WHITE PLAINS, New York (AP) -- It was Easter Sunday, and Patricia Santangelo was in church with her kids when she says the music recording industry peeked into her computer and decided to take her to court.

Santangelo says she has never downloaded a single song on her computer, but the industry didn't see it that way. The woman from Wappingers Falls is among the more than 16,000 people who have been sued for allegedly pirating music through file-sharing computer networks.

"I assumed that when I explained to them who I was and that I wasn't a computer downloader, it would just go away," she said in an interview. "I didn't really understand what it all meant. But they just kept insisting on a financial settlement."

The industry is demanding thousands of dollars to settle the case, but Santangelo, unlike the 3,700 defendants who have already settled, says she will stand on principle and fight the lawsuit.

"It's a moral issue," she said. "I can't sign something that says I agree to stop doing something I never did."

If the downloading was done on her computer, Santangelo thinks it may have been the work of a young friend of her children. Santangelo, 43, has been described by a federal judge as "an Internet-illiterate parent, who does not know Kazaa from kazoo, and who can barely retrieve her e-mail."

The drain on her resources to fight the case -- she's divorced, has five children aged 7 to 19 and works as a property manager for a real estate company -- forced her this month to drop her lawyer and begin representing herself.

"There was just no way I could continue on with a lawyer," she said. "I'm out $24,000 and we haven't even gone to trial."

So on Thursday she sat alone at the defense table before U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Fox in White Plains, looking a little nervous and replying simply, "Yes, sir" and "No, sir" to his questions about scheduling and evidence exchange.

She did not look like someone who would have downloaded songs like Incubus' "Nowhere Fast," Godsmack's "Whatever" and Third Eye Blind's "Semi-Charmed Life," all of which were allegedly found on her computer.

Her former lawyer, Ray Beckerman, said Santangelo doesn't really need him.

"I'm sure she's going to win," he said. "I don't see how they could win. They have no case. They have no evidence she ever did anything. They don't know how the files appeared on her computer or who put them there."

Jenni Engebretsen, a spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America, the coalition of music companies that is pressing the lawsuits, would not comment specifically on Santangelo's case.

"Our goal with all these anti-piracy efforts is to protect the ability of the recording industry to invest in new bands and new music and give legal online services a chance to flourish," she said. "The illegal downloading of music is just as wrong as shoplifting from a local record store."

The David-and-Goliath nature of the case has attracted considerable attention in the Internet community. To those who defend the right to such "peer-to-peer" networks and criticize the RIAA's tactics, Santangelo is a hero.

Jon Newton, founder of an Internet site critical of the record companies, said by e-mail that with all the settlements, "The impression created is all these people have been successfully prosecuted for some as-yet undefined 'crime'. And yet not one of them has so far appeared in a court or before a judge. ... She's doing it alone. She's a courageous woman to be taking on the multibillion-dollar music industry."

Santangelo said her biggest issue is with Kazaa for allowing children to download music without parental permission. "I should have gotten at least an e-mail or something notifying me," she said. Telephone and e-mail messages seeking comment from the Australia-based owner of Kazaa, Sharman Networks Ltd., were not returned.

Because some cases are settled just before a trial and because it would be months before Santangelo's got that far, it's impossible to predict whether she might be the first to go to trial over music downloading.

But she vows that she's in the fight to stay.

"People say to me, 'You're crazy. Why don't you just settle?' I could probably get out of the whole thing if I paid maybe $3,500 and signed their little document. But I won't do that."

Asked how far she could go financially, she said, "I'm already past that point."

Her travail started when the record companies used an investigator to go online and search for copyrighted recordings being made available by individuals. The investigator allegedly found hundreds on her computer on April 11, 2004.

Months later, there was a phone call from the industry's "settlement center," demanding about $7,500 "to keep me from being named in a lawsuit," Santangelo said.

Santangelo and Beckerman were confident they would win a motion to dismiss the case, but Judge Colleen McMahon ruled that the record companies had enough of a case to go forward. She said the issue was whether "an Internet-illiterate parent" could be held liable for her children's downloads.

Santangelo says she's learned a lot about computers in the past year.

"I read some of these blogs and they say, 'Why didn't this woman have a firewall?"' she said. "Well, I have a firewall now. I have a ton of security now."
Source
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Takes some courage to stand up to a massive rich giant of a bully like the RIAA. The RIAA has no right to 'peek' into your computer! I hope she gets to stick her finger in their face and tells to them to screw off.

she should start filing her own lawsuits for invasion of privacy. and if someone "peeked" into her computer that's hacking which is an offense anyway, so their whole case is based on illegally obtained evidence.

i hope she kicks their arse.

although at least the music industry is doing something about piracy...

Hacking computers is illegal, I don't think the RIAA have a right to do that, do they?

If they don't, she could easy get her $24, 000 by suing them for privacy breeching.

