Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Copyright Law Blogs -> Recording Industry vs The People
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Copyright Law
: Recording Industry vs The PeopleLinares declaration evolving to evade detection?
By Ty Rogers and Ray Beckerman
One of our readers, who wishes to be known only as "Concerned Citizen", did an analysis of the Linares declaration filed recently in LaFace v. Does 1-7 in Michigan, comparing it to the Linares declaration used in an earlier Michigan case, LaFace v. Does 1-5. These were Concerned Citizen's findings:
There are some changes that have been made in the Carlos Linares Declaration from last September 11. 2007 (LaFace v. Does 1-5 NMU) and the Current July 8, 2008 LaFace v. Does 1-7 U of M. version. They include the following changes.
(1). "I am an attorney and...", to Linares opening statement. Not a big surprise , but per Michigan's new Professional Investigator law, the attorney needs to be licensed to practice law "in Michigan" in order to exempt an investigator for the requirement of licensing.
(2) the Addition of "Allows users to further distribute files to other users..." in paragraph # 7 section 4
(3) the addition of "In some cases more that one computer can access the internet over a single IP address by using Network translation..." in Paragraph 12 page 5
(4) Removal of the word "Illegal" and "downloaded music files" from the most recent declaration Paragraph 15. In the September 2007 version as Linares referred to the copies as "Illegal copies of sound recordings", but that language has now been changed to "copies of sound recordings" (the word Illegal does not appear in the most current declaration anywhere that I could find)(5) Replaced the term "Offered for download" and "were offered" with "Distribute" the new boilerplate language.
(6) Added a new paragraph # 24 to the mix claiming that "...Fourth, computer evidence by its very nature is subject to being overwritten. At times, plaintiffs have sought evidence from defendants computers only to find that the evidence of infringement was destroyed (intentionally or unintentionally). Expedited discovery is critical to allow Plaintiffs to put Defendants on notice of the need to preserve the electronic evidence and avoid the loss of evidence.
Keywords: digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property portable music player
Full post as published by Recording Industry vs The People on August 24, 2008 (boomark / email).
US Federal Government
allegedly violated the niversal Declaration of Human Rights by deporting undocumented parents of US born children.

fMRI, Lie Detection, and Statistics
Memory Detection and Constitutional Rights
Revised Procedure for an Oath or Declaration.
Ex-UBS Banker Indicted for Allegedly Helping Billionaire Evade Taxes
McCanns are still managing to evade justice
Japanese Sisters Hid $58m in Shed to Evade Inheritance Tax








