James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan infringement

53 views
Skip to first unread message

ca...@my-deja.com

unread,
Mar 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/7/00
to
JAMES DAMIANO VS. BOB DYLAN & SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC.
CIVIL # 95-4795 JBS
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT:

Bob Dylan's surreptitious solicitation of James Damiano's songs
warrants a mandate for justice to be corrected."
"Eleven Years"

A true violation of American Civil Rights.

A paramount signature
of what has become of the United States
Judicial System


After four years and five months, fifty hours of depositions, and after
three million dollars have been spent on this litigation there has not
been a counter-suit filed by Bob Dylan and or Sony Music Entertainment


This website declaration was posted on the world wide internet for two
years and two months and defendants still to this date, November 8,
1999 have not contested the issues of facts or the issues of
solicitation by defendants of plaintiffs songs cited in this website
declarartion

It is unconstitutional for this court to accept as truth the biased
opinion of Bob Dylan's attorney, Orin Snyder, when no unbiased facts
exist to support Mr. Snyder's allegation that James Damiano attempted
to commercially exploit his claims against Mr. Dylan, which Judge
Simandle cited as the primary basis for the dismissal of this law suit.


http://dylan_damiano_litigation.homestead.com/index.html


acl...@aol.com <acl...@aol.com>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Frank Ifa

unread,
Mar 7, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/7/00
to
You would have to be an idiot to countersue in a case which has been
dismissed, with prejudice, in your favor. I was really beginning to miss
these posts.

Judge_...@hotmail.com

unread,
Mar 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/8/00
to
In article <8a29pq$4f6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

James Damiano, now posiing as ca...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>
> After four years and five months, fifty hours of depositions, and
after
> three million dollars have been spent on this litigation there has not
> been a counter-suit filed by Bob Dylan and or Sony Music Entertainment

In general, the defense of a lawsuit does not require the filing of
a counterclaim (what Damiano calls a "countersuit"); and the failure of
Dylan to file one does not in any way suggest that Damiano's claims have
merit. Indeed, Damiano should be grateful that neither Dylan nor Sony
has filed one, because, based only on Damiano's postings, it is clear
that Damiano would lose the countersuit and be forced to pay damages.

>
> Defendants still to this date, November 8,


> 1999 have not contested the issues of facts or the issues of
> solicitation by defendants of plaintiffs songs cited in this website
> declarartion

Which is a pretty clear sign that Damiano's case is utterly with
out merit.

Go away, James.

MAGNEY, J.

carr

unread,
Mar 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/8/00
to
I can see your not a real judge! James


* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!


carr

unread,
Mar 8, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/8/00
to


"Eleven Years"

A true violation of American Civil Rights.

James Damiano may have been the last unsigned artist ever to
work with the late great legendary music record producer John
Hammond Sr. who discovered , Bruce Springsteen, Stevie Ray
Vaughan, and Bob Dylan.

James auditioned for Mr. Hammond in the early eighties and
maintained an eleven year associtaion with CBS Records and Bob
Dylan through Mikie Harris, Anthony Tiller, Elliot Mintz, Jeff
Rosen and other Dylan associates.

JAMES DAMIANO VS. BOB DYLAN & SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC.
CIVIL # 95-4795 JBS
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT:

Bob Dylan's surreptitious solicitation of James Damiano's songs
warrants a mandate for justice to be corrected."

Library of Congress registration number TXU 547-786

A paramount signature
of what has become of the United States
Judicial System


Library of Congress registration number TXU 547-786

Dedicated to all my friends and Herb

All rights of performance, professional and amateur are strictly
reserved. Includes all material printed in this composition
(Eleven Years)
Request for permission of use should be addressed to publisher
at

James_...@excite.com
Copyright December 7, 1992

Truth knows no bias

After four years and five months, fifty hours of depositions,
and after three million dollars have been spent on this
litigation there has not been a counter-suit filed by Bob Dylan
and or Sony Music Entertainment

This website declaration was posted on the world wide internet

for two years and two months and defendants still to this date,


November 8, 1999 have not contested the issues of facts or the
issues of solicitation by defendants of plaintiffs songs cited

in this wbsite declarartion


website declaration.
This website
has been edited
to comply with the
Honorable
Judge Joel B. Rosen's
confidentiality order designating
all discovery
materials in this law suit
as confidential

Chapter 1

DECLARATION OF JAMES DAMIANO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY


JAMES DAMIANO
VS.
BOB DYLAN &
SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC.

Civil # 95 - 4795 (jbs)
1979

James Damiano pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1746, declares under
penalty of perjury that:
Years ago I read an unauthorized biography about Bob Dylan, in
which the author made reference to a man who at one time was
considered to be the president of CBS Records. His name was John
Hammond, Sr. He was family to the Vanderbilts, Attended Yale law
school, the most sought after record producer in the United
States, and had signed Pete Seeger to Columbia Records 1960.
In fact John Hammond Sr. was and probably will always be
considered the most influential music executive in the world by
music industry professionals.
After years of working in the music industry, Mr. Hammond
established himself as a legend and accomplished a reputation as
having the best ears in the business by signing a fascinating
number of legendary artists to the record world.
Artists like Billy Holiday, Count Basie, Charlie Christian, Duke
Ellington, Aretha Franklin, George Benson, Bob Dylan, Bruce
Springsteen along with many other artists including Stevie Ray
Vaughan were John Hammond affiliates.
Inspired by the book I read, I decided to take a long shot and
called CBS Records on the phone. The operator answered and I
asked to be put through to John Hammond's office. The
receptionist rang his office and Mikie Harris answered the
phone.
I told Mikie that I was a lyricist and asked her if she had a
few seconds to listen to one lyric. She replied yes by
saying "Shoot." I then recited a lyric to her that I had
recently written and said "the lyric is: Just think how
beautiful you'd feel if you knew your love was real." Within a
few seconds I could tell Mikie liked the lyric.
I in turn did not want to push to hard on the first phone call
fearing that I might put her behind schedule, so I tried to inch
my way out of the conversation politely while trying not to show
my emotions but before the conversation ended between Mikie and
me, she made it explicit that she wanted me to call again. She
repeatedly told me to feel free to call her there at the office.
So began a relationship where we would converse through actual
meetings or correspond over the phone, that lasted close to
seven and a half years.
Mikie told me that her name would be appearing in the credits on
Stevie Ray Vaughan's album that was released in 1983. When the
album was released it listed John Hammond Sr. As Executive
producer and Mikie Harris as Production Assistant
Stevie Ray Vaughan later recorded on Bob Dylan's "Under the Red
Sky" album, released in 1990.

1982
Chapter 2
I (James Damiano) registered my first copyright with the Library
of Congress in Washington DC. In 1982. The library registration
number is PAU 409-107, Titled Collective songs by James Damiano.
The computer print out of the registration describes the
registration as lyric sheets and one Cassette tape. This tape
included Dylan's 1994 hit song "Dignity" { Lyrical hook and
melody line }

In 1994 Bob Dylan released a song titled "Dignity" who he claims
to have independently written.
Dylan's copyright produced in this litigation by his attorneys
states that Dylan's first registration made to the Library of
Congress was December 5th, 1991.
Since the beginning of my involvement with Mikie, I had been
sending her tapes that I recorded at home on my cassette deck.
After of about a year and a half of talking on the phone,
sending lyric sheets of my songs to Mikie as well as bringing
cassettes with my music up to her at CBS Records, Mikie asked me
if I would like to audition for Mr. Hammond.
None of my songs at that time had been recorded in a
professional recording studio.
I accepted the invitation to audition for Mr. Hammond and Mikie
told me that she would call me back in a week to set up the time
and place.
A week later Mikie called and told me that she had set up the
audition for three months from that date. The audition would be
at Mr. Hammond's office in the Media Sound Building in New York
on West 57th Street at Eleven O'clock in the Morning. I started
practicing fifteen hours a day seven days a week. The three
months seemed like forever.
The morning of the audition Mikie called me and told me that she
would have to cancel the audition. I told her that I couldn't
believe what she was telling me. She knew I quit my job three
months prior, to practice for the audition. Finally after while
she told me that she wanted to keep it out of the news and that
Mr. Hammond was in the hospital. She then assured me that once
Mr. Hammond was out of the hospital she would reschedule the
audition.
A few months later Mikie called and resheduled the audition for
a few months from that date. I was excited and called a person
who I was working with at the time named Allen LeWinter.
Allen worked with Don Kirshner and was associated with the band
Kansas. Allen and his wife were living in a beautiful high rise
condo on the East side. I loved going up there. They had a
spectacular view from their balcony, and gold Kansas albums
hanging on the wall.
Allen told me that his wife wrote scripts for soap operas.
Allen was a cool guy, well mannered, polite, modest, just your
all around classy person. Kind of an artistic guy who's greatest
attribute was his sincerity.
It seemed , Allen's job was to seek out talant in the suburbs.
Everything else goes without saying. Allen respected Mr. Hammond
immensly and was looking forward to going to the audition with
me.
When I told Allen that the audition was back on we made
arrangements for me to pick him up at his condo the morning of
the audition.
Again I started practicing and practicing fourteen hours a day
when Mikie sent me a book titled "John Hammond on Record." I was
all practiced out, Icouldn't practice anymore, so I read the
book.
The book put me in semi-shock. It identified Mr. Hammond as the
most influencial music executive in the world.
The days counted down to three nights before the audition and I
could'nt not sleep. The following night I couldn't sleep, till
finally the night before.
It was twelve midnight the night before. I laid in bed trying to
go to sleep but still could not It seemed impossible. My
adrenalin wouldn't stop pumping.
One A.M. rolled around, I was still wide awake and I hadn't
slept in a couple days. Around two thirty I went downstairs
grabbed a bottle of tequilla and started drinking. Within a half
hour I finally fell asleep.
The audition was for eleven oclock in the morning. I woke at
seven, jumped in the car, drove to New York, picked up Allen and
we drove cross town to the audition. We parked the car, I
grabbed my guitar and we started to walk to Mr. Hammond's office
when I started feeling ill.
Allen quickly started trying to help me pull myself together
with words of support, by calmly saying "You can do this " while
I was thinking "he must be crazy, he doesn't understand how sick
I feel" anyway I had no other alternative but to believe what
Allen was saying to me and to simply pull myself together.
We entered the building and the receptionist called up to Mikie
to tell her we were there, she hung up the phone and told us
that Mikie said for us to go up. When we got to the office Mikie
was waiting and quickly asked me if I'd like to tune my guitar.
I said yes and she brought me down into a recording studio where
she pointed to a piano and said "You can tune your guitar to
this piano, it's the piano that Billy Joel records on." My first
reaction was " Now that's a dose of reality not to many
musicians could swallow." and with that thought I had to wonder
what she expected from me. My second reaction was "Now that's
inspiration.
I started tuning the guitar, when all of a sudden a string
broke. I put down the quitar and said to Allen I'll be right
back. I jumped up, ran down the stairs, stopped at the
receptionist and asked her to get me some packets of salt, I ran
a couple blocks down to the car and asked the valet where my car
was. He pointed me to it and I ran down and grabbed a case that
had guitar strings in it.
I ran back to the building , and as I ran past the receptionis
she handed me the salt, I ran back up the stairs, put on the
string, tuned the guitar, licked some salt and followed Mikie
back up to Mr. Hammond's office .
Mikie told Allen and me to have a seat and that Mr. Hammond
would be in in a couple minutes. We waited a few minutes, then
Mr. Hammond walked in. Mikie introduced us. We all shook hands,
Mr. Hammond sat down at his desk and started out the
conversation with a comment about Bruce Springsteen. We talked
for a while and Mr. Hammond asked to hear one of my songs.
I played four songs for Mr. Hammond. One of which was
titled "Living Proof." Mr. Hammond also read a song of mine that
when I handed it to him I explained that I had written the song
on an electric guitar and that since I only had an acoustic
guitar with me, that I'd rather not try to play it. Mr. Hammond
politely understood and said that he would like to hear it with
music after it was recorded.
The song that Mr. Hammond read was untitled at the time but
identified with two separate names. The first identification of
this song was "Just say yes to me" the second was "Dignity". I
copyrighted this song with the Library of Congress in 1982.
Twelve years later Bob Dylan was nominated for a Grammy for a
song titled "Dignity" released on his 1994 Bob Dylan's Greatest
Hit's album and also on his MTV Bob Dylan Unplugged album.
The relationship between Mr.Hammond, CBS Records, Mikie , and
myself continued for over Eleven Years. I kept submitting
material. Musicians that I was playing with at the time would
come up to CBS Records with me when I went to bring new songs
that I had written up to Mikie.

