the RIAA really spend money on these fishing expeditions. A few cases that really stick would do them a lot more good than this throwing noodles at the wall and keeping the ones that stick.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
James, 11 Aug 2006 @ 2:47pm

Idiots
I realize this is stating the obvious, but if they spent half as much $$ creating viable marketing opportunities, and products people want, vs. suing the public and DRM this would be a non-issue.

One can only hope that people quit buying any form of packaged media until these idiots figure it out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DJ, 12 Aug 2006 @ 9:27pm
  
  Re: Idiots
  I purchased almost 1000 CD/DVDs from BMG/Columbia House during the '90s, then came the fall of Napster (in the spring of 2000?), I have not spent a penny on CDs or DVDs since! And the clueless idiots @ BMG/CH "just cannot understand why!" the reasons "one of our most valued customers" would suddenly cease a "mutually beneficial business relationship". It's called PRINCIPALS, and that was, and is, something that those folks will never have!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Q, 11 Aug 2006 @ 2:47pm

Stuff like this makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
freakengine, 11 Aug 2006 @ 2:49pm

Is there an editor in the house?

"unless the have a blanket gag order"

"Kind of makes you wondering"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Can you read?, 12 Aug 2006 @ 7:09am
  
  Re:
  Your post makes no sense. Read the article again.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonym, 11 Aug 2006 @ 3:36pm

I am curious...
Is there ANYBODY out there who thinks that RIAA is NOT a bunch of scumbags? Most of the press they are getting (excluding what they paid for, I guess) is negative, people hate them, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Stagnant, 11 Aug 2006 @ 4:23pm
  
  Re: I am curious...
  Yes, me. I find that applying the appelation of "scumbag" to the RIAA to be an insult and great disservice to scumbags of the world. Admittedly, these scumbags are scumbags, but putting the in the same detestable category as the RIAA is just crossing an unnecessary line. In the future, please think about your choice of words.
  
  ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike Mixer, 11 Aug 2006 @ 4:57pm
    
    Re: Re: I am curious...
    Here Here I say, Using the oldest definition for scumbag it could bew implied that indeed the name scumbag in too good for these goniffs as scumbags serve a purpose as do assholes and even dickheads. Slime can even come in handy once in a blue moon so it can't convey the utter uselessness of an RIAA lawyer accurately. In fact I wrack my brains and can think of no vile word that approaches that level of scurrility, Even lower than divorce lawyers who screw their clients.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
homer, 11 Aug 2006 @ 4:53pm

noodles?
nooooodlesssss... mmmmarrrrrgggggg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Count Porkula, 11 Aug 2006 @ 4:59pm

Yes, I agree with Stagnant. The RIAA is more on par with child molesters than boring old scumbags.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Aug 2006 @ 6:17pm

What?
Here in Soviet USA, we dont listen to MP3's. The MP3's listen to us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Aug 2006 @ 6:33pm

well technically it should be...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Aug 2006 @ 6:33pm

well technically it should be... In Soviet Russia, MP3 listen to you!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Motopsycho, 11 Aug 2006 @ 6:45pm

Soviet Russia...
Did you know you can't use the soviet russia joke on fark anymore? gets filtered out...

I now return you to your regularly scheduled topic...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Surly Curmudgeon, 11 Aug 2006 @ 8:36pm

RIAA can bite my ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
riaa guy, 11 Aug 2006 @ 10:08pm

i dont get it, why cant we sue people for stealing music who cares if they didnt actually use it..
if little joey downloads a illegal mp3 on his dads computer, dad should get his nutsack stapled to the wall and get his pc confiscated and get a very large fine for enabling little joey to commit very serious crimes...

respect my authority...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
w00t, 12 Aug 2006 @ 2:05am

Little joey...
They should round up all the little joeys and burn them at the stake as a example for all the frightened innicents that think they may have downloaded a illegal music file at one time or another... it would be history repeating itself, Hitler=RIAA warm up the chambers!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Big #1, 12 Aug 2006 @ 3:50am

