Can the Subpoenaed Subpoena?

[Unsueable Davey Brown]

This might be a dumb question, but I've always wondered about it, so I thought I'd ask it anyway.

As I understand it, It's like this, the RIAA want to sue someone as a John Doe. They then subpoena for information to the ISP of the JD for information. Apparently they can also subpoena for information derived from the JD's hard drive. There's conflict as to how that information can be taken, nevertheless as I understand it they can subpoena for the info.

OK, so if I'm the person who's the recipient of all these subpoenas, do I have any legal right to subpoena for information on my own behalf.

For example, if someone is suing me the first thing I want to know is if it's the right person suing me. Am I allowed to sue for access to contracts which establish the RIAA or whoever as the legal representives of the copyright?

Can I subpoena for exact technical details as to how the claimant got the idea I was infringing copyrights. Can I go through the paperwork, and hard drives of the sub-contractor who gave the RIAA the information?

Also if there is a penalty phase of this lawsuit, I want to establish what is actually lost as a result of my alleged copyright infringement. I'm going to say no money has been lost. Am I allowed to subpoena, to look through the books to prove this.

There's other stuff I'd like to subpoena for, but you get the idea, right?

I guess what I'm asking is, do I as a sued person have any right to disclosure?

[DigitalJunkie]

I've no idea, but I would think you'll need to file a countersuit first.

[YWD67]

Your best bet is to contact an attorney or some form of free legal aid that can help you decided what your best course of action should be.
It is a lame saying but it is a true one none the less.
"An attorney (or person) that represents himself, has a fool for a client.

[DwarfBaby]

Yes, you can subpoena anyone (within reason) that may have taken part in a crime/dispute or even if you believe they only have some knowledge regarding the crime/dispute. If they challenge the subpoena then you need a judge to agree with you. Some states require different proofs be presented and different steps must be taken which is why you should get attorney before attempting anything.

It’s also obviously much more complicated when dealing with a corporation or organization, which you believe has done wrong. Especially if they have money.

[shawners]

The obtained information, but the burden of proof is on them to show that you downloaded/shared any and all copyrighted files that they complained upon. So let them try to settle, and then let them take you to court. Judge isnt knowledable on technical crap. All you know is that they must show that you in fact did infringe and didnt make the mistake or obtain the wrong person.

[Unsueable Davey Brown]

Here's an interesting one.

http://p2pnet.net/story/8906

It's from p2pnet so as usual it's kind of difficult to understand, but it seems to concern a motion to suppress an RIAA subpoena.

From that information it appears the plaintiff doesn't have to provide much proof, before he can subpoena for more intel.

What appears to have happened in that particular case is a private firm looked into someone's shared folder, and saw multiple files. From that the RIAA wanted to subpoena for more information.

OK, what I'm asking is if that happened to me, could I at that point have my lawyer say, "OK I want to subpoena for more information on exactly how the contractor discovered that information. I want to see his logs, records, contracts - whatever"?

Here's why. Suppose the guy had his shared folder locked so other users couldn't see inside his shared folder? The RIAA contractor would have had to have hacked his way inside, right? That would be illegal. At that point could his lawyer have had future subpoena's suppressed, and perhaps the case thrown out based on the fact the supposition of guilt is based on an illegal investigation?

For example suppose I told a debt collector I had no money, but he broke into my house and found evidence I owned a safety deposit box. Could he then subpoena to see inside the box?

If he couldn't shouldn't I be able to subpoena for information as to how he got the idea I had a safety deposit box, before the case went any further? If the information was gathered illegally wouldn't that be information I'd want to put before the court?

Dwarf Baby tells me you can do that sort of thing. I'm curious now why lawyers don't appear to do it?

[SanDiegoKid]

First, be sure to find the judge in contempt.

Example:
"... and I find you in contempt, your honor!"

Then, put the system on trial.

[YWD67]

Here's an interesting one.

http://p2pnet.net/story/8906

It's from p2pnet so as usual it's kind of difficult to understand, but it seems to concern a motion to suppress an RIAA subpoena.

From that information it appears the plaintiff doesn't have to provide much proof, before he can subpoena for more intel.

What appears to have happened in that particular case is a private firm looked into someone's shared folder, and saw multiple files. From that the RIAA wanted to subpoena for more information.

OK, what I'm asking is if that happened to me, could I at that point have my lawyer say, "OK I want to subpoena for more information on exactly how the contractor discovered that information. I want to see his logs, records, contracts - whatever"?

Here's why. Suppose the guy had his shared folder locked so other users couldn't see inside his shared folder? The RIAA contractor would have had to have hacked his way inside, right? That would be illegal. At that point could his lawyer have had future subpoena's suppressed, and perhaps the case thrown out based on the fact the supposition of guilt is based on an illegal investigation?