Chapter 3
1982 [later that year]
In 1982 Mikie sent me a Christmas card stating ;
Dear Jim,
"Wishing you a splendid Christmas and a most prosperous New
Year."
(signed) - Love Mikie, Randy, Duke and Nikkie too. December
1982.

{Plaintiff's attorney Steven M. Kramer refused to produce this
Christmas card to the court]

Mikie invited me to stay at her home for weeks at a time where I
wrote and experimented with songs on her baby grand piano all
the while submitting more and more material to her.

1986
I met Danny Gallagher in 1986. Danny was in one of Bruce
Springsteen's first original bands "Doctor Zoom and the Atomic
Boom". Rumor has it that Springsteen was sleeping on Danny's
couch when he got signed to CBS Records. Nevertheless Danny and
Springsteen still remain friends as of today {August 5th 1997.}.
Danny was a great steel guitar player. I asked Danny if he would
put a steel guitar track on "Steal Guitars" and he agreed to do
so. He also told me he that had a friend named Mario who played
a great electric guitar and who did some touring with members of
the New Riders of the Purple Sage.
Danny set up the recording session at Mario's home, we set up
the equipment and recorded "Steel Guitars."
Danny Gallagher who recorded the dobro guitar track on James
Damiano's song "Steel Guitars" signed a declarartion that he
recorded the steel guitar track on James Damiano's song "Steel
Guitars" in 1986.
{My attorney Steven M. Kramer refused to submit Danny
Gallagher's Declaration to the court, untill the reconsideration
motion. }
Danny's declaration has been designated as confidential by Judge
Rosen and Judge Simandle and has been deleted from this website.

Mario Phillips a musician who recorded the electric guitar track
on "Steel Guitars" during the same recording session with Danny
Gallagher and James Damiano also signed a declaration stating
that he played an electric guitar track on "Steel Guitars"
during the same recording session.
On June 6th 1987 Mikie wrote a letter to me stating ;
Dear Jim:

Thanks for 'sharing' your lyrics / poetry with me. To me, your
work represents a lot of time and effort but, from an artistic
point of view, I feel that it is representative of poetry rather
than a song in today's commercial market of music.
Since no tape accompanied the words, I have no way of knowing
what your ideas are with regard to the music.
I just wish that there was some way for me to be of help to you,
but with things the way they are, especially regarding Mr.
Hammond's health, my hands are tied.
Our office has (at least since I've been associated with John)
been actively involved with publishing, which is something I
suggested you try to your material several years ago.
I still maintain that this is the best route for you. Publishers
can reach major artists and guide you with regard to your
material.
On the basis of the material that you have just now presented to
me, I think it might stand a stronger chance of being recognized
as a volume of straight poetry rather than songs.
Because of Mr. Hammond's policy with regard to his relationships
with artists he has worked with, I will not be able to present
your material to Bob Dylan.
Jim, I wish you the best ( but surely you know this by now after
all these years ) and I'm only sorry that our office can't be of
assistance to you. Take care……Mikie


This is the letter I received after Mikie took my songs for
seven and a half years.
{ My attorney Steven M. Kramer never produced this actual letter
to the court }
{Mikie Harris was never deposed in this litigation }

When I (James Damiano ) received the June 15th, 1987 letter from
Mikie Harris stating that she could not be of assistance to me,
I called her at CBS and asked to speak to her. A man answered
the phone and told me that Mikie was at the hospital with Mr.
Hammond. His name was Tony Tiller and he said that he was
watching over the office while Mikie was out.
Mr. Tiller then asked me if I was the person who wrote the
material on Mr. Hammond' s desk. I asked him what material he
was referring to and he replied the songs in the big black
notebook. I replied yes and we started to converse about the
songs. He told me that he liked them and invited me up to CBS to
meet with him. Tony showed a great deal of enthusiam for my
material. We started meeting or corresponding over the phone as
Mikie and I had and Anthony started inviting me to parties in
New York that other CBS people would attend.
I brought a sound engineer Phil Pfisterer that I had worked with
in the studio to one of Tony's parties. Not long after this,
Phil started working in the studio with Mr. Tiller on a musical
project that Tony Tiller was producing. Scott Patterson an
associated of Mr. Pfisterer testified in this litigation.
I was directed by order of Judge Simandle to remove Mr.
Patterson's testimony from this website, because it is
designated as confidential under Judge Rosen's order for
confidentiality.
Scott met Tony Tiller through Phil Pfisterer and met Mikie
Harris at a party at Tony's home in New York.
July 10th, 1987
July 10th, 1987 Tony Tiller asked me If I would like to submit
material to Bob Dylan. I told him sure I would. He told me to
mail the songs to Dylan at the Meadowlands Arena in East
Rutherford New Jersey. I mailed them certified mail with return
receipt requested. Produced during discovery in this litigation
is Exhibit # 27 a certified mail receipt sent to Bob Dylan at
the Meadowlands Arena Route 20, East Rutherford New Jersey. The
date of this receipt is July 10th, 1987. On the same day July
10th, 1987 John Hammond. Sr. passed away.
A few weeks later Tony Tiller told me that he went to the
Memorial service for Mr. Hammond and that he manned the door at
the church making certain that everyone signed the quest log. He
said Bob Dylan was did not attend and that Bruce Springsteen was
there.
January 1st, 1988
On other occasions certified packages with return address
required had been sent to Elliot Mintz in Beverly Hills who is a
ten year associate of Bob Dylan
In January 1988 , I started recording at Broccoli Rabe studios
in Fairfield New Jersey. Among the songs " My Cousin JoAnn"
and "Another Justification" is an instrumental song
titled "Steel Guitars". The melody line of "Steel Guitars"which
is analyzed in a comparative analysis to Bob Dylan's recording
of "Dignity" by both Jon Bob Jovi's piano teacher Harold Frazee
and Harvard University musicologist, Dr. Paul Green.
Plaintiff has been directed by Judge Simandle to delete Doctor
Green's analysis from this website.
Produced in this litigation is part of the contract with
Broccoli Rabe studios and Mohammad Marhoumy who is a private
investor for the Damiano project.
For seven years I had been submitting low budget studio projects
and home recorded tapes to CBS. Tony Tiller told me that I
needed to produce a more high quality recording. I approached a
friend of mine who was my boss Mohammad Marhoumy and asked him
to put up the money. I told him that I had been working with CBS
for years. I told Mo that if he didn't believe me that he could
talk to Tony himself. Mr. Marhoumy told me to set up the
meeting. I called Tony Tiller set up the meeting andf Mo and I
went up and met Mr. Tiller at the CBS Building. After the
meeting Mo put up the money for the project. During the meeting
Mr. Tiller told Mr. Marhouny that Bob Dylan was receiving James
Damiano's materials. Mr. Marhoumy's testimony had to be deleted
from this site and cannot be displayed because of Judge Rosen's
confidentiality order.
May 1st, 1988Damiano's second copyright with the Library of
Congress was registered on May lst, 1988. Registration # PAU 1-
103-561. The last song on side B contained a song that would
later be analyzed and compared to a song released by Bob Dylan
titled "Dignity".