RIAA
I think it is wrong to steal music, and if someone were stealing my product I would go after them. So, RIAA, go after the real pirates. Not some kid recording their music from a friends CD, but the people selling 1000's of copies or more after mass copying. (I think there is court precedence allowing you to copy things for yourself because of audio and video tapes)
I do think, however, that the wholesale theft the music (and movie) industry is seeing should tell them their product is over-priced. If they made their prices more reasonable, there would be no real market for large-scale pirating. I don't believe they would be hurt. Look at how these people live! And the artists are making pennies on the dollar when compared to the producers.
There is gold in them thar pipes!
I think the way to stop it is to stop buying the product all together. It will never happen, we are addicted to it. I am included in that catagory!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just Another Average Joe, 12 Aug 2006 @ 6:46am

RIAA
Have you noticed that CD prices never seem to go down as technology advances and media gets cheaper? That there is not much new musical offerings, except for those "artists" that just happen to be "popular" at any given time? That independent music never seems to realy take off or to be distributed (even to arthouse music stores)?
Nevermind about DRM, what is crooked is the business model in itself. For starters, the RIAA is a cartel of recording companies that decide what becomes "popular" and its cost. Consumers have no free choince in here, they are just plugged in to a pipe and they turn on the water, so to speak. Secondly, "popular" artists are never any good. I mean, seriously, who does really believe that Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys, &c., &c. have any artistic value? They don't even compose their own songs for crying out loud. The "popular" music, if you listen to it closely, is all the same within its specific genre. Popular rappers sound alike, popular boy bands sound alike, popula female singers sound alla like. Standardized production with in-house musicians and composers, that's what it is. Performers just sing whatever is put in front of them.
The whle point about this cartelized, standardized scheme is to retain control. There is no real promotion of musical innovation and no real search for true talent. You know, people like Ray Charles, B. B. King, Eric Clapton or groups like Pink Floyd, The Who, Led Zeppelin... I could go on forever. My point is that the ony way to take the model down is by sponsoring independent, talented musicians to produce outside of the commercial recording labels, and get the stores to distribute them. Online distribution of independent music can help, so long as artists agree to such distribution and receive proper credit (and payment) for their work. Nuff said.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gothica, 12 Aug 2006 @ 4:05pm
  
  Re: RIAA
  I'm surprised someone doesn't try to go after the RIAA for price fixing, price gouging, and anti-trust. Since they supposedly speak for the major labels, which comprise almost 85 percent of the market, this could very well fall under anti-trust laws. As far as I'm concerned, the RIAA can kiss my ass.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
English Pro, 12 Aug 2006 @ 6:49am

Keep on topic
Who cares if the wrong word is used at the wrong time? This forum is not about English (even though the more intelligent the conversation, the more credible the statement). If in doubt, run it through your copy of Word (illegal or licensed), Google, or open a dictionary. And if you don't, who cares?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just Another Average Joe, 12 Aug 2006 @ 7:00am

Re: RIAA
Given what I said above, the blanket gag order makes sense because it is a way to protect the cartel that the recording companies have established to milk customers and deprive artists of their rightly earned income.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Aug 2006 @ 11:22am

RIAA is a cancer
Find a cure for cancer, collect royalties for about 7 years. Sing a song about cancer, and RIAA gets to collect royalties for ten times longer.

Time to have Washington end the corrpution and fix the laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
killer_roach, 12 Aug 2006 @ 11:32am

Doesn't make sense
#19: Not only are CD prices not going down as production and distribution costs go down, they're going up. And the amount of money the artist gets is remaining the same. The labels say it's because of the need to market the artists, but come on... apart from MTV or their ilk, how often do you see any promotional information about artists without physically walking into the record store? Methinks it's not all that much money they're spending on marketing, and more that they're spending on endless layers of legal facilities and administration.