For example suppose I told a debt collector I had no money, but he broke into my house and found evidence I owned a safety deposit box. Could he then subpoena to see inside the box?

If he couldn't shouldn't I be able to subpoena for information as to how he got the idea I had a safety deposit box, before the case went any further? If the information was gathered illegally wouldn't that be information I'd want to put before the court?

Dwarf Baby tells me you can do that sort of thing. I'm curious now why lawyers don't appear to do it?

Last I knew it was illegal to use any criminaly obtained evidence in a civil trial or criminal.
That is as long as the councel who is presenting the evidence knew it to be obtained or was involved with the unlawfully gathering of the information.

Try this one on for instance as a example:

"Your honor I obtained those documents in the mail from an anonymous source who was interested in seeing that justice was done. I have no knowledge of who or how it was obtained. Therefore it should not be considered stolen documents"(Nudge, nudge, wink, wink)

[mfgbypooter]

I just hope that should I ever have to go to court again I'll get a Substitute Judge. (http://snltranscripts.jt.org/79/79mjudge.phtml)

*

[DwarfBaby]

First, be sure to find the judge in contempt.

Example:
"... and I find you in contempt, your honor!"

Then, put the system on trial.

For some reason that reminded me of this Animal House line:


Ladies and gentlemen, I'll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests - we did.

But you can't hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the whole fraternity system? And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America.

.

[YWD67]

I just hope that should I ever have to go to court again I'll get a Substitute Judge. (http://snltranscripts.jt.org/79/79mjudge.phtml)

*

LMAO I remeber that SNL skit, it is one of the best.

[YWD67]

You know, I believe that famous speech by Steve Martin pretty well sums it all up people.
Please feel free to crying afterwards. I was so moved that I did.

What I Believe
by Steve Martin

Do I look okay?

I know what you're saying. You're saying, "Hey. Where has Steve been? Haven't seen him on 'Saturday Night Live' in a while.." [ chuckles ] They want me. They call me every week to do the show. But I have been holding out for a little bit of this.. [ rubs his fingers together ] And so the calls fly back and forth, and I made a deal, and I'm very happy to be here tonight. I wish I'd asked for money instead of a little bit of this.. [ rubs his fingers together again ]

You probably heard I was into the comedy thing. Kind of getting out of that now.. into a little more serious deal. And so that's why right now I'd like to talk about "What.. I.. Believe.."

[ heavy music starts to play ]

"What I Believe."

I believe in rainbows and puppy dogs and fairy tales.

And I believe in the family - Mom and Dad and Grandma.. and Uncle Tom, who waves his penis.

And I believe 8 of the 10 Commandments.

And I believe in going to church every Sunday, unless there's a game on.

And I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, wholesome and natural things.. that money can buy.

And I believe it's derogatory to refer to a woman's breasts as "boobs", "jugs", "winnebagos" or "golden bozos".. and that you should only refer to them as "hooters".

And I believe you should put a woman on a pedestal.. high enough so you can look up her dress.

And I believe the United States should let all foreigners in this country, provided they can speak our native language: Apache

And I believe in equality, equality for everyone.. no matter how stupid they are, or how much better I am than they are.

And, people say I'm crazy for believing this, but I believe that robots are stealing my luggage.

And I believe I made a mistake when I bought a 30-story 1-bedroom apartment.

And I believe the Battle of the Network Stars should be fought with guns.

And I believe that Ronald Reagan can make this country what it once was - an arctic region covered with ice.

And, lastly, I believe that of all the evils on this earth, there is nothing worse than the music you're listening to right now.

That's what I believe.

[mfgbypooter]

Ah yes, Steve at his best.

I couldn't think of a better guy to play the Jerk.

and the scene where he gets out of the steamy shower and dries his face with John Candy's underwear in planes, trains, and automobiles is priceless.

*

[DwarfBaby]

Ah the Jerk. Best opening line of any movie I've ever seen

[DwarfBaby]

Dwarf Baby tells me you can do that sort of thing. I'm curious now why lawyers don't appear to do it?

Yes you absolutely can find out how information was gathered. A subpoena in this case is hardly required as the method obtaining the information is most certainly described in original complaint. There are exceptions to this of course but be assured if the plaintiffs do not present this information the case would likely be dismissed.

As for why lawyers don't appear to do it?

The simple answer is the they “do” all the time with great frequency, especially in matters regarding technology. Subpoenas are more common then the common cold.

[Unsueable Davey Brown]

OK, so let me piece together everything I've learned so far then.

If a person is sued, and he wants to he can subpoena for information as to how they got the idea he or she was uploading files.