Chapter 4

The time came when Mr. Tiller called me and asked me if I would
like tickets to a Bob Dylan concert at Jones Beach Theater in
Long Island stating to me that I should bring my songs and to
see if I could give them to Bob Dylan. I accepted the invitation
and went to the concert.
After I recorded the material at Broccoli Rabe studios everyone
who heard the music thought that it should be on the radio. Also
included on the tape was fast tempo recording of "Steel Guitars"
which was compared to "Dignity" in the analysis.
When nothing happened with the music I decided to move back to
Charlotte.
I discussed it with Tony ( Tiller) and I could see he was
uncomfortable with the idea. I had stopped giving material to
CBS.
I was upset with the fact that CBS was not doing anything with
the recorded materials I had just finished.
I drove to Charlotte, found a home and bought it. Came back up
New Jersey to prepare to move in a few months.
Tony knew I was serious about moving back south when one day he
called me and said to me that he had to tickets for a Bob Dylan
concert a Jones Beach Theater in Long Island New York.. This
conversation was on or about June 15th, 1988. He offered the
tickets to me and said "Maybe you could bring some songs with
you.
I thought that was an interesting statement and as I was
listening to Tony talk trying to keep focused on his words, his
previous words kept ringing in my head "Maybe you could bring
some songs with you."
I was working long hours at the time and had to be at work the
following morning. I asked Tony if he knew where Jones Beach was
and he replied "no."
I wasn't sure where Jones Beach was but I knew it was pretty
far. I tried to calculate how long it would take me to drive to
the concert, watch the concert, do what ever was going to happen
after the concert then drive back home and get enough rest to be
able to get up the following morning for work without being dead
tired .
I had no idea what day the concert was. Tony told me July 1st
however I couldn't see a calendar from where I was sitting. I
remember thinking to myself I hope it's on a Saturday night
because I could sleep late Sunday morning. Unfortunately it was
a Friday night. When Tony replied "Oh wait a minute here it is,
the day is a on the ticket, it's on a Friday night". I suddenly
had to reply to his remark about Friday night and had to stopped
thinking about the statement he made about bringing some songs.
As the conversation progressed I was strongly staring to suspect
that I was going to get to meet Dylan that night.. His words
kept on ringing in my head "maybe you could bring some songs
with you " and realized that his words were chosen very
carefully.
Tony was also being very evasive, nervous, talking a bit faster
that his normal self. He knew I was excited about the statement
he made to me but he didn't want to talk about it. I was in a
dilemma. I couldn't talk about it yet I wanted to badly.
I reiterated how tired I would be the next day hoping he would
offer more information but he said nothing pertinent to the
situation at hand.
I took a different tact and said 'It's a long ride but if I'm
going to get backstage to give Dylan the songs it'll be worth
it. Tony said nothing and just listened.
I asked him what was going to happen when I got there he said "I
don't know>" I was trying to get an idea of what to expect so I
said "Will I get to meet Dylan if I go?" Tony replied "Ummm" as
if he was thinking.
I waited a while for a response then said "Will I get back
stage?" Tony replied "Do you want to try? I then realized that
some thing had been arranged just by the way he was choosing his
words.
I could tell how uncomfortable he was with my questioning him.
The conversation however continued on for a while when Tony told
me to come to his office to pick up the tickets.
I went to get the tickets from Tiller and went back home
July, 1st, 1988
On July 1st, 1988 my wife and I drove to the concert. Tony's
instruction were to go to the back stage entrance after the
concert. So when I got there I said to my wife let's find the
entrance to the back stage so we know where to go after the
show.
After we found the entrance to back stage we found our seats.
The concert was sold out. The Alarm was playing. We were the
only two people in our row although there were not any other
vacant seats anywhere else in the amphitheater.
We watched the show. After the show we proceeded to the back
stage entrance. There was a guard standing near the gate and the
gate had a pad lock that was locked on it. I went up to the
guard and to bring these songs to Dylan as I held up the
package.
The guard who I was no more than three and a half feet away from
did not acknowledge one word I said and just stared at me.
Pam (my wife) and I stood there wondering what was suppose to
happen now. Tony's words kept on ringing in my head "Maybe you
could bring some songs, go to the back stage entrance"
We waited a while longer and started to see people walking down
a long path coming from the backstage area.
Pam started getting impatient and started saying to me "let's go
this is crazy."
I told her to wait. We waited a little while longer when she
said it again "Let's go". I said "No let's wait."
The guard heard Pam saying "let's go". A couple minutes later a
tour bus started driving out from back stage. That was it for
Pam and she adamantly stated "Come on let's go home.
I looked at the guard and asked him "Is that Dylan's bus?" He
then decided to talk and said "No it's the opening acts bus, the
Alarm."
A few minutes after the guard's statement about the bus It
started to rain. Pam said "let's go home" I said "No" and Pam
said "Well then at least let's go the umbrella in the car."
Isaid "OK" and we started to walk toward the car. We took a
couple steps and I looked back one last time and saw the guard
unlock the gate to the back stage area.
I put the envelope of songs under my jacket and said to Pam that
the guard just unlocked the gate. Pam said "So what, I don't
care, let's go, this is rediculous." I said "No let's go back
stage." She said "No" again. I turned around and started walking
back toward the gate and Pam followed me. "
The guard obviously saw us walk through the gate. As we were
walking down the path the guard who was now in his blazer with
security lights on it was backing up very slowly watching us
walk down the path to back stage.
We saw another fence in the distance. When we approached it we
saw that it was open. We walked through the second gate and saw
a platform. I sat down and asked Pam to watch out for Dylan. I
started going through the songs to be sure I had what I thought
were the best on top of the pile.
As I started going through them I stopped and said to Pam "Make
sure you look out for Bob" A few minutes later a man came out
from a door that led to back stage. Walked passed Pam came over
to me looked down at my face. I stopped and looked up at his. He
then walked back past Pam and back into the door he came out of.
A few minutes later a group of people came out. I didn't even
look up. I was almost positive it would take Dylan much longer
to come out but I was wrong.
I heard Pam say something. I was still going through the songs.
I asked her what she said. She replied "There's Bob" I looked up
and saw Dylan with his foot on the bottom step of the bus almost
ready to get on.
I stood up and froze staring Dylan in the eyes. I was a few feet
from the back of the bus. Dylan was at the door to the bus. We
were maybe thirty feet away from each other. I waited for him to
make a move. He started walking toward me and I toward him.
All the people who came out of the door with Dylan were now
gathered around us and watching this take place..
When I was within arms reach I held out the envelope of songs to
him and tried to say "Tony Tiller told me to bring you these
songs " However the only words I had time to say were "Tony
Tiller."
No sooner than me saying to Dylan "Tony Tiller", did the big man
who initially came out from the back stage door, swing his hand
down and said "hold it.' I looked up at him. He asked me," Who
told you to bring these songs" but before I could answer, this
same man pointed at a man to my left, and said "Give them to
him". Ironically, no sooner did the man say "Give them to him"
did the man to my left grab the envelope and rudely started
pulling on it. I looked him square in the eyes and wouldn't let
go. We both pulled for a couple seconds when the man stopped
pulling and politely said "I'm sorry who told you to bring these
songs. I replied "Tony Tiller at CBS Records." and let go.
I immediately looked back at Dylan. Dylan nodded to me, turned
around and walked back to the bus everyone else followed. The
door shut and the bus drove away.
Produced in this litigation were copies of the ticket stubs to
the Bob Dylan Jones Beach concert
Pamela Damiano's has been designated as confidential by Judge
Rosen and Simandle and has been deleted from this website.
Tony Tiller's deposition has been designated as confidential by
Judge Simandle and has been deleted from this website.
Chapter 5
Two months after the Jones Beach concert Tony Tiller called me
and asked me if I had any more songs that I could give Dylan. I
told him that I had some songs that were not as of yet typed up
but that I could copy some of them real fast by hand if I had
to. Tony then told me that Dylan was playing at Waterloo Village
in Byram, New Jersey and that if I wanted to go to the concert
that he would get me tickets. I told him that I would go since
it was so close to where I was living.
After asking me how many tickets I wanted Tony told me that he
would call me back to let me know where to pick up the tickets.
I called a friend of mine Brad Wright and asked him if he wanted
to go. He told me that he was going to go anyway and that he had
tickets for he and his girlfriend Sandy. Brad told me that he
would drive over to my apartment, and we would all go together.
When Brad and Sandy arrived I was on the phone with Tony. Tony
told me to go to the will call window where there would be four
complimentary tickets.

Brad, Sandy, Pam, and I drove to the concert and picked up the
tickets. The seats were seven rows back on the center isle.
After the concert we followed Tony Tillers instructions to go
backstage. The following transcript is what Brad Wright
testified to in his deposition and under oath. Deposed by Orin
Snyder, Bob Dylan's attorney Brad testified the following:
Insert quotes from Brad's deposition
August 5th, 1988
I received a letter from Bob Dylan's publisher stating:

We are sorry to inform you that we are no longer accepting songs
for review. Enclosed please find the return of your material.
Sincerely, Bob Dylan office..

Produced in this litigation was a copy of the letter and the
envelope which enclosed the letter.

Tell me you never
Have had to have lived .
Purely by faith Alone
copyright Damiano 1988
August 5th, 1988
I also received on the same day August 5th, 1988 a letter from
CBS Associated Labels a letter stating
Dear Damiano:
Thanks for sending me the enclosed. I've listened to a number of
times and my decision is to pass. I just don't feel it's right
for us at this time. May I wish you every success and thanks for
thinking of us
Sincerely L___P___S____
September 10th, 1988
Dylan had writers block for commercially viable songs during at
least a portion of the the relevant period of time, from the
early eighties to 1994 when defendants solicited James Damiano's
songs.
Bob Dylan gave an interview to Associated Press reporter Kathryn
Baker. The interview took place while having dinner at a
restaurant in California. With Dylan's permission Ms. Baker
recorded the interview.
When Ms. Baker's article appeared in the newspaper, it quoted
Bob Dylan as saying:
"There is no rule that claims anyone must write their own songs
and I do I write a lot of songs. but so what you know? You could
take another songbody else has written and you could make it
your own."
The article goes on to talk about the fact that this was the
first time Dylan had ever used other writers on an album. The
article states that it was inevitable that Dylan did not have
enough material of his own for an album.
Ms. Baker then quotes Dylan again as saying :
"Writing is like such an isolated thing. You're in such an
isolated frame of mind. You have got to get into that place. In
the old days I could get to it real quick. I can't get to it
like that no more. It's not that simple.
Ms. Baker goes on to quote Bob Dylan: "I mean just being able to
shut yourself off for long periods of time, where you're so
isolated, no one can get to you mentally or physically, you
know. You need to do that to come up with that kind of stuff."
Ms. Baker quotes Dylan once again: "You're alway capable in your
youth and especially if you're an unknow and nobody cares, like
if you're an anonymous person, but once that all ends, then you
have to create not only what you want to but you have to create
the enviroment to do it in which is double hard."

Katheryn Baker testiimony has been designated as confidential by
the court and has been deleted from thos website.

Please note that Elliot Mintz, Bob Dylan's publicist and a ten
year associate of Bob Dylan, attended this interview with Dylan
and Ms. Baker. Mr. Mintz called James Damiano from Beverly Hills
and gave James Damiano his phone number, fax number and address
and thereafter accepted and received James Damiano's songs for a
period of two years and eleven months.
The Associated Press filed a motion and attended an oral
argument to block the production of the actual interview tape
with Dylan's voice stating to Ms. Baker that he didn't have
enough songs that he wanted to put on an album.
Ms. Baker's testimony has been designated as confidential by
Judge Rosen and by Judge Simandle and her testimony has been
deleted from this website.
September 10th, 1988
Chapter 8
Waterloo concert / Brad Wright / Backstage / Sandy Miller
Two months after the Jones Beach concert Tony Tiller called me
and asked me if I had any more songs that I could give Dylan. I
told him that I had some songs that were not as of yet typed up
but that I could copy some of them real fast by hand if I had
to. Tony then told me that Dylan was playing at Waterloo Village
in Byram, New Jersey and that if I wanted to go to the concert
that he would get me tickets. I told him that I would go since
it was so close to where I was living.
After asking me how many tickets I wanted he told me that he
would call me back to let me know where to pick up the tickets.
I called a friend of mine Brad Wright and asked him if he wanted
to go. He told me that he was going to go anyway and that he had
tickets for he and his girlfriend Sandy. Brad told me that he
would drive over to my apartment, and we would all go together.
When Brad and Sandy arrived I was on the phone with Tony. Tony
told me to go to the will call window to pick up the tickets,
there were four complimentary tickets.
Plaintiff Statement / Dylan / Waterloo / Backstage / Brad
Wright / Sandy Miller
Brad, Sandy, Pam, and I drove to the concert and picked up the
tickets. The seats were seven rows back . My seat was row G
seven rows back from the stage center isle. After the concert we
followed Tony Tillers instructions to go backstage.
The guards saw us approaching, they moved to the side and let us
walk right on through to the back stage area. Brad had an
envelope of my songs in his hand.
We walked down a path to Dylan's bus. Brad knocked on the door
and a man came off the bus and introduce himself as Mike Reed.
Brad and I shook his hand. After the handshakes Mike looked down
at the envelope and asked Brad "Are those for me?". Brad
answered "yes" and started to hand Mike the songs. But before
Mike could grab them I took the songs out of Brad's hand. Mike
suddenly looked at me. with a confused expression. I then asked
Mike "Why doesn't Dylan come down and get the songs?" Mike
thought for a moment and replied "Bob already left" I then asked
mike "why should I give you the songs?" and He didn't know how
to answer me, or what to say. I was trying to decide whether I
should leave the songs with him, when Brad asked Mike if Dylan
would give him his autograph. Mike replied that Dylan does not
give autographs. As Mike and Brad were talking I was trying to
decide what to do so I opened the book of lyrics to a page that
read:
Doesn't seem like a man
Who would beat you but
I guess you never know
People do whatever it takes
To get what they want
So quick to put on a show
And there's a reason for
Everything in this world
Hit me high or hit me low
Might seem like a cynical
Attitude but someday
You'll reap what you sow
And I never met a man who
Could afford to be honest
Have to have
Those essential luxuries
Faith is your reason
Belief your purpose
Don't tell me you didn't know
Damiano / copyright

After Mike Reed read the songs we talked for a little longer.
When the conversation between Mike, Brad and me ended Mike
entered the bus with the envelope in his hand.
Brad Wright's testimony has been designated as confidential by
Judge Simandle and has been deleted from this website.
{Mike Reed was never deposed in this litigation. although he was
served with a subpoena}
[Ticket stubs to this concert have been produced in this
litigation .]

