  pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to major marco Re: Gasping For Money
said by major marco :Gasping for money and grasping at whatever end run around due process of law that they think they will get away with. The sad part of this is that they are not committing an end run around due process of law. Their tactics, while objectionable, are entirely legal. Unless the Constitution is amended so that defendants in lawsuits have the same protections as those accused in criminal proceedings, the **AA will continue to engage in these legal activities. -- Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
  major marco Res Firma Mitescere Nescit Premium join:2003-02-13 Stepford, CA clubs:
2 edits | said by pnh102 :The sad part of this is that they are not committing an end run around due process of law. So you believe that it is entirely legal for entity C to harass and/or threaten to serve a lawsuit upon A in order to get information from A regarding B?
Irrespective of either criminal or civil law, it doesn't work that way. Entity C has to first serve a subpoena on A for those records on entity B. That's called due process of law, and, in this particular matter, since money is involved that entity C is calling a "settlement," entity A is entirely within its right to deny entity C any records it may possess on B. Entity A can confidently tell entity C to go piss up a rope and/or get a warrant and/or issue a subpoena. -- The Toll
|
|
 Thaler Premium join:2004-02-02 Encino, CA
| reply to pnh102 said by pnh102 :The sad part of this is that they are not committing an end run around due process of law. Their tactics, while objectionable, are entirely legal. So...they're basically like the mob today, but using lawyers instead of threatening bodily harm. Got ya. |
|
 Blackened Your Freedom Fries Are Stale
join:2003-09-29
| reply to major marco In this case, sadly, that depends upon the University exercising it's due process rights, since the apparent (innocent until proven guilty, of course) infringement happens on their servers. Because some Universities don't, it's up to the student to choose another school who will stick up for due process and their individual rights.
Make no mistake, the RIAA is doing all it can to subvert the law to get what they want, which is why they earned the image of thugs, and why due process should apply for all colleges automatically, especially those who receive any public funding. The fact that some colleges are allowing the RIAA in with the red carpet treatment should be an alarm to students. Every single one of these suits should be fought with as much impunity, and care for individual rights as possible. And students who want their rights cared for need to use more research and be more selective about where they attend, to get public funding cut off for those who cater to corporate interests before individual rights. |
|
  pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to major marco said by major marco :So you believe that it is entirely legal for entity C to harass and/or threaten to serve a lawsuit upon A in order to get information from A regarding B? It is 100% legal.
Any person or entity in the USA can legally sue anyone else for any reason, regardless of merit. Of course, such lawsuits can be declared frivolous or can be dismissed outright, but the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he/she is not liable. Of course, that means "lawyering up" and spending tons of money to defend oneself in court.
Someone else said this once, and it applies here perfectly... There's a reason it is called the "legal system" and not the "justice system." -- Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
  supergirl
join:2007-03-20 Pensacola, FL
·Cox VOIP
·Skype
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
| reply to pnh102 said by pnh102 :said by major marco :Gasping for money and grasping at whatever end run around due process of law that they think they will get away with. The sad part of this is that they are not committing an end run around due process of law. Their tactics, while objectionable, are entirely legal. Unless the Constitution is amended so that defendants in lawsuits have the same protections as those accused in criminal proceedings, the **AA will continue to engage in these legal activities. Due Process doesn't vanish just because it is a civil case. Even at $11 the University should be saying no unless faced with a subpoena. In any civil case, if you want info to prove your case, get a subpoena. Students might be able to sue the school for invasion of privacy since the school is invading their privacy.
Also, considering this is going throw the mail, it could be against postal laws. Since they are really proving nothing, it could even become Racketeering after so many letters. The RIAA is doing an end-run around the court by (1) creating their own "court" (case numbers and docket?) (2) any lawyer on that letter? (ethics violation of the lawyer who eventually handles it probably--lawsuits or threats are supposed to have counsel's name and contact info and bar #) and (3) settling a supposed "case", without real proof, is tantamount to extortion (we'll sue you if you don't). |
|
 nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to pnh102 said by pnh102 :... Someone else said this once, and it applies here perfectly... There's a reason it is called the "legal system" and not the "justice system." yes indeed. I have learned the hard way that in the American legal system, justice is for those that can afford it. You pay nothing and you are not likely to get any justice; if you only pay a little, you only get a little justice; complete justice is very expensive. |
|
  TKJunkMail Enjoy the sun Premium join:2002-03-03 Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
1 edit | said by nasadude :yes indeed. I have learned the hard way that in the American legal system, justice is for those that can afford it. You pay nothing and you are not likely to get any justice; if you only pay a little, you only get a little justice; complete justice is very expensive. The Golden Rule(not the bible version): Those who have the gold, rule!! And this version of the rule has applied throughout recorded history. -- -- My BLOG My Web Page |
|
  Jason Levine Premium join:2001-07-13 USA
| reply to Thaler I've said it before and I'll say it again: The RIAA's actions remind me of a Web comic called "Evil, Inc." It's motto is "You can do more evil if you do it legal."
