woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA
 ·EarthLink
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to howrman
Re: First RIAA Lawsuit Heads to Trial
you could change your own drive and who would know. Wouldn't they have to get a subpoena to get the contents of the hard drive? I wouldn't infer that she was hiding anything. The way windows works and the time frame, it is not out of the ordinary for this to happen.And the geek squad are idiots any way. Isn't it incumbent upon the riaa to prove their case, than just state they "uploaded"? You can subpoena my hard drive, but mine are all removable anyway, not that I upload 
--
BlooMe |
|
Pirate515
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY
|  said by woody7  :Isn't it incumbent upon the RIAA to prove their case, than just state they "uploaded"? Depends on whether this is a criminal or civil case. If it it the former, then indeed the prosecutor must prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. However, civil cases (and I think this case is a civil one) are decided on preponderance of evidence. In other words, whoever's side does a better job proving themselves wins.
What I'm really wondering about is whether this case is being heard by a judge or jury. If this is going to a jury, I wonder how many RIAA fanboys are sitting on it? Quite a few jurors usually see cases like these as "David vs. Goliath", where a big fat corporation that just cannot get enough money is trying to shake down a hardworking lady who is struggling to support her family, and regardless of the evidence, guess who they are going to side with?
--
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... |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| It's absolutely a civil case. First and foremost, there is no criminal copyright law. Secondly, the RIAA is bringing the case, only the government can bring a criminal case. You can't criminally charge someone else, you have to have the DA do it.
Finally, I'm sure the RIAA has some vague IP sniffer data that nobody on the jury will understand, that the defendants lawyer will have to try and debunk. That will most certainly result in that glased eye look you get from the majority of people when you mention any type of computer process.
The icing for the RIAA is that they can blame failure on the "suspicious" disappearence of the defandants HD. So they don't have to worry about creating negative case law. |
|
howrman
join:2000-07-08
Philadelphia, PA
| reply to woody7
said by woody7 :you could change your own drive and who would know. It's very easy to figure out when a hard drive has been formatted/installed. |
|
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | It doesn't matter when the drive was changed, my point was that is they are just stating the an ip addy was used to upload/download music without any other proof. Is that enough in it's self to win?
--
BlooMe |
|
Hanko
join:2001-12-28
Eatonville, WA | reply to howrman
Just change the date and time in the bios before you add in the HD and make sure the HD was manufactured before the Date and time you specify.. |
|
tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI
| reply to Ahrenl
said by Ahrenl :It's absolutely a civil case. First and foremost, there is no criminal copyright law. Secondly, the RIAA is bringing the case, only the government can bring a criminal case. You can't criminally charge someone else, you have to have the DA do it. Finally, I'm sure the RIAA has some vague IP sniffer data that nobody on the jury will understand, that the defendants lawyer will have to try and debunk. That will most certainly result in that glased eye look you get from the majority of people when you mention any type of computer process. The icing for the RIAA is that they can blame failure on the "suspicious" disappearence of the defandants HD. So they don't have to worry about creating negative case law. In that case, the judge will toss it out of court due to lack of evidence and they have the burden to prove she told BB to remove it. Maybe she never heard of the program "kill disk" or maybe she did. Played stupid and BB fell for it, swapped out her HD. Regardless. Evidence is circumstantial and without the drive, that's about as far as it will go. Think they can make her take a poly? |
|
Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Time Warner Cable
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| reply to howrman
said by howrman :said by woody7 :you could change your own drive and who would know. It's very easy to figure out when a hard drive has been formatted/installed. i can set my time in my bios to an date before hand
so nice try |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to tc1uscg
Naah, Civil case only requires a preponderance of evidence. That means they basically just have to prove that there's a better than not chance that she downloaded something.
Also, it would get tossed from lack of evidence in the Grand Jury deliberation, which, if this is going to trial, has already happened. |
|
Doctor ASCAP
@wideopenwest.com
| reply to Ahrenl
Re: Oh! Yes, Copyright Infringements Can be Criminal
I at one time was involved with suing individuals and there businesses in Federal Court for copyright infringements. And yes, Copyright Infringements Can be Criminal...
United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc., 334 U. S. 131,
158 (1948). And deliberate unlawful copying is no less an
unlawful taking of property than garden-variety theft.
See, e.g., 18 U. S. C. §2319 (criminal copyright infringement); §1961(1)(B) (copyright infringement can be a predicate act under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act); §1956(c)(7)(D) (money laundering
includes the receipt of proceeds from copyright infringement). |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
| Well that's case law against a corporate entity. Which I would assume would mean they were selling copyrighted material. Which is actually stealing. There's no legislated criminal law on the books for making a copy of something, with no money changing hands. Case law should only be viewed narrowly, especially because it is so often over-turned. |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | reply to woody7
Re: First RIAA Lawsuit Heads to Trial
It depends what she has to defend herself. Remember, they only have to be 51% right. There's really no innocent until proven guilty in Civil court, since both sides are technically citizens. |
|