These lawsuits anymore are starting to get absurd... the RIAA's going after these people because they're easy targets; the commercial pirates are harder to trace and oftentimes are outside of the jurisdiction of the American legal system. So, rather than actually taking steps that might actually solve things, they go after the easy marks that might just throw a grand or two in their direction to just make the problem go away and let the RIAA crow about another victory over piracy in a press release. What a crock.

What the record industry needs is for Congress to dissolve the studio system in the music industry like what they did to the film industry in the 50s. It's long overdue, to be honest, would make musicians "free agents", and, as an added benefit, would kill off the RIAA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
trichome, 12 Aug 2006 @ 1:51pm

The Okd Daze
and where was the RIAA when people were taping songs from the radio in the 70s and 80's and recording theit favorite movie on a vcr

seems to me if they made the investment in the technology ,to sell online ,years ago when napster was first up and running.... that they would not be facing these issues to the extent they r today......

greedy then and more greedy now.........and somehow its everyones fault but theirs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Aug 2006 @ 5:07pm

Look Around...
The USA is not free anymore. Welcome to Soviet USA...

Please check your liberty at the door.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ray Beckerman, 12 Aug 2006 @ 6:20pm

I think someone is going after them
Gothica said: "I'm surprised someone doesn't try to go after the RIAA for price fixing, price gouging, and anti-trust."
Last I heard, the New York State Attorney General's Office was investigating them for that.
Also the US Dept of Justice was investigating them for that, but ended its investigation in 2003, based on statements by the record labels that were later found to have been false: http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=Napster_decision_crimefraudexcept
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
StarfleetCommand, 12 Aug 2006 @ 8:35pm

RIAA = Oil Company Execs
Hell, they may be one in the same. They are equally as offensive to the human race and just as worthless.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Repeat much???, 12 Aug 2006 @ 11:02pm

You used the same title for world of warcraft

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060324/106215.shtml

"First Rule Of World Of Warcraft: You Don't Talk About World Of Warcraft"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeff, 13 Aug 2006 @ 6:23am

Sony/BMG discs break notebooks
I purchased my first CD in a long time. It turned out to be a new dual-format CD DVD that won't play in my kitchen or bedroom CD player. Further, it had trouble ejecting when inserted into my MacBook Pro notebook (and would not play). The disc does have a printed warning stating that it is not compliant with CD specifications and may not play in some CD and DVD players (who dreams up this crap?)

I searched Amazon's reviews and found several others that had the Sony/BMG disc permanently stuck in their slot load notebooks and had to return them for service. The disc is 33% thicker than a normal CD and killed the notebook and caused the disc to be scratched.

What are these music executives thinking? You think that Sony/BMB would have learned from their last non-standard rootkit spyware disaster. I sent emails to two Sony/BMG asking if I should return the disc to the retailer and buy the music from the iTunes music store??

Sony/BMG should put big warnings on these disc s are too THICK and may break your notebooks or other slot load CD and DVD players. I won't be buying any more discs for a long time. Good job music executives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe Smith, 13 Aug 2006 @ 1:03pm

Questions
So here would be the question I would like to see the Judge ask the RIAA when the Defendant brings on the motion:

What question is it that you are afraid will be asked on the deposition and you want to protect the answer to?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Luke Rumfelt, 13 Aug 2006 @ 8:57pm

A suggestion
remember this no matter who puts a gag order on you whether it be lawyer, judge, or anyone, if you live in america there is a right to free speech. obey no gag order. it s all done under duress anyway. when able, sing like a canary and let them sue as they wish. All the lawsuits in the world can't put the words back in you :)

This my friends can be called civil disobediance. Actually it is a civil obligation to do the right thing. gag orders work only due to the greed of the people who agree to them and the greed of the companies that con you into accepting this drivil.

No need flaming me, i won't be reading them. no need disagreeing with me saying what i say is against the law.... i don't care. It is laws like these that are illegal when held u[p to standard against the highest laws of this land.

gets off his soapbox, wipes his hands clean of the bs in the air and walks away from the lot of you...............
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Music Pirate, 14 Aug 2006 @ 4:00am

Yargh!
Life is good! Pirate for life!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]