I hope she wins, but really, why does she automatically think her childrens' friends, when it could just as easily have been her children?

good on her, the RIAA have gone far enough and their doing it illegally, i hope she wins

i hate all those guys which are against piracy of music. all the guys i know are downloading music. why should someone pay 20$ for one song that they like? just imagine there was no priracy no kazaa no nothing. would you be able to listen to all the music you like? how much money would you have spent to listen to music? yes i agree piracy is bad but what can i do, musicians are mil/ers most of them. i am a poor guy which can't afford buying cds. (ok ok i can afford it but i think its waste of money)

i hope that woman wins !!!!

same with me undeadlizard, piracy is the scapegoat for high prices now days and i seriously doubt it is doing as much damage as they claim considering most of the people who pirate would of never brought the cd anyway, its their own fault for having high prices which cause people can't afford to spend on they pirate

Well, if you practice priacy with music, you are missing out on a lot, and actually even though you may think you like the band and are supporting them by stealing their music, if everyone did that, the bands would be out a lot of money. Also, you don't really care about a band until you spend a few bucks on a CD to go to their cause. By downloading just one song, you are missing out on a lot of good music, as well, for usually the song played on the radio is the worst on the CD. And if you want music for cheap prices on music, the radio's right there.

I use iTunes, myself. I can get what I want for a lot cheaper ($7 a full CD, anyone, and it gives something to the band, too).

And this woman isn't protesting over being able to steal music, she's protesting because they are taking her to court for something she obviously didn't do.

That's a lot of typing.

IMO i think the bands get to much as it is and piracy will not go away, If the band feels the need to make more money then they should get there ass's out and tour more, oh the poor rock stars.

I hope she win's big time.

As far as some watcher of the net taking me to court for hacking my comp bring it on.

tretfd

hey oneeye whats up? well in your post you have some modest points.

First of all there are bands which are just for the money, which i think you will agree, ex. is metallica they changed, at first they were for music and later on they were for the money. in others words they became what they hated.
i support the bands by going to their concert and buying their clothes(logos), posters,key chains, etc. so in other words you dont support the band just by buying cds so you know.
there are many bands i do not like, some of them though might have only one song that i like (which i have heard some of the others songs too) so whats your advice buy the whole cd? whenever i download the whole album their might still be few songs i do not like. i assume that happens to you too buying a cd and not like few songs (sometimes, not always) i think you will agree with me.
you are contradicting your self, you are telling me to listen to the radio for the music i like, but they play the worst songs of the cd as you claim. i do not really get what exactly you want to tell me right here. rephrase pls
when i hear that britney spears is worth 5o millions (may be more) to tell you the truth i do not want to give her a penny (i do not listen to her its an ex)
thats why the rich get richer and the poor poorer*. you go ahead and give her more money,
if i like a band i listen to their whole cd and then i pick which songs i like if not all.
if you like the music industry i would suggest for you to help underground bands which love making music and not the mil/es ones which are for the money (some of them not all).

i admire you for wanting to help the music industry that is very nice. help the ungeground bands, they are the ones that need your real support.
have a nice day

first off while true, alot of the money from sales of cd's goes to the middleman/manager of the artist, so why do they deserve millions? second of all, i do occasionally buy cd's, but now days its to expensive (especially here in australia) so i only buy 1-2 cd's a year, also what if you only like one song on a cd and its not available in a single, why should i pay $30-$45 for just one song (here in australia that is the general price, while 45 is a bit extreme it has happend)

I guess I'm one of the few people out there that still thinks illegal downloading is wrong. It's stealing, plain and simple. CD prices are increasing these days in part to cover the cost of lost sales as a result of piracy. Granted, the popular artists do not need money, but it is still their money. Stealing from the rich is still stealing. It's the small-time artists that aren't getting much, if any, actual money out of their sales that are really suffering from piracy.

ANyhow, judging by the facts of the case as I see them, I hope she wins too

paranoid android i agree with you. i never said that downloading is legal. i am just saying its not worth paying 20 $ for a cd etc (at my previous post) if someones wants to help the music industry he/she should help the underground bands(small time artists as you say) not the mil/re ones

but at the same time, its just a scapegoat, there is no reason for them to raise the prices that it costs currently , i mean how does piracy hurt the sales that much, if the people werent gonna get the cd anyway? and that the original cd where it was ripped from was obviously brought, its a cycle, people pirate due to costs, but costs rise due to pirating

You have good points as well, undeadlizard.

What I meant by the radio thing is that you get what you pay for (minus the whole piracy thing, of course). If you want music for free, of course you're going to get some of the worst, or maybe middle degree, songs off of the CD.

And as for the bands who are in it for the money, they suck. When they actually tried to please their fans only for pleasing their fans, good, but now it's just an insane economic thing. If you like a song from one of them, go ahead, but if you steal it, they're just going to try to make more money because they lost some by making even crappier music. For the underground bands, you can go to their websites or whatever, buy their stuff, instead of downloading it, and help them get money for a record contract. Downloading illegally won't help them as much as buying a CD and then telling everyone will.

Paranoid Android has a very good point, as well. Over the past few years, the prices of CD's has gone up at least $4, and that's mostly because over the last few years, the rate of music piracy has increased. I remember when the sites first opened up for downloading, I remember the people complaining over $8 or $10 CD's.

