RIAA wants to depose dead defendant's children; but will allow them 60 days to grieve

E

eldad9

CAGiversary!
Feedback
41 (100%)
In Michigan, in Warner Bros. v. Scantlebury, after learning that the defendant had passed away, the RIAA made a motion to stay the case for 60 days in order to allow the family time to "grieve", after which time they want to start taking depositions of the late Mr. Scantlebury's children:

Legal document (PDF) here:
http://www.ilrweb.com/ILRPDFs/warner_scantlebury_motion.pdf

Every time you buy a new RIAA CD you vote for this kind of thing with your wallet.

Just say no to RIAA music. There's a world of music to explore.
 
Ha, alternatives to RIAA music. Doesn't that just leave garage bands and international artists? If I wanna support bands I like, I will, regardless of whether or not they are under the RIAA umbrella.
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Ha, alternatives to RIAA music. Doesn't that just leave garage bands and international artists? If I wanna support bands I like, I will, regardless of whether or not they are under the RIAA umbrella.[/QUOTE]

Wow, you're a fucking retard. They have these thing called independent labels that aren't associated with the RIAA. But hey, I wouldn't expect you to know that, as you get all your music recommendations from EA TRAX.
 
[quote name='evanft']Wow, you're a fucking retard. They have these thing called independent labels that aren't associated with the RIAA. But hey, I wouldn't expect you to know that, as you get all your music recommendations from EA TRAX.[/quote]

Hahahax999
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Ha, alternatives to RIAA music. Doesn't that just leave garage bands and international artists? If I wanna support bands I like, I will, regardless of whether or not they are under the RIAA umbrella.[/quote]

I was at some birthday party for some chick I hardly know the other week, and this guy who said he was a band rep picked up the tab for us (about 20 ppl upstairs). He winked and said he'd just tab it as 'promotional expenses'

So in an odd way, I guess you paid for the party Vanilla. Thanks dude.
 
[quote name='eldad9']In Michigan, in Warner Bros. v. Scantlebury, after learning that the defendant had passed away, the RIAA made a motion to stay the case for 60 days in order to allow the family time to "grieve", after which time they want to start taking depositions of the late Mr. Scantlebury's children:

Legal document (PDF) here:
http://www.ilrweb.com/ILRPDFs/warner_scantlebury_motion.pdf

Every time you buy a new RIAA CD you vote for this kind of thing with your wallet.

Just say no to RIAA music. There's a world of music to explore.[/quote]

I didn't think the RIAA could get any lower. This is just fucking rediculous
 
I'm sure I'm in the tiny minority on this but I don't think you can just drop a case just because the defendant died especially as it seems that they were close to resolving the case. Allowing a period of time like two months seems to be a reasonable compromise to me.

*braces self for the inevitable backlash*
 
update from boingboing.net:
RIAA's "abundance of sensitivity" ends harassment of grieving family
Last week, we posted about the family of a recently deceased defendant in a lawsuit by the RIAA being given 60 days to grieve before the RIAA went on to depose the dead man's children in a renewed suit against his estate. In the intervening days, the publicity about this despicable act -- suing the family of a dead man -- has mounted. Today, an RIAA spokesperson, Jonathan Lamy, contacted me today with this statement:

Our hearts go out to the Scantleberry family for their loss. We had decided to temporarily suspend the productive settlement discussions we were having with the family. Mr. Scantleberry had admitted that the infringer was his stepson, and we were in the process settling with him shortly before his passing. Out of an abundance of sensitivity, we have elected to drop this particular case.

I wrote back to ask him this followup question:

Where was the "abundance of sensitivity" when the RIAA failed to initially drop its case against the Scantleberry family following the death of the named defendant in the case? Given that this "abundance" only materialized within 24 hours of this story hitting several large news outlets and blogs isn't it fair to say that the RIAA is demonstrating sensitivity to its public image, and not its sensitivity to the Scantleberry family?

To which he declined to further comment.
Click to expand...
 
Buy used or buy indy.

I spent $39 the other day on:
Nile: Annihilation of the Wicked (used)
7 Seconds: Take It Back, Take It On, Take It Over! (used)
In/Humanity: Violent Resignation: The Great American Teenage Suicide Rebellion (used)
Judge: What It Meant: The Complete Discography (new, non-RIAA label)
The Accused: Oh, Martha (new, non-RIAA label)

http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp is what I used to determine if the labels were RIAA or not.

So, while it may be easier for someone with tastes like mine to avoid supporting this industry, with the ready availability of used albums via ebay, Amazon marketplace, or (GASP!) your local fucking record store, you have no excuse when your punk ass grabs EMF's Greatest Hits at Target. No excuse.

I do agree with dopa to an extent, that the context of the case would and should still hold if the defendant is deceased (imagine if this was a class-action against Kenneth Lay! Er...). However, the framed story here (corporate mega-behemoth versus small unwitting family) does make people more sympathetic to those who are, legally speaking, criminals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top