This is a big request folks, if they do allow him to take a look at their methods we may find they are non-existent or badly flawed leading to an avalanche of counter claims for those in litigation with the rIAA.
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/15131Central to the RIAA’s case against many of the RIAA victims, including Lindor, who’s now 57, is MediaSentry, a so-called ‘expert’ investigative company used by the Big 4 and their RIAA to dredge up supposed evidence against alleged file sharers.
The Massachusetts state police recently banned MediaSentry, and its evidence has been called into question repeatedly, and yet the RIAA is still touting it and using its dubious, to be charitable, conclusions to help railroad innocent men, women, children and students across America.
Now Lindor’s lawyer, Ray Beckerman, is trying to force the company to produced .txt printouts he needs as part of the material which will finally, and indisputably, show MediaSentry up, owned by SafeNet, for what it is.
“MediaSentry must disclose its digital files, validation methodology, testing procedures, failure rates, software manuals, protocols, packet logs, source code, and other materials, so that the validity of its methods can be evaluated by the other side,” says Beckerman on his Slashdot Journal.
But SafeNet, MediaSentry and the RIAA say No —- the information is “proprietary” and “confidential”.
Because the very last thing they want is for the MediaSentry material to be held up for expert and critical examination in the full light of day.
If they do move to deny him this I,m sure the court will rule their evidence in-admissable and throw it out, this of course will make it easier to get all other claims based on their illegally gathered information thrown out also.
Well done to Ray Beckerman for sticking to them like glue despite the many setbacks he has had to face