And evil_kenshin, yes, the middle man does get a lot of the money, but without the middle man, the band might not be where they were, and I think that deserves some credit, in my opinion. And for the overpriced CD's, use iTunes. I'm sure you can find almost any song you want and buy it for a fair price compared to $30 or $40.

The whole scapegoat thing I don't get you on either. You're saying the sales of CD's would be the same if piracy was to never take place because the person wouldn't have bought the CDs? Well, they would have to buy it to hear the songs if there were no piracy. They would have to have bought it anyway, as there is no other way to get the music. Piracy makes it so one person can buy a CD, and everyone else doesn't even need to waste any money. That is definatly unfair.

~

Remember, this is only my opinion, anyway.

The RIAA takes this stuff too far.. And I seriously believed they have hacked peoples computers to get a case against said people. If she can prove they did that, she can win alot of money... Why dont the RIAA take out those stupid warez sites? They have evidence of that sh**.

A Warez site attack? On De. 19th 2004 the RIAA/MPAA hit and shut down Suprnova.org, an illegal warez site, and then all over a sudden hackers and uploads came out of the wood work creating even more sites, programs and shifty little ways. In a sense it backfired on the RIAA/MPAA quite a lot.

There is no really way to stop the sharing short of shutting down the entire internet. Criminals will always come up with better, faster and smoother ways to share with each other. Sharing is caring.

nice comeback oneeye

the scapegoat and piracy are true. i mean that whether there was piracy or not the cds would have gone up, its not just the cds just look around you how much everything is priced now than 4 years ago. this is what iam thinking that piracy helped the cds to stay in a kinda descent prices ex this is what the music industries might say(hey we cant raise the cds more b/c piracy exists . here let me explain if we raise the price of the cds than more people will turn to piracy, but if we try to have the cds in a normal amount than not alot people will go to piracy)

if the cd suddenly costed 50 bucks than who would buy cds? immediatly more and more people will go to piracy

so you people that buy cds should be happy that piracy exist b/c it helps to maintain the cds in a "low" cost (note this is my theory which makes sense hahaha)

no there are bands that suck and make mi/s iam not going to mention any b/c i dont want to offend anyone. (i assume you can mention some of your own oneeye)

see you

Activists Aid Woman in Music Piracy Case

WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. - Patricia Santangelo just wanted to save money, but the mother of five quickly realized that acting as her own lawyer against the music companies accusing her of illegal downloading was a big-time money-burner. Fortunately, for her, it didn't take long for the Internet crowd to help her out.

Santangelo, who is being sued by the Recording Industry Association of America for allegedly pirating songs, said Thursday that pending court approval she is hiring an attorney to defend her in the civil case being brought here.

The Wappingers Falls woman says she never downloaded any songs and if it was done on her computer by her children or their friends it's the fault of a file-sharing program for allowing them to do it.

The RIAA won't comment directly on her case, but spokeswoman Jenni Engebretsen said Thursday, "Our goal with all these anti-piracy efforts is to protect the ability of the recording industry to invest in new bands and new music and give legal online services a chance to flourish."

Because Santangelo's defense was emptying her bank account, she had dropped her previous lawyer. When she appeared in court on Dec. 22 she was the attorney of record, all alone at the defense table.

That went fine, because all she had to do was say, "Yes, sir" and "No, sir" to the judge's questions about scheduling and exchange of evidence.

But then, she said, came the avalanche of paper as the RIAA's law firm sent her requests for evidence plus the material it was sharing with her in the pretrial process known as discovery.

"If I could show you the stack of paper, the stuff I had to do, the demands on my life," Santangelo said in an interview after a brief court session. "All of a sudden I felt very small. It was overwhelming. ... It was fear."

Her new attorney, Jordan Glass, calls discovery "a synonym for $50,000."

"You can be your own lawyer, but you still have to pay for depositions, copying and the rest of it," Glass said. "As bright as Patti is, the legal process is specific, and it can be daunting."

Fortunately for Santangelo, her case has created a stir online among critics of the RIAA's tactics. They contend that music downloaders have the right to use the peer-to-peer networks like the ones the RIAA said were used on Sangangelo's computer. More than 16,000 people have been sued by the RIAA, and nearly 4,000 have settled. Santangelo refuses to settle, though it would be much less expensive than the $24,000 she says she already has spent.

Jon Newton, founder of an Internet site critical of the record companies, said Thursday that $5,699.63 had been raised online for Santangelo in a campaign he started. That money, he said, enabled her to hire Glass.

Newton, who lives on Vancouver Island on Canada's west coast, said by e-mail that the contributions have come from "ordinary kids, musicians, students, moms, dads, writers, waiters, programmers, bus drivers, artists."

"We're trying to help Patti take on what's become the common enemy — the corporate music industry, with its bottomless pockets and legions of lawyers," he said.
Source
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why not just pay the $3500 origional fine? $24k just for justice? This is pathetic.

And give in to a giant bully? The RIAA is just targeting her because they thought she would roll over and give them another win percent. But she isn't, she is getting support I guess from a number of places.