Chapter 8
Radio City Music Hall / Backstage again
Brad accompanied James Damiano to yet another concert backstage
at Radio City Music Hall. While backstage Brad and I were
singled out of a crowd of people, to follow a man who said
something to the effect of "come with me" and to follow him to
Dylan. After being led all around backstage, up and down stair
cases, for a while the man stopped and said to us something
like "he'll be coming down here" meaning Dylan, after a while he
led Brad and I to an exit door took the songs from us and told
us to go outside on to the street.. Brad's testimony has been
deleted and connot be displayed because of the confidentiality
order.
Although Brad's testimony along with depositional testimony of
other witnesses in this case was much more in depth and
revealing of defendants solicitation of plaintiff James
Damiano's songs it was disregarded by Judge Simandle. Why?
1988 - Was the beginning of a trend in Dylan's career that
documents his use of other songwriters materials on his albums
for profit.
1988 - Bob Dylan released the "Down In the Groove album. Three
of the songs on this album were newly written orignial songs by
Bob Dylan, and one other one other was co-written with Robert
Hunter of the Grateful Dead.
The other six or seven songs on "Down In The Groove" were songs
taken from songs in the public Domain or traditional folk songs
in which Dylan did not write.
There is a good chance that Dylan did not pay any royalties to
the owners of these songs that he recorded, released to the
public and profited from.
This also documents the fact that Dylan was not as prolific as
he was in his earlier days and that he was in need of material.
In 1989 Bob Dylan released the "Oh Mercy " album. On this album
there were similarities between Bob Dylan's material and
Plaintiff James Damiano material.
On June 4th, 1990 James Damiano contacted a lawyer Thomas Ruff.
Mr. Ruff wrote the following letter to Tony Tiller of
CBSRecords.

Dear Mr. Tiller:
I write as a representative of James Damiano, who is now living
in the Charlotte area. As you may recall, Mr. Damiano has
written numerous songs and has submitted many of them to you. He
has also submitted material to Bob Dylan on three occasions and
receipt of those materials has been acknowledged.
James presently feels that there is no point in waiting for
further progress on the question of producing his work. He would
like to contact other companies and artists in this regard. He
feels that it would be best if he recovered the previously
submitted materials.
I would appreciate your reviewing this situation at your
earliest convience. If there is any reason for you to retain the
works let me know. If you know any reason for Dylan's retention
of works submitted to him, I would also appreciate hearing from
you.
Otherwise I will look forward to receiving the previously
submitted materials at your earliest convience.
Sincerely, Thomas C. Ruff. Jr.

Mr. Ruff told me he was surprised that Mr. Tiller disregarded
his letter.
Tony Tiller neither sent the material back or contacted Tom
Ruff.
When I talked to Tony on the phone he told me that the songs
were safe with him and that I would be better off if I left them
with him in his office.
He told me that if someone stopped at his office, they would be
able to hear the songs or read the lyric sheets.
Tom Ruff was also left off the defendants subpoena list.
October 31, 1990.
On October 31, 1990 - Bob Dylan was playing a concert at Ovens
Auditorium in Charlotte North Carolina. Tony told me that there
were complimentary tickets for me at the ticket window and asked
me to bring some more of my songs to Bob Dylan.
I called a few friends and asked them if they would like to go
to the concert with me. One of the friends was Tom Ruff. I
picked up the tickets and went to the area where the busses were
parked. I had an envelope in my hand. In the envolope were lyric
sheets of my songs. In my pocket I had two white cassette tapes
of my music.
Four people approached me and asked me if I would like for them
to give Bob Dylan the package of songs. Tom Ruff had advised me
not to give the songs to anyone not even Bob Dylan.
Tom Ruff also advised me, that I should tell anyone from Dylan's
organiaztion who wanted me to give the songs to them, that I was
legally advised to say that I will not give them the songs but,
that if Bob Dylan wanted to seethe songs that I was willing to
go back to the hotel room and let Dylan see them. That is what I
told these four people that approached me.
I was then approached by another person who asked me if I wanted
to meet Dylan's bus driver. I knew that they were controlling
the situation so I went along with him. We walked over to a bus
that was an older bus and parked off in the distance.
As we approached the bus there was a man looking out the front
window. The man I walked over to the bus with motioned to the
man looking out the window for him to come down off the bus.
He came off the bus, walked over to us and was introduced to me
as Tom Masters. We talked for about fifteen minutes and I
explained that Tony Tiller told me to bring these songs here
tonight.
Tom told me he was unable to take the songs. I then told Mr.
Masters that I was legally advised to not give the songs to
anyone but that if Dylan wanted to see the songs that I was
willing to go somewhere to let Dylan see them.
Tom said Bob could not do that. We talked a little while longer
and Tom told me that he had to leave. We shook hands, he turned
around, took a couple of steps, stopped and turned around toward
me and said "But if you want me to give the songs to Bob I
will." I responded to Tom 's remark and said "I told you that I
can't give you the songs but here are two tapes of my music." as
I handed him two tapes.
Tom took the tapes and got on the bus.
The tapes included my song "Steel Guitars." however the same
versions as well as and other versions of "Steel Guitars" had
been previously submitted to John Hammond and Mikie Harris in
1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986 and 1987.
"Steel Guitras" was also submitted to Tony Tiller and Dylan
associates's in 1987 and 1988.
Bob Dylan recorded "Dignity" in 1989.
Although Dylan recorded "Dignity" in 1989 he did not release it
untill December of 1994, almost five years later.
Sometime after the Ovens Auditorium concert Tom Masters called
me at my home. I was not there but my Mother in law who was
visiting at the time answered the phone and told him that I was
not there.
A couple weeks later Tom Masters called again. He told me that
he had some friends over and that they just listened to my tape.
He told me one of my tapes was still on Bob Dylan's tour bus. I
asked him if Bob heard the tape and he replied "Yeah Bob heard
it and he thought it was good." I said "really?" and Tom
said "Yeah Bob liked it."
I asked Tom "Is Bob There now?" Tom replied "No." When out of
the clear blue sky Tom asked me where the songs were that I said
I was going to send him. I didn't know what he was talking about
because I thought that we had already established the fact that
I was not going to send any more of my songs as per Tom Ruff's
advise.
I told Tom "I told you I wasn't going to send anymore material."
Tom then said "Oh I thought you told me you were going to send
me songs" I replied "Tom, how can I send you songs when I don't
have your address?" Tom replied "Oh, well if you want to send
them my address is"[ and he gave me his address. ]
I had no receipts for all the material that I submitted to Bob
Dylan so I decided to send the songs to Tom Masters certified
mail with return receipt requested.
On January 18, 1991, someone at Tom Masters address signed for
James Damiano's songs.
[Enter Tom Masters certified mail receipt dated January 18,
1991.]
On January 20, 1991, I (James Damiano) received a letter from
Tom Masters transcribed below:
Dear Jimmy:
I received the certified letter with your lyrics, which I am
returning to you. I am flattered of course that you picked me to
send them to, but let me reiterate the following:
I am Bob's bus driver no more. He does not discuss his music
with me. I take care of the bus and he takes care of the music.
People hand me tapes all day long. hoping that Bob will listen
to them. I tell them exactly what I am telling you. Please do
not send me anymore lyrics or tapes. They will be returned
unopened or thrown in the trash.
I wish you the best in your musical endeavors, however I am not
the contact you think I am and I am requesting that you neither
call nor send me anymore of your work.
The best of luck to you,
Sincerely
Tom Masters.
Chapter 10
1990 Bob Dylan releases "Under the Red Sky" album. Similiarities
exist between between James Damiano's material and Bob Dylan's
material.
On 1/30/91 January 30, 1991 Bob Dylan's publisher Jeff Rosens's
office signed certified mail for James Damiano's songs and this
is not the last time.

On June 19, 1991 Elliot Mintz of Dylan's organization signed
certified mail receipt for James Damiano's songs.
[Enter all certified mail receipts Bob Dylan, Elliot Mintz and
Jeff Rosen]
[Enter TomMasters recorded phone conversations]
{Enter Tony Tiller recorded phone conversations 1 through 12}
{Enter Elliot Mintz Mikie Harris / recorded phone
conversations }
{ Enter Elliot Mintz / deposition }

1992 No newly written original songs by Bob Dylan. Album
released "As Good As I've Been To You."

The following recorded phone conversation between Tony Tiller
and James Damiano recorded on December 5th, 1992 was produced to
Judge Simandle by Plaintiff's attorney.
Tony - Hello
James - Anthony?
Tony - Hi.
James - Hello.
Tony - Hi, how are you.
James - Boy you're a hard guy to get a hold of.
Tony - You didn't call me back yesterday.
James - Yes I did, you left.
Tony - What time did you call? James - About five minutes after.
You were on the line to Germany or something.
Tony - Gee well it's unfortunate that you choose right now to
call.
James - Oh really. I just need to ask you a fast question. I'm
going to Nashville. I wrote a book. Remember when you said that
when you got a promotion, that if it was in A&R, that I would
have been the first person you would sign? Would you write me a
letter to that effect before I go. I'm going in two weeks, to
meet some people in Nashville about my songs. Could you write me
a letter just so when I get down there I could show them that
they Or at least you were serious about the music.
- Yeah"
James - Thank you I really appreciate that.
Tony - But I really have to go now.
James - I'm sorry.
Tony - The other call is costing a mint while they're on hold
and I'm hoping they will still be there when I get back.
James- Let me ask you one more question. Did Mitch call you?
Note : Mitch Berman works for Bob Dylan and in all the recorded
conversations emphatically denies knowing Tony Tiller of CBS
Records. Mitch Berman is also know as Elliot Mintz.
James - Let me ask you one more question. Did Mitch call you?
Tony - Um recently?
James - Yeah.
Tony - No.
James - I wrote a book. Is it all right to put in the book that
you told me to go back stage at Jones beach to give Bob Dylan
the material?
Tony - Uh No.
James - Don't put that in the book?
Tony - No.
James - I'm sorry?
Tony - No do not.
James - Why can't I put that in the book?
Tony - No, because that would make me as an employee of the
company liable for telling you to do that, and that would be
uncool.
James - Okay.
Tony - But I have to go now.
James - Okay Ant.
Tony - I will talk to you soon.
James - Okay thanks.
1993 - No newly written original songs by Bob Dlylan. Album
released by Dylan, was "World Gone Wrong"
Chapter 10

Honest about
The lies he tell
Lies about
The religion
He sells
Damiano 88 Copyright

