Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Friday, May 9, 2008
Look who’s wearing the big-boy pants now!
—mother may I.
I the RIAA.
Hey there that sure is a nice laptop; my six thousand dollar poodle could use that to watch you tube videos of itself riding in the backseat of my Escalade while I’m in court suing some other sap for making a mix tape for his girlfriend. It’s gimmie all your stuff, and I’ll have the local cops take it for me, so I never see you cry; not that I’d care.
I’m the RIAA; you see, I don’t care about people, only money. Only money. It’s not my fault; it’s just that my piles and piles of money (made from the sweat of other people with real talent) are lonely. That’s right my money is lonely, so I need yours and your computer, and your house, just because you only like that one Black Crowes song and didn’t want to buy the album for it (where I get 90% of the profits).
I found my news here:
tech.blorge.com/ the following is quoted:
"The RIAA sued 83 year old Gertrude Walton. When they sent the letter stating that they were going to sue unless Mrs. Walton chose to settle, her daughter received the letter as part of her mother’s estate. She sent the RIAA a copy of her mother’s death certificate. The RIAA sued her mother anyway. Apparently when the case went to court the RIAA had to accept the fact that Mrs. Walton was indeed dead.
In the case of Patricia Santangelo, a divorced mother of three, the RIAA lost that case because Ms. Santangelo successfully proved her own computer illiteracy. The Judge dismissed the case. The RIAA then chose to sue her three children.
Unfortunately, another single mother, Jamie Thomas, was found guilty by a jury who set damages for her to pay at $222,000 or $9250 per song. A single mother who sells lingerie, there is no way that Ms. Thomas has the funds currently to pay this exorbitant amount. There is very little chance that she will ever be able to pay the damage award. Ms. Thomas has appealed the damages as being excessive. The Department of Justice has filed an Amicus brief arguing that the verdict amount is not excessive and should stand."