Re: [ga] More RIAA nonsense: RIAA Walks Away From Another "Discovery"Case

["Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Eric and all,

  Thanks for the history lesson.  But I was already aware.  No, not
annoyed at all at the gamesmanship.  Rather I find most of it
as you indicate, mostly a waste of time, effort, and basically silly.
Power grabbing tactics of this sort serve no good long term purpose
IMO, but do provide an object lesson or series of lessons that
unfortunately are repeated for the purposes to educate the ignorant,
while at the same time seek to inflate egos and than fail to some
degree and in many respects of the player of this merry-go-round
comic/tragic relief using the courts as their stage...  >:)

  Frankly so far this law firm that is the RIAA's primary legal
advisors, should go back to ambulance chasing, or traffic
violation representation as they are certainly way out of their
league in this area of legal practice...  Humility also doesn't
seem to be part of their personality profiles either...  But as
with most large law firm legal pros I've known, this is not
at all unusual, but often times counter productive when faced
with determined opposition.

  As you know or should know, Copywrite, Trademark, and
IP patent law is now in a huge mess all over the world, the US
not withstanding.  But the use of harassing tactics is getting far
less acceptable, and the RIAA as well as their legal eagles
are having trouble getting this message properly, as is the IPC.
Ergo it would seem wise and prudent for the RIAA to rethink
soon and the IPC to either give them the boot, or restructure
significantly and reevaluate their strategy especially given their
poor to nearly nonexistent trial court victories along with significant
loss of $$ for their clients...  >:)

  Additionally, ICANN would be wise to eliminate the IPC all
together within the GNSO as it's existence clearly is beyond it's
MOU mandate or at least has morphed beyond same...

Hugh Dierker wrote:

>
> Jeff, You seem annoyed at the gamesmanship of the Copywrite and
  Trademark arena. Perhaps you suffer from a very modernistic view and
  have no historic perspective.Modern "Western" concepts of ownership of
  symbols and words really can be traced back to around 381ish AD. Just
  a little place named Nicea. Seems up until then you could go around
  using a symbol willy nilly. And therefor it did you little good.  Well
  along comes this Imperialistic megalomaniac, for fun let us call him
  Constantine. Let us make the symbol a cross. Let us call the Court
  that got to make the decision as to who got rights to the cross,
  either the council of Nicea or the Nicene Council. Well deciding who
  had the power and right to use the cross was easy. The Council of
  Course. How they came to that conclusion had some minor details like
  "was it devine or was the author who made it famous devine?" Well in
  the end they licensed the highest bidder, Constantine to use it. You
  see it was not the cross that made this guy, it was his righteous
  claim of use that forever changed the world. The council that decided
  was not that important, the due process they used was not that
  important. It was everyone's agreement or acquiescence that old
  Constance had the right that was important. So whether or not RIAA
  wins or loses a battle is not important, or how they go about doing it
  is not important. What is important is that we recognize through
  agreement or acquiescence that they have the right to fight the battle
  under the banner of righteousness.

  --- On Sun, 1/18/09, Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  wrote:

       From: Jeffrey A. Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
       Subject: [ga] More RIAA nonsense: RIAA Walks Away From
       Another "Discovery" Case
       To: "Ga" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "icann board"
       <icann-board@xxxxxxxxx>, "ICANN Policy staff"
       <policy-staff@xxxxxxxxx>, "twomey@xxxxxxxxx"
       <twomey@xxxxxxxxx>, "Ray Beckerman" <ray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

       Cc: "GAC Rep" <ssene@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "DOC/NTIA ICANN Rep"
       <aheineman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "ICANN Admin supp. Manager Karen
       Lettner" <karen.lettner@xxxxxxxxx>, "ICANN Dan Halloran"
       <halloran@xxxxxxxxx>, "ICANN Kim Davies"
       <kim.davies@xxxxxxxxx>, "icann legal" <jeffrey@xxxxxxxxx>,
       "ICANN Marc Salvatierra" <marc.salvatierra@xxxxxxxxx>,
       "ICANN Marilyn Vernon" <marilyn.vernon@xxxxxxxxx>, "Peter
       Dengate Thrush" <barrister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
       Date: Sunday, January 18, 2009, 7:20 AM


       All,

         Well here we go again.  Seems ICANN's IPC member, the
       ever stupefying RIAA decides it can't win so just drops the
       case...  But was able to at least scare two John Does into
       paying ransom.  >:(

         Ray, I think that the RIAA is still going to do some night crawling
       for awhile longer...  What is baffling to me is why ICANN's
       IPC still keeps the RIAA AND the MPAA around...  Maybe
       their hoping for ACTA to give them some traction, or the new
       administration with their two choices for the IP division at
       DOJ to do same?

       See:
        http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/ NewYorkCountryLawyer
       writes "You may recall that the RIAA
       http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/01/14/015210&tid=123 walked
       away last week from one of their 'discovery' cases seeking the
       identities of 'John Does' who attended Rhode Island College. We
       have just learned that
       
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2009_01_01_archive.html#3600307732730029650
       they walked away from another one, BMG Music v.
       Does 1-14, in Greensboro, North Carolina. 2 of the 14 John Does had
       settled, but the other 12 who hung tough will never be identified to the
       RIAA lawyers and will not have to pay any 'settlement.' This adds fuel
       to the debate over whether the RIAA has finally
       http://www.p2pnet.net/story/18199 seen the light or is still
       sneaking around in the dark."

       Regards,

       Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
       "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
          Abraham Lincoln
       "YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

       "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
       very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

       "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
       liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
       P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
       United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
       ===============================================================
       Updated 1/26/04
       CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
       div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
       ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
       jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
       My Phone: 214-244-4827

>
Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln
"YES WE CAN!"  Barack ( Berry ) Obama

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
My Phone: 214-244-4827