My (James Damiano's) musical expert in this litigation Doctor
Green who Graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard University
reports:
Dear Mr. Damiano: Following your requests, I have briefly
reviewed the instrumental introduction to "Love is a Miracle" on
your audio cassette copyright 1982. This short introduction
seems to bear melodic, harmonic, and rhythmic similarities
to "Steel Guitars", as copyrighted in 1988 and 1996.
There is a good chance that a careful examination of this
material may show that in 1982 you were experimenting with many
of the musical ideas that came together later in "Steel
Guitars". Moreover, other elements of "Steel Guitars" can be
heard in other songs, not only on the 1982 cassette, but on the
cassette copyrighted in 1988.
I propose that a careful analysis of several or all of your
works leading up to "Steel Guitars" may allow me to piece
together a historical account of your creation of this
composition. Sincerely Paul Green Quotes from Doctor Green's
comparative analysis of Dylan's song "Dignity" and James
Damiano's song "Steel Guitars" will follow.
Twelve years later Bob Dylan was nominated for a Grammy, for a
song titled "Dignity" copyrighted by Dylan in 1991.
Judge Simandle writes in his opinion concerning
access "Plaintiff asserts that 'the bulk of his life's work' was
submitted to Sony beginning in 1982.(Complaint. At 2) . He also
alleges that he was told to bring his songs to several concerts
which he attended courtesy of Sony. Plaintiff has produced
evidence that after these concerts, he was allowed backstage and
gave his work to Dylan or his agents. (Damiano Declaration. At
2, 5, ; Deposition of Pam Damiano at 77-84, 97-104: Deposition
of Brad Wright at 105-112)."Taking these allegations as true,
plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact as
to whether defendants had access to his work."
Judge Simandle also states "This court will accept as true
plaintiff's allegations that Sony represented to him that he
would be credited and compensated if Dylan used his work."
Doctor Green a musicologist who graduated Magna Cum Laude from
Harvard University states that there is a recurring vocal melody
in the song "Dignity" released on Bob Dylan's 1994, MTV
Unplugged album that is strikingly similar to James Damiano's
song "Steel Guitars" that was copyrighted in 1988 and recorded
with studio musicians in 1986 and whom have submitted
declarations to the court.
Doctor Green further states:
"The melodic arc found in both "Dignity" and "Steel Guitars", Is
more than just a collection of shared pitches. It seems to
embody the melodic shape or character of both songs. When played
on it's own it is reminiscent of both compositions."

Someday maybe
You'll be able to tell
The greatest story
Say the greatest line
Give the greatest performance
Find the greatest find
Damiano copyright 92"

After exchanging copyrights to provide evidence of who's song
was copyrighted and learning that James Damiano's was
copyrighted in 1988 and Dylan's in 1991 defendants produced what
they allege to be Bob Dylan creation materials, produced March
1, 1996.
Defendants wrote to Judge Joel B. Rosen :
"During discovery, Bob Dylan will be producing, inter alia,
unpublished and extremely valuable tape recordings and written
lyrics which document the evolution and independent creation of
Mr. Dylan's musical compositions which are at issue in this
case. These materials are highly confidential and proprietary in
nature because they were created during private, songwriting
sessions. These materials have never been never been released to
the public in any manner."
Please note: The above letter of March 1, 1996 was sent to Judge
Rosen only after Defendants and Plaintiff exchanged copyrights
to compare the date of registration for the respective songs at
issue in this case.
In other words would defendants have had to write this letter to
the court if Dylan's copyrights predated Damiano's copyrights ?
While Dylan and his attorneys claimed to have produced inter
alia never before published Dylan creation materials Doctor
Green again asserts in his declaration:
"The [creation materials] tapes seem to document the
experimentation with and creation of the lyrics, style and
instrumentation of "Dignity" but not the creation of the
melody."
"Therefore I conclude that the melody of 'Dignity' was actually
created before the production of the Dylan creation tapes."
Doctor Green also states:

"Of all the compositions I examined for this report, I find that
the composition most similar to "Dignity" in terms of the
melodic and formal features specified in Section 1 is "Steel
Guitars."
In Bright Tunes Music Corp. vs. Harrisongs Music Ltd., 420 F.
Supp. 177 (SDNY 1976), aff'd. Abkco Music vs. Harrisongs Music,
722 F 2d 988 (2nd Circuit 1983) , Beatle George Harrison
unsuccessfully contended that the phrases in question were
trite. The Second Circuit upheld the lower court's finding of
liability holding that it was a question of fact as to whether
the two works were similar in any substantial way. In Bright
Tunes, the court found that the repetition of two short, basic
musical phrases, sol-la-do-la-do, created a "highly unique
pattern" sufficiently original to be protected by copyright,
although each standing alone was in the public domain. 420 F.
Supp. at 178.
What this statement actually means is that the melodic arc in
George Harrison's song was a common melodic arc that had been
played on the radio many times in many different songs. The
melody line was a common musical or blues cliché..
However the court still found Harrison guilty and he lost the
suit in court.
Plaintiff's attorney asserts that : Professor Green also
discovered from a review of the so called Dylan creation
materials that there are actually no Dylan creation materials
for the melody at all. Professor Green states: "The [creation
materials] tapes seem to document the experimentation with and
creation of the lyrics, style and instrumentation of "Dignity",
but not the creation of the melody. Therefore I conclude that
the melody of "Dignity" was actually created before the
production of the Dylan creation tapes.
Professor Green concludes: "Because the shared melodic arc
of "Steel Guitars" and "Dignity" is rare in popular music, I
conclude that similarities between the two songs are not to due
to common incorporation of melodic cliches of the blues or folk-
rock music. So, either Damiano and Dylan arrived at similar
melodies independently, or one musician was influenced by the
other. Since "Steel Guitars" predates both "Dignity" and the
Dylan creation materials, and since the Dylan creation materials
do not document an independent creation of the "Dignity" melody,
I conclude there is a very good chance that the melody "Dignity"
may be based on that of "Steel Guitars."
"Dignity" was the "Hit" off both the "Bob Dylan Unplugged" album
and the "Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits Volume 3" album.
Bob Dylan was in need of a commercially viable song. It had been
twenty years since Bob Dylan released "Knockin On Heaven's door"
which was last hit song, released in 1974.
Since this law suit has been filed people tell me things that
suggest that this is not the first time Dylan's songs resembled
other songwriters songs.
One allegation suggests that Dylan's song "Shelter From the
storm" is extremely similar to John Fogerty's song "Down on the
corner." Fogerty's song was released and being played on the air
in 1969, Bob Dylan's song was released in 1974. [Five years
after John Foggerty's song was released] I was shocked after
hearing the resemblance .
Another allegation suggest's that "Knock, Knock, Knockin On
Heaven's Door" released by Dylan in 1974 is very similar to the
song "Helpless, Helpless, Helpless" released by Neil Young in
1968. [Six years before Bob Dylan's song was released]
Johnny Burnett wrote a song in 1967 titled Bertha Lou. Rob
Stoner the famed guitar player who toured with Dylan and who was
the musical director of the tour was quoted in a Dylan biography
that he questioned Dylan about the song being very similar to
one of his songs titled "Rita Mae". Stoner is quoted saying that
Dylan was aware of the song. Doctor Green in an analysis states
that not only the titles bare similarity but the melody line of
both songs is close to identical.
Stoner's deposition has been designated as confidential by the
court and Judge Simandle has ordered the deletion of it's
contents.
Eric Von Schmidt published in his biography that Jackie
Washington wrote the melody line to "Man of War" He also quotes
Jackie Washington as saying that Dylan often came to see him
play in the village and that he even went over to Washington's
record company to get a copy of his record before Dylan
released "Man of War."
Chapter 11
Everyone someday finds out
Just how much faith
A man must have
So may the truth
Of your reality
Be in your own behalf
Copyright 88" Damiano

Review: Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits Volume 3
Released November 1994.
Trying to bring Dylan to the attention of the CD-buying audience
of the Nineties, his record label again tried to convert the
indifferent mass market into purchasers. The title almost left
room for legal action - only "Knockin' On Heaven's Door" was a
bona-fide hit. By no stretch of the imagination could the eleven
minute "Brownsville Girl" or nursery rhyme "Under The Red Sky"
be termed "hits."
The necessary incentive for those who had everything anyway, was
the inclusion of the contradictory "brand new "Dylan
classic" 'Dignity.' 'Dignity' was a rollicking , rock-a-billy
chunk sliced off the "O-Mercy" sessions and reproduced. It
confirmed Dylan's inability to pronounce the word 'mirror' and a
first for Bob -this namechecked a member of the British royal
family.Otherwise Volume 3 was a satisfactory treading water
exercise.

In a span of seven years from 1990 to 1997, Bob Dylan released
only one newly written original song titled "Dignity."
All other songs besides "Dignity" released by Bob Dylan during
this seven year span, were songs previously released by Bob
Dylan, traditional folk songs, and songs taken from songs in the
public domain.
Dylan's attorneys ask Judge Simandle permission to file a motion
to hold James Damiano, in contempt of court for the use of this
Web site. September 5, 1997.
"As we advised your chambers yesterday, September 4, 1997, it
has come to our clients' attention that plaintiff, James
Damiano, is using a website located at vir...@planet.net to
disseminate information about his claims against Mr. Dylan and
Sony." "The purpose of this letter, therefore is to request
leave of court to file a motion seeking to have plaintiff held
in contempt.
"Two years later defendants filed a motion to hold James Damiano
in contempt for violations of Judge Joel B. Rosens order
designating all discovery materials as confidential.
Judge Simandle incorrectly described the issues of fact in this
law suit.
Judge Simandle opined in his decision that "Taking these
allegations as true Plaintiff has demonstrated a genuine issue
of material fact as to whether defendants had access to his
work."
The true issue of fact is that for years defendants CBSRecords
and Dylan associates, solicited Plaintiff James Damiano's songs
as specified in the complaint.
This solicitation more than suggests the "copying of "plaintiff
James Damiano's songs. Although Plaintiff Damiano's attorney did
not submit much of the substantiating evidence to the court {why
I don't know } solicitation was still lisited as an allegation.
Judge Simandle never asked for any proof of that solicitation.
For more information please refer to the Seamless law website on
Alta Vista.
When you need not use
Your intelligence anymore
Your charm or your wit
Only then can you
pride yourself as being
the most
hypocritical hypocrite
Damiano Copyright 92