Here's something that hasn't been mentioned yet, but I think it's important. The RIAA doesn't sue for single files.

It doesn't sue for single files, and it can't hack into your shared folder to discover what files are in there. If it did it would be breaking the law, and according to what I've been told here, the evidence would be inadmissable as it was gathered illegally. If it were to hack in you could discover this with a subpoena of the contractor who gathers the information from your computer.

Therefore in order to sue you the RIAA requires you to open you're shared folder for public viewing.

This is kind of important if it's all fact, don't you think? What it's saying is the RIAA can't sue you unless you open your shared folder to public view. In order to avoid a lawsuit, all you'd have to do would be to lock your shared folder from public view.

Or, maybe not. Am I understanding anything incorrectly?

[DigitalJunkie]

For single user like you & me, we probably won't have our house raided by police to take away personal computer. Police can then, get into your hard drive to check for the evidence. That is, IF they have enough manpower to do it in the first place!

[Unsueable Davey Brown]

Actually wasn't there a case recently where one of the sued who is going to court petitioned to have a subpoena disallowed which would have permitted the RIAA to look through her hard drive?

She fought it on the grounds her own experts should be permitted to invesitigate her computer, and submit only the pertinent evidence. She didn't want the RIAA to have an all-access pass to everything on her hard drive.

As I recall she won.

Edit

OK, I found the story. Again it comes from P2Pnet so the veracity is debateable.


Recently, RIAA victim Tanya Andersen, the disabled woman who sued the RIAA under the RICO (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization) act, won a major victory over the RIAA.

Said to have shared files online, she vigorously denied it and for months, unsuccessfully tried to get the RIAA to examine her hard-drive so they could see for themselves that she'd done nothing wrong.

Finally, the Big Four decided that might be a good idea after all. Unfettered access to Andersen's computer? Think of the possibilities!

But it didn't work out like that. Instead, Andersen won a court order which allowed her to hire her own investigator to look for very specific items, preventing the RIAA from freely raiding her system.

However, the pseudo police organization was yesterday planning to carry out an unchecked 'examination' of a computer owned by someone who hadn't even appeared on its hit list of alleged file-sharing thieves.

The current RIAA law firm was hoping the victim, the friend of someone who'd received a subpoena, would be stupid enough to take the computer to the offices of an associated company. And if not, it generously offered to send its own investigator to the potential victim's home.

It somehow neglected to mention that, following the precedent set by Andersen, the person could retain his/her own technician, and that the RIAA could be confined to looking only for named items rather than being able to roam freely.

http://p2pnet.net/story/8610

[SanDiegoKid]

Those aren't pillows!

[shawners]

Fact.. RIAA sues you, its a civil case. They can ask the judge for your pc to investigate it, but judge doesnt have to allow it.. Police arent involved in any of it. Movies is a federal crime and will have police to seize your stuff and other things.

[DigitalJunkie]

Are you sure, they can't file for both civil & crimiinal case? If they claimed, you've uploaded hundreds or thousands of songs & may have backup on CDs, police can't search your house?

[mfgbypooter]

I'm glad the only thing on my computer is dust.

*

[Lehk]

Are you sure, they can't file for both civil & crimiinal case? If they claimed, you've uploaded hundreds or thousands of songs & may have backup on CDs, police can't search your house?

only the government can file criminal charges in the united states.

[DwarfBaby]

only the government can file criminal charges in the united states.

True to a certain point. The DA files criminal charges when someone is willing to press charges or when the DA believes there is enough evidence to convince a grand jury. If you have enough money (AKA RIAA) the DA would be willing to give a Blow Job, press charges, then say thank you.

[shawners]

Are you sure, they can't file for both civil & crimiinal case? If they claimed, you've uploaded hundreds or thousands of songs & may have backup on CDs, police can't search your house?


No, the fact is that RIAA tries to settle with you and that if it went to trial, you wont get any jail time. But if you rip things and share online like scene groups. Thats a big no-no. So that can be a federal crime and be seen as pirating. It's alll civil, no one knocks down your door. Riaa will call you up to settle the case or to reach aggrement. They may have a lawyer that is in the area that want you to come in, they will try to reach an agreement with you before going to trial, RIAA dont want to spend more time/money on a case, even if they win. You dont have to pay, they get a judgement but look in your laws. You may be able to keep your home and not have to sell or no wage garnishments.

[DigitalJunkie]

I'm not trying to argue with you. We are just trying to diiscuss the possibilities here! Like I pointed out in previous posts, most of us don't have nothing to worry about. The fact is, we all rip CDs or DVDs & keep copies of them for backups. It's just that we are also sharing online, and **AA could do anything they want but can't that's all!