»evil-comic.com/d/20050826.html |
|
  Pirate515 Premium join:2001-01-22 Brooklyn, NY
| reply to pnh102 said by pnh102 :It is 100% legal. Any person or entity in the USA can legally sue anyone else for any reason, regardless of merit. Of course, such lawsuits can be declared frivolous or can be dismissed outright, but the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he/she is not liable. Of course, that means "lawyering up" and spending tons of money to defend oneself in court. Someone else said this once, and it applies here perfectly... There's a reason it is called the "legal system" and not the "justice system." Well, in that case, it would be perfectly legal for me to sue the ISP or a university that decides to give my info up to the RIAA without a subpoena or a court order. If they are so smart to just pony up my info to a private party without my consent, then let THEM pay whatever that party thinks I owe them.
If there is a subpoena and they must cooperate with authorities, then I understand that they have no choice but to give the info up. But if they give it up just because someone says so, they better be prepared to be taken to the cleaners by me. -- Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies... A MESSAGE to the RIAA and the MPAA: You shouldn't wound what you can't kill... |
|
  TKJunkMail Enjoy the sun Premium join:2002-03-03 Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by Pirate515 :Well, in that case, it would be perfectly legal for me to sue the ISP or a university that decides to give my info up to the RIAA without a subpoena or a court order. You are right. But can you afford to pay for an attorney willing to take on an ISP or University. Unless you can interest the ACLU or some other organization that will do it for free, you better be pretty rich to afford the lawyer fees. -- -- My BLOG My Web Page |
|
  pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to supergirl said by supergirl :Due Process doesn't vanish just because it is a civil case. I never said that it did. Due Process refers to any sort of activity in the legal process, including the ones that unfairly screw over other people. -- Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
  vpoko Premium join:2003-07-03 Jamaica Plain, MA
| reply to pnh102 said by pnh102 :Any person or entity in the USA can legally sue anyone else for any reason, regardless of merit. Of course, such lawsuits can be declared frivolous or can be dismissed outright, but the burden of proof is on the defendant to prove that he/she is not liable. Of course, that means "lawyering up" and spending tons of money to defend oneself in court. Someone else said this once, and it applies here perfectly... There's a reason it is called the "legal system" and not the "justice system." Filing a frivilous suit in itself is actionable (meaning someone can be sued for filing a frivilous suit), and filing a blatantly frivilous suit could be contempt of court. Threatening to file a frivilous suit can (and has been prosecuted as) blackmail.
Why did you decide that the burden of proof shifts to the respondent? The burden of proof in a civil case is on the claimant. |
|
 soccerguy
join:2004-06-28 Seattle, WA
| reply to pnh102 Actually, due process rights - even in civil cases - derive from the Fifth Amendment's due process clause: "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"
Your state constitution's due process provisions may be broader and provide greater protection than the Fifth Amendment. |
|
 soccerguy
join:2004-06-28 Seattle, WA
| reply to pnh102 Legal to a point.
In most cases (cases involving strict liability are but one group of exceptions), the plaintiff is still required to prove a prima facie case. Otherwise the defendant can get the claims dismissed "for failure to state a claim" without the burden of proof shifting to the defendant.
Plaintiffs who sue without stating a cognizable claim will often end up paying the defendant's attorneys fees or be sanctioned. Depends on the nature of the claim. |
|
  supergirl
join:2007-03-20 Pensacola, FL
·Cox VOIP
·Skype
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
| reply to pnh102 Funny, you said this: "The sad part of this is that they are not committing an end run around due process of law. Their tactics, while objectionable, are entirely legal."
That is why I said this: "Due Process doesn't vanish just because it is a civil case."
You forget what you typed?  |
|
  supergirl
join:2007-03-20 Pensacola, FL
·Cox VOIP
·Skype
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southeast
·magicjack.com
| reply to TKJunkMail said by TKJunkMail :said by nasadude :yes indeed. I have learned the hard way that in the American legal system, justice is for those that can afford it. You pay nothing and you are not likely to get any justice; if you only pay a little, you only get a little justice; complete justice is very expensive. The Golden Rule(not the bible version): Those who have the gold, rule!! And this version of the rule has applied throughout recorded history. Funny, I don't think that is what Our Founding Fathers intended. You finally posted something that makes sense. |
|
  pnh102 Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| reply to supergirl said by supergirl :Funny, you said this: "The sad part of this is that they are not committing an end run around due process of law. Their tactics, while objectionable, are entirely legal." That is why I said this: "Due Process doesn't vanish just because it is a civil case." You forget what you typed? I said that they are not committing an end run around due process of law.
Due process of law is being followed. It is just that this facet of due process isn't the "nice thing" that many people make it out to be. -- Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
 DSL Oberst
join:2001-11-29
| reply to TKJunkMail said by TKJunkMail :But can you afford to pay for an attorney willing to take on an ISP or University. Or you can represent yourself pro se.
In any case, you are NOT required to have an attorney in order to pursue or defend against a lawsuit. The Clerk of the Court is required (at least according to the current statutes of the 50 states) to advise you of the procedures and forms required in a court of law. You may peruse the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the state equivalents at your leisure. The law libraries in the courthouses of the land are open to the public.
Will people actually take the time and effort to learn this stuff? No, not unless they're going to make a buck off of it. This leads to much amusement when you realize that the very system that runs the life of the nation is ignored, seen as boring, and considered to be something only attornies and legislators have access to. |
|
  manfmmd Premium join:2003-01-14 Earth clubs: | "A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client." |
|