Chapter 12
Being limited on webspace it is difficult to enter all the
evidence I acquired in Eleven Years, however I intend to
periodically update this web site.
Should any attorneys read this site, who would like to offer any
assistance please feel free to contact me by the beeper number
displayed below or the address above.
I guess the last thing I'd like to say is that I have been in
litigation with Bob Dylan for over four years. Defendants have
alleged to the court that I committed fraud by trying
to "extract" not "extort" but "extract" money from Bob Dylan.
Although Defendants suggest fraud as their a defense, they do
not back up their allegation with a countersuit. In other words
no countersuit has been filed by defendants Sony and or Bob
Dylan.
If the defendants do not file a countersuit, this could only
mean that the issues of fact can not substantiate such a claim
and that the defendants have no legitimate claims or defense to
Plaintiff's allegations.
Bob Dylan has not publically commented on this litigation.
A Diversion Of the truth
Defendants failure to contest the issues of solicitation creates
a diversion of the truth so as to avoid having to answer
obligatory questions identifying the difference between Judge
Simandle's description of Plaintiffs demonstration of , "access"
as opposed to a more incriminating description of Plaintiffs
demonstration of Defendants "solicitation" of James Damiano's
music. Solicitation is actually what occured.
It is these facts of solicitation which disable the defendants
from filing a countersuit.
This website has been on the internet for two years and four
months as of this date December 26, 1999.
Please note that for everyday that this web site is up and
running the fact is documented that the defendants do not
contest the issues of fact, the evidence of solicitation or the
statements set forth in this web site declaration. This website
has been on the internet for two years and three months as of
this date December 14, 1999.
Therefore the reader can conclude that the statements and
evidence set forth in this web site are true.
Chapter 15
The Impeachment of Elliot Mintz and Tony Tiller : I have been
ordered by the court to remove this document which contains
blatant admissions of guilt by defendants and also perjury by
their own testimony.
Another Diversion from Defendants:
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W - P R O C T O R S I N A D M I R A L
T Y
EAST REDMAN AVENUE,
Haddonfield NJ 08033-2331
(856)795-9000:(856)795-0904
Steven D. Johnson
Partner in-Charge
October 4, 1999:
James Damiano v. Sony Music and Bob Dylan Civil Action No. 95-
4795 (JBS)
Our File No. 14132-0002N

U.P.S.
Honorable Jerome B. Simandle
H. Cohen U.S. Courthouse
John F. Gerry Plaza, NJ 08101-0888
Judge Simandle:,
We together with Orin Snyder, Esquire, of the firm of Parcher,
Hayes & Snyder, represent defendants, Bob Dylan and Sony Music
Entertainment, in the above matter. We write to advise the Court
of ongoing and serious violations of this Court's
Confidentiality Order (the "Protective Order") on the part of
plaintiff, James Damiano.letter dated September 5, 1997 (Exhibit
A), we advised Your Honor that Damiano was maintaining an
Internet website at HYPERLINK mailto:Virt...@aol.com on
which substantive information about his dismissed claims against
Bob Dylan and Sony Music was being disseminated in violation of
Judge Rosen's Confidentiality Order reported at Damiano v. Sony
Music Entertainment, Inc. and Bob Dylan, 168 F.R.D. 485 (D.N.J.
1996) (Exhibit B). Your Honor responded by letter of the same
date (Exhibit C) directing the attorneys for the parties
to "immediately discuss the situation with one another toward
working out an agreement." Thereafter, following conversations
between Parcher, Hayes & Snyder and Steven Kramer, Damiano's
attorney at the time, we sent Mr. Kramer a certificate for
Damiano to sign containing the following language:to the terms
of the protective order in this case issued on August 6, 1996, I
shall not publish, display, disseminate or otherwise exhibit on
the Website located at HYPERLINK mailto:Virt...@aol.com [
Now changed to James_...@Excite.com] or in any other medium
or form of communication any discovery materials from this case,
including but not limited to deposition transcripts, documents
produced in the case, expert reports or other litigation
materials or any excerpts therefrom.(Exhibit D)certificate was
never signed.October 15, 1997, Damiano faxed Parcher, Hayes &
Snyder a letter dated (inexplicably) October 18 (Exhibit E)
requesting that he be contacted directly to discuss the website
issue since he was "acting pro se until Steven Kramer is
reinstated." Parcher, Hayes & Snyder replied the next day
stating that "[I]n light of your pro se status, the nature of
this litigation, and your prior history of tape-recording
telephone conversations, please direct all communications to
this firm in writing." Thereafter, our efforts to communicate
with Mr. Damiano proved futile, and we assumed that the website
was either inactive or removed., we have just been made aware
that Mr. Damiano has updated his website, which is now located
at HYPERLINK http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Gallery/1238. A
print-out of the contents of the site are enclosed at Exhibit F.
As Your Honor can see, the website contains direct text and
videotape quotations from and characterizations of the
deposition testimony and expert reports in this case, which are
plainly covered by the Protective Order. In addition, Mr.
Damiano is now selling videotapes of depositions taken in this
case, which again are known by all parties to be highly
confidential under the Confidentiality Order. (See Exhibit G)
This willful and egregious flaunting of the Protective Order is
all the more worrisome because the defendants obtained the
Protective Order to prevent precisely the kind of commercial
exploitation of this litigation in which Mr. Damiano is now
actively engaged. Even more disturbingly, this website has been
viewed 1,473,085 times to date.addition, most recently, Damiano
has been sending e-mail messages to various persons that provide
direct links to his website. Last week, for example, plaintiff
sent an unsolicited e-mail communication to The Ethical Culture
Fieldston School Alumni Organization, the alumni organization at
the high school in New York City attended by our co-counsel,
Orin Snyder, Esquire. (Mr. Snyder is currently a Board Member of
the Fieldston School.) (Exhibit H) That e-mail provided a direct
link to Mr. Damiano's website and contained the following
note: "RE Orin Snyder" (Mr. Damiano apparently obtained
information concerning Mr. Snyder's affiliation with the School
from the Alumni Organization's website.) Damiano sent this e-
mail for the clear purpose of harassing Mr. Snyder, since the
website contains defamatory statements about Mr. Snyder, our
clients and the defendants' conduct of this litigation in
general. Last month, Mr. Snyder received a telephone call from
an attorney in Chicago to whom Mr. Damiano had sent a similar e-
mail.that was not enough, Damiano has set up at least two other
Internet sites that disparage Mr. Snyder and the defendants and
disseminate confidential litigation material. See, HYPERLINK
http://www.seamless.com/mail/messages/1497.htm; Dead
link .com/mail/messages/1497.ht m and HYPERLINK
http://www.themusicvine.com/users/JAGGAR (Exhibits I and J,
respectively). Additional evidence suggests that Damiano has
created – or attempted to create – a website about Mr. Snyder in
Mr. Snyder's own name (see attached Excite search summary;
Exhibit "K"). Finally, we have just learned from our client's
representatives that Damiano is participating in Internet "chat"
or "discussion rooms" in the course of which he is transmitting
material from the litigation, as well as his comments about it,
to anyone who will listen. Under separate cover, we will be
providing examples of this sort of conduct.before filing this
frivolous action, Damiano sought to commercially exploit his
meritless allegations against Mr. Dylan and Sony Music, as Judge
Rosen found in the Protective Order. The very purpose of the
Protective Order was to protect Mr. Dylan from any further
inappropriate efforts by Damiano to use this lawsuit as a means
by which to commercialize his allegations. As we stated in our
motion for a protective order:the depositions and other
discovery materials are not maintained as Confidential
Information under the Protective Order they will almost
certainly be exploited either by the plaintiff, by one or more
of the many individuals who actively seek out information about
Mr. Dylan in to profit by merchandising personal aspects of Mr.
Dylan's life, or by someone posting the materials on the
Internet for worldwide distribution with no ability to stop or
recall the distribution or refute the allegations being
disseminated. Clearly, this lawsuit should not be a vehicle for
such an invasion of Mr. Dylan's privacy and rights. (Emphasis
added)course, this is precisely what Damiano is doing today – in
flagrant violation of the Court Order. To make matters worse,
information on Damiano's Website has now been re-published by
third parties elsewhere, compounding the damage. a more general
note, this website mischaracterizes the evidence and the issues,
defames Mr. Dylan and Sony and, perhaps most tellingly, nowhere
reveals that this Court, as well as the Third Circuit, has ruled
against Damiano and dismissed his claims. We note that Damiano
is now appearing pro se in this litigation. Under New Jersey
Rules of Professional Conduct 3.2 ("...and shall treat with
courtesy and consideration all persons involved in the legal
process"), 3.4 (c) ("[shall not] knowingly disobey an obligation
under the rules of the tribunal..."), 3.6(a) and (b)(1) ("[shall
not]...make an extrajudicial statement" relating to "the
character, credibility, reputation...of a party...") and 4.1(a)
(1) ("...a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of
material fact or law to a third person"), no attorney admitted
to the Bar of this Court would be able to make the statements
contained in Damiano's website. It seems, therefore, anomalous
that Mr. Damiano can represent himself before the Bar of this
Court and still behave in this fashion without fear of sanction
or discipline. In this regard, we note the provisions of
L.Civ.R. 104.1 (m) to the effect that "[N]othing contained in
these Rules shall be construed to deny this Court such powers as
are necessary for the Court to maintain control over proceedings
conducted before it, such as proceedings under Title 18 of the
United States Code or under Fed.R.Crim.P. 42." At the risk of
being accused of taking the bait, we direct the Court's
attention to the following excerpt from Damiano's website:guess
the last thing I'd like to say is that I have been in litigation
with Bob Dylan for over three years. Defendants have alleged to
the court that I committed fraud by trying to "extract"
not "extort" but "extract" money from Bob Dylan.Defendants
suggest fraud as their defense a [sic] defense, they do not back
up their allegation with a countersuit. In other words no
countersuit has been filed by defendants or Bob Dylan.red
blooded Attorney or Judge knows that if the defendants do not
file a countersuit, this could only mean that the issues of fact
can not [sic] substantiate such a claim and that the defendants
have no legitimate defense or offense...note that for everyday
[sic] that this web site is up and running the fact is
documented that the defendants do not contest the issues of
fact, the evidence of solicitation or the statements set forth
in this web site declaration.the reader can conclude that the
statements and evidence set forth in this web site are true.Bob
Dylan's attorneys would download this site, and send it to Judge
Simandle and then ask to hold James Damiano in contempt.
(emphasis supplied) Accordingly, we respectfully request leave
of Court to file a motion seeking to have Mr. Damiano held in
contempt of Court for his wilful violations of this Court's
Order and for such other and further relief as the Court may
deem appropriate.

Respectfully yours,
HECKER BROWN SHERRY AND JOHNSON

Anyone can see for themselves, that nowhere in the defendants
letter to Judge Simandle, asking for permission to hold James
Damiano in contempt, for alleged violations of Judge Joel B.
Rosen's order, designating all discovery materials as
confidential does it say, that plaintiff James Damiano is not
telling the truth about the information published in his
website.
The absense of a denial from defendants of plaintiff's
allegations after four years of litigation and two years and
four months of being on the internet validates the truth of
plaintiffs allegations of defendants solicitation of James
Damiano's songs.
The truth cannot be libelous therefore Judge Joel B. Rosen's
order for confidentiality is not legal under the first amendment
and must be vacated.

Chapter 16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

JAMES DAMIANO,
Plaintiff
CV (95-4795-(JBS)
-against-
SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC
and BOB DYLAN
Defendants
PLAINTIFF'S APPEAL-OF JUDGE JEROME B. SIMANDLE'S MEMORANDUM
OPINION OF FINDING JAMES DAMIANO IN CONTEMPT FOR VIOLATING JUDGE
JOEL B. ROSENS CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER AND MOTION TO VACATE SAID
ORDER..
Dated November 28, 1999
1. Defendants obtained a protective order designating all
discovery materials as confidential granted by Judge Joel B.
Rosen based on the allegation that For several years preceeding
this lawsuit, Mr. Damiano sought to commercially exploit his
meritless allegations against Bob Dylan.
a. Plaintiff contests both statements "commercially exploit"
and "Meritless allegations"

2. Orin Snyder's certification in support of defendants' motion
to hold James Damiano in contempt for violations of said
protective order begins with the title lauguage "Damiano's Pre-
Litigation Attempts to Profit From His fradulent Allegations."
3. This is the same language that defendants used to obtained
said protective order.
( A true and correct copy of the pages containing this language
is attached here to see Exhibit A)
4. Plaintiff contests the statement "fradulent allegation" made
in this statement and draws the attention of the court to a
letter sent to James Damiano dated May 7, 1996 from the Library
of congress containing the exact language quoted herin :
"Dear Mr. Damiano: This is in response to your expedited request
received in our office on March 26, 1996 via Steven M. Kramer
office for certified copies of the deposits PAU-103-561 and 3
others.
A search conducted at the Copyright Offices Deposit Copy Storage
Area disclosed that the deposit entitled Collective Songs By
James Damiano registered under the number PAU 409-107 is in the
progress of being transferred to the Washington National Record
Center.
At this time we are unable to provide you with a copy of that
deposit. You may resubmit your request at a later date and we
will conduct another search for no additional search fee. (A
true and correct copy of the May 7, 1996 letter sent to Mr.
Damiano from the copyright office is attached hereto as Exhibit
B)
5. Exhibit B is dated May 7, 1996 however defendants were able
to obatain months before Damiano recieved said letter from the
copyright office.
6. Page 206 of the James Damiano deposition displays E X H I B I
T S FOR IDENTIFICATION # 42 marked as Mr. Damiano's certified
1982 copyright filing number PAU 409-107. This page factually
documents that defendants had in their possession plaintiff's
copyright filing on May 16, 1996 whereas nine days before the
copyright office informed Mr. Damiano that it was unable to
locate Plaintiff's copyright filing and that he may resubmit his
request for certified copies of the filing at a later date
preferrably 180 days later. (A true and correct copy of the Page
206 of the James Damiano deposition is attached hereto as
Exhibit C)
7. Again plaintiff draws the attention of the court to page 116
para 20 through page 117 para 15 of the Damiano deposititon.]
By Orin Snyder: Let me have the court reporter now mark, please,
three documents for identification.
First will be Mr. Damiano's certified 1988 copyright filing
number TXU 547786 bearing plaintiff's Bates stamp L-003 through
and including L 0073. Can we mark that as the next exhibit
(Whereupon, Mr. Damiano's certified filing number TXU 547786
marked defendants' Exhibit 41 for identification as of this
date.)
By Orin Snyder : Next will be Mr. Damiano's certified 1982
copyright filing again certified with the number PAU 409-107
marked defendants' Exhibit 42 for identification as of this date.

pages 116 through 117 of the James Damiano deposition further
documents that defendants were able to obtain access to
plaintiffs 1982 copyright filing months before plaintiff was
able to obtain access.(A true and correct copy of page 116 para
20 through page 117 para 15 of the Damiano deposititon is
attached hereto as Exhibit D)
8. Defendants cannot deny this fact issue certifies a deficiency
in the crediblitity of the copyright office.
9. May this court also take into consideration other scenarios
that might come into play. During the James Damiano deposition
plaintiff was caught dumbfounded when it appeared that song
lyrics were missing from his copyright filing of materials
deposited for registration to the Copyright office. How is it
that the defendants were able to obtain access to plaintiff's
1982 copyright filing from the copyright office before plaintiff
himself was able to obtain access to his own registration? This
fact issue exhibited in Exhibit's B, C and D offers an
explanation to the court.
10. PLAINTIFF CAN ALSO SUPPLY THE COURT WITH OTHER DOCUMENTATION
CONCERNING DEFENDANTS ACCESS TO PLAINTIFF'S COPYRIGHTS BEFORE
PLAINTIFF WAS ABLE TO GAIN ACCESS.
10A. How is it that the copyright office supplied defendants
with a certified copy of James Damiano's 1982 copyright filing
on or before May 16th 1996 yet were unable to supply plaintiff
with a copy untill months later?
11. Plaintiff respectfully demands that Judge Simandle
acknowledge with consideration, Exhibit's B, C and D in
contention to defendants groveled description of plaintiff's
allegations as being fradulent and declare if not at least as
neutrally as possible the fact that human error exists and that
plaintiff's materials deposited to the copyright office could
have been misplaced or lost either purposely or unintentionally.
12. Defendants highlight their own guilt by way of motion to the
court to hold Damiano in contempt for allegedly violating Judge
Joel B. Rosens order designating all discovery materials as
confidential.
13. Plaintiff denies and contests Orin Snyder's allegation that
James Damiano sought to commercially exploit his meritless
allegations against Bob Dylan.
14. No factual unbiased evidence or testimony exists supporting
Mr. Snyder's allegations of Mr. Damiano's alleged exploitation
of Mr. Damiano's allegations against Bob Dylan, other than Mr.
Snyder's own opinion of Mr. Damiano's correspondence to certain
entities in which the defendants purport to identify as
exploitation.
It is unconstitutional for this court to accept as truth, the
biased opinion of the opposing parties attorney when no unbiased
facts exist, to support defendants statement regarding the
alleged exploitation of Mr. Damiano's claims against Mr. Dylan.
15. Secondly it was someone other than Mr. Damiano who initially
suggested that these entities be contacted for the purpose of
searching for an attorney in assuming that these entities
employed the best attorneys in the respective areas of
entertainment, copyright and intellectual property law.
From the Certification of Orin Snyder
"For several years preceeding this lawsuit, Damiano sought to
commercially exploit his meritless allegations against Bob
Dylan. Damiano completed an unpublished manuscript totaling over
100 pages entitled "Eleven Years," which purport to document his
now-discredited allegations of copyright infringement. After
writing the manuscript, Damiano sought to market it to various
publishers. In addition, Damiano sent copies to, inter alia, the
television tabloid show a "A Current Affair", and The "New
Yorker magazine. Damiano also placed an advertisement for his
defamatory claims in Rolling Stone magazine, a leading music
industry publication, which read "WOULD BOB DYLAN STEAL SONGS?'
Read 'Eleven Years' w/recorded phone Calls. $15.95, Virtue
Books."
16. No unbiased fact issue exists that Mr. Damiano sought to
market the manuscript "Eleven Years" to various publishers.
17. The above certified statement of Orin Snyder highlights
defendants own guilt by way of motion to the court to hold James
Damiano in contempt for allegedly violating Judge Joel B. Rosens
order designating all discovery materials as confidential.
Defendants never officially or unofficially refuted, contested
or denied any of the issues of fact concerning their
solitication of James Damiano's songs, plaintiff's eleven year
association with CBS Records and his affiliation with Dylan
associates, in which they contend Mr. Damiano allegedly sought
to exploit.
18. Without a denial from defendants, of plaintiffs allegations
concerning their solicitation of James Damiano's songs, this
court must consider Mr. Damiano's denial of defendants
allegations of plaintiff's alleged exploitation of his
allegations against Bob Dylan as valid by fact. This fact must
be acknowledged by the court and the court must realize that any
and all alleged allegations of exploitation of Plaintiff's
claims against Mr. Dylan are the mere opinion of Orin Snyder
alone of which must be considered, as biased in nature and void
by fact.
19. Again plaintiff denies the allegation that he sought to
commercially exploit his allegations against Bob Dylan and that
plaintiff's motive in contacting "A Current Affair", "The New
Yorker" magazine and "Rolling Stone magazine was to find an
entertainment attorney capable of competeing against the caliber
of attorney's that Bob Dylan and Sony Music Entertainment could
monatarily afford.
20. Plaintiff's motive was also to officially and
chronologically document through a published document,
defendants solicitation of plaintiff's materials by defendants.
Both plaintiff's manuscript and website have now been officially
published.
21. No court can deny that the publishing of a document in
itself has a value of truth especially if it is not contested by
anyone. This value of truth has carried a tremendous amount of
weight in standing up for my rights against the enormous giant
Sony Music Entertainment, Bob Dylan and all of their resources.
22. Through the absense of a denial of these allegations by
defendants and through the publishing of plaintiff's
manuscript "Eleven Years", I'm sure your Honor can see that
plaintiff's motive was to chronologically document his eleven
year affiliation with John Hammond, John Hammond associates, CBS
Records, Bob Dylan and also defendants solicitation of
Plaintiff's songs.
23. James Damiano, in his manuscript "Eleven Years" and in
Plaintiff's website "Eleven Years" (designated as Exhibit E )
merely stated the factual truth. The law provides as a matter of
law that the truth cannot be libelous. Therefore the truth
cannot be exploited.
24. Defendant's also do not specify exactly what statement Mr.
Damiano published in which they contend is either factually
incorrect, damaging to Bob Dylan, or an exploitation of
meritless or fradulent claims against Bob Dylan.
25. It is possible to be found guilty in a court of law when the
specific crime was never cited to the court? What defendants are
stating to Your Honor is Damiano is guilty but we'd rather not
tell you what he is guilty of. What defendants are stating is to
just find Damiano guilty. But keep off the record exactly what
it is he is guilty of.
26. Defendants only contention is that James Damiano diseminated
discovery materials on the internet. What defendants do not say
is that James Damiano diseminated a portion of the testimony of
Bob Dylan's publicist ( Elliot Mintz ) in which Mr. Mintz
testified under oath in a video taped deposition: This
information has been deleted and cannot be displayed by order of
the court order for confidentiality.

27. Or that Mr. Damiano diseminated a portion of Elliot Mintz's
testimony in which Mr Mintz testified under oath in a video
taped deposition: This information has been deleted and cannot
be displayed by order of the court order for confidentiality.

28. Mr. Mintz's testimony is in blatant conflict with his
previous testimony as displayed below: This information has been
deleted and cannot be displayed by order of the court order for
confidentiality.

29. In other words Mr. Mintz testified that he told Mr. Damiano
that he was giving Mr. Damiano's songs to Bob Dylan yet he
accused Mr. Damiano of being delusional.
30. Does the court chose to refuse to see the irony of Mr.
Mintz's testimony?
31. Defendants Sony Music Entertainment and Bob Dylan do not
contend that Plaintiff James Damiano is not telling the truth
about the issues of fact published in his manuscript "Eleven
Years" (Exhibit # 5) nor do defendants contend that Mr. Damiano
is not telling the truth about issues of fact published on his
website concerning their solicitation of his songs, the eleven
years history of Damiano's affiliation with CBS Records and Bob
Dylan through Mikie Harris, Tony Tiller, Elliot Mintz, Jeffrey
Rosen, Mike Reed, Tom Masters, Richard Fernandez, and John
Hammond Sr. office.
32. Plaintiff's motive was also to officially document through a
published document, defendants solicitation of plaintiff's
materials by defendants. Both plaintiff's manuscript and website
have now been officially published.
33. Solicitation implies copying and copying implies
infringement.
34. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the
following evidence and that the truth cannot be libelous:
35. That the publishing of this truthful information cannot be
libelous and that the truth cannot be exploited.
36. That plaintiff has the right to publish this information
under the first amendment of the Constitution of the United
States.
Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15,
1791.
AMENDMENT I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances.
37. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the absense
of a denial by defendants of plaintiff's allegations of
defendants solictation of plaintiff James Damiano's songs.
38. The court must acknowledge that any denial by defendants
could have been made to the court more than four years ago when
the suit was filed.
39. To reiterate defendants guilt even further defendants never
contested any of the issues or facts set forth in Plaintiff's
manuscript "Eleven Years" even after defendants were made aware
of the following advertisement which was published in Rolling
Stone magazine that read "WOULD BOB DYLAN STEAL SONGS?'
Read 'Eleven Years' w/recorded phone Calls. $15.95, Virtue
Books."
40. Defendants do not contend that plaintiff is not telling the
truth about the fact issues published in his website allegating
that they made promises to the plaintiff concerning his
songwrting career.
41. In fact Defendants do not contend that plaintiff James
Damiano is not telling the truth about any of the information
published on his website therefore the information contained in
plaintiff's website cannot be libelous.
In fact Defendants do not contend that plaintiff James Damiano
is not telling the truth when he published the fact that in a
span of seven years from 1990 to 1997 Bob Dylan only released
one newly written original song titled "Dignity" in which he
claimed to have independently written. All other songs released
on Bob Dylan albums during those yeras were songs taken from
songs in the public domian, traditional folk songs and
previously written and released Bob Dylan songs. Should the
court lay out all seven albums on a table and review the credits
it will reveal that the albums were produced or arranged by Bob
Dylan (Not written by Bob Dylan). I believe the albums display
just the title of the songs and do not display the name of the
original author of the songs. It would also be interesting to
know whether Dylan payed royalties to any of the families of the
origianl authors of these songs. Nevertheless Defendants do not
contest said statement published on Mr. Damiano's website.
42. Again the truth cannot be libelous therefore the truth
cannot be exploited.
43. Without a denial from defendants of the allegations
published on plaintiff's website, defendants admit to their own
guilt by contending that the issues of fact cited on Plaintiffs'
website are damaging to Bob Dylan. Here, clearly the defendants
admit to the court themselves that the issues of fact they
refuse to contest and refuse to deny are damaging to Bob Dylan.
Apparantly admitting that plaintiff's allegations are meritous.
Again the truth cannot be libelous.
44. The absense of a denial by defendants is evidence enough to
vacate Judge Joel B. Rosen's confidentiality order designating
all discovery materials as confidential and to also reverse
Judge Simandle's decision of finding James Damiano guilty of
contempt for violations of that order.
45. Not many songwriters can honestly say that their material
was solicited by Bob Dylan and or CBS Records. This fact alone
is of public interest.
Defendants manipulated Judge Joel B. Rosen to grant said
protective order based on the biased testimony of the following
biased witness's both of whom have submitted materials and
projects to Sony Corporation with hopes of gainning Sony's
services such, as distribution and promotion. Both of whom could
monatraily benefit from a contract with Sony Corporation.
47. Scott Patterson: I draw the attention of the court to the
testimony of Scott Patterson's deposition which reveals that Mr.
Patterson's testimony was biased: And that at the time of Mr.
Patterson's depositions, he was awaiting a response from Sony
concerning the submission of a musical projected that Mr.
Patterson's company had submitted to Sony Music.

48. Further, defendants contend in the Orin Snyder certification
that "Damiano subsequently entered into a written agreement with
an individual named Nicholas Kuntz regarding the commercial
exploitation of his claims". The agreement provided as follows:
This is to certify that on this day January 28th, 1994 that
James Damiano assigns the monitary [sic] settlement of any legal
issues awarded to James Damiano regarding his legal suits [sic]
involving CBS Records and / or Bob Dylan to both Nicholas G.
Kuntz and James Damiano cooperatively and any and all profits
derrived [sic] from the sale or production of this material
adapted to the mediums of publishing, recordeing, video,
television or film are to be shared and distributed equally.
The sale and or development of any project based upon the
property "Eleven Years" the manuscript written by James Damiano
documenting this matter, for the mediums of publishing,
recording, video, television or film shall be developed,
produced and distributed through the mutual efforts of this
alliance between the consenting parties and no other rights
regarding the property "Eleven Years" for the purposes of
publishing, recording, video, television or film development,
production or distribution may be assigned or acted upon without
the express written consent of both parties.
49. Defendants fail to mention Mr. Kuntz has rescinded this
contract. Also in a letter to James Damiano Mr. Kuntz writes:
" I understand that "For the record you are in need of a
clarification from me as to the nature of the "agreement" that I
testified to in my deposition for your law suit involving Bob
Dylan and yourself. I would like to add that I am offering this
information willingly and that the agreement we had has been
voided, as I have previously sumitted in writing, and that there
exists no further "agreement" between us.
Mr. Kuntz acknowledges that at the time this alleged, invalid
agreement was signed plaintiff James Damiano was under not only
duress but under a great deal of duress as follows.
.
At the time that this agreement was drawn up between us, there
was a great deal of stress and tension personally in both out
lives., as you well know. You were at a time in your life that
had a great deal of confusion and turmoil involoving almost
every aspect of your life - Your relationship with your parants,
your marriage as well as the severed relationship with your son,
who meant a great deal to you. As if those things were not
enough, you were also facing a tremendous number of questions
and issues regarding the situation with your prior dealings with
Bob Dylan, his associates and Sony Music.
I, on the other hand, was also facing numerous professional and
personal issues that were also demanding. Together we puzzeled
daily as to how to manage your situatuion so that a more
positive handling of those issues could be arranged. It was not
always possible to make the best decision as to what should be
done
at any given time.
Mr. Kuntz goes on to explain the intentions of his actions and
his goal involving correspondence written in James Damiano's
behalf which was to find an attorney.
One thing is and was always clear regarding the matter involving
Bob Dylan and Sony Music. That was that you needed a lawyer to
assist you in bringing this matter forward in the manner
necessary. That was always our goal, right from the beginning.
In our respective personal positions, however that was easier
said than done and required a considerable effort over many
months.
That night that you called me, around 11pm, I believe you had
been out with your Dad and your anticipation before that evening
was high that this would be a positive meeting with him
Apparantly it was not, because you called from a diner in Toms
River and he had left you there with no way to get back to my
office in Wall Township where you had been staying at the time.
It became apparant to me, after you called asking if I would
come to get you, that my commiyttment, if I was going to proceed
to help you any further that I already had, was going to be the
primary source of support for you. That would mean more time
that would have to be devoted, money that would have to be spent
to carry out whatever needed to be done - i.e. trips to New York
City - and other resources or expenses that would have to go for
things like printing, phone calls, and other incidentials such
as Fed-Ex charges.
I was working at the time with extremely limited funds, trying
to support a family and working desperately to keep a failing
bussiness alive. So, I made a decision and that was that if I
was going to be devoting all of this to your effort, I wanted to
be assured that I would have a say in what was going to be the
path and circumstances we would be facing. I decided that I
wanted to have an official and signed agreement with you, more
for the sake of your realizing that I was making this decision
and what this committment on my behalf might mean.
We had never talked about this kind of a thing prior to that
evening, however, I wanted you to realize that I was making a
much bigger committment than just helping a friend out who
needed a hand. In short, I was now about to devote almost all of
my efforts and attention nto helping you get a lawyer and that I
was going to do my best to not have any further distractions to
that goal.
So, I hastely wrote up the agreement and brought it with me to
pick you up from the diner. I walked in and you were very
distraught. You had just been left there by your father and that
was because you had another problematic confrontation with him.
I told you that from here on in that if I was going to have to
be your support, in every sense of the word, that I wanted to
know that we were not going to make any mistakes. To insure
that, we were going to be "partners" in the sense that we
discussed and agreed upon future courses of action. I then
presented you with the agreement.
Mr. Kuntz reiterates the amount of duress plaintiff James
Damiano was under the night the agreement was signed by Mr.
Damiano . I would like to draw the courts attention to the
following statement made to James Damiano by Nicholas Kuntz the
night the agreement was signed. Mr. Kuntz stated to Mr. Damiano
in a rural diner at 12:30 in the morning quoting Mr. Kuntz
himself "Well, if you're not going to agree and sign it, I will
leave you here!"

Mr. Kuntz continues: You had just had a very trying evening, one
of many at that time, and said that you couldn't think of
anything like that at the time. I told you, "Well, if you're not
going to agree and sign it, I was going to leave you here!" That
took you by surprise, which it was intended to do and you
thought for a moment. Then you said something like "Oh, what the
hell," picked up the pen and signed it. Then it was over. We
never talked about it again, we didn't need to. That's why it
was such a surprise that I even mentioned it in the deposition.
Due to the nature of the questioning at the deposition, I
couldn't not mention it and not be truthful. It probably would
have been easier if I had'nt brought it out, however, I knew
that the truth of how it came about and why, would be important,
regardless of how the defense would perceive it and try to use
it to their advantage, which they obviously have.
I think it's obvious, though, that our only intent was to make
sure that you got a lawyer to help bring your case forward,
because that's all we did. That's all we ever worked on, that's
all we ever planned. My intent
in even creating that agreement was so that , in effect, you
would have no other choice but to consult me on major issues so
that I could help you not make a mistake. At the time it was
important, however, after that night we literally forgot about
it.
I would have no problem testifying to this statement.
Sincerely Nicholas G. Kuntz.
50. I would like to direct the courts attention to the specific
sentence in Mr. Kuntz's letter which states:
"Well, if you're not going to agree and sign it, I was going to
leave you here!"
51. Clearly no court would decide that this is or ever was a
valid binding agreement, especially since Mr. Kuntz specifically
acknowledged even other duress that James Damiano had been under
at the signing of this document.
52. The order for confidentiality granted by Judge Joel. B.
Rosen was based on the biased testimony of Nicholas G. Kuntz.
53. Very recently sometime in late November, 1999 Nicholas Kuntz
confessed and revealed to Plaintiff James Damiano that sometime
in or about 1992 or 1993 before his deposition he was a
distributor for Sony Corporation in which there was a written
agreement between Mr. Kuntz and Sony Corporation.
54. Said agreement provided a source of income to Mr. Kuntz.
55. See Exhibit # 1 Declaration of James Damiano regarding the
biased testimony of Nicholas Kuntz.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

JAMES DAMIANO
VS. cv 95-4795 (JBS)
SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT
AND BOB DYLAN
DECLARATION OF JAMES DAMIANO

James Damiano pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1746, declares under
penalty of perjury that:
1. Sometime in late November, 1999 Nicholas Kuntz confessed and
revealed to me (James Damiano) that sometime in or about 1992 or
1993 and before his deposition in this litigation Mr. Kuntz
was a distributor for Sony Corporation in which there was a
written agreement between Mr. Kuntz and Sony Corporation.
2. Said agreement provided a source of income to Mr. Kuntz.
3. Mr Kuntz did not reveal this conflict of interest at his
deposition in the James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan litigation.
4. Mr. Kuntz never mentioned this agreement or produced the
agreement during his deposition. Other than the biased testimony
of Mr. Kuntz there is no other unbiased fact or evidence
supporting defendants allegations of plaintiff's allegeded
attempt to profit from pre-litigation exploitation of
plaintiff's claims against Bob Dylan.
5. To further endorse the bias of Mr. Kuntz's testimony Mr.
Kuntz has asked me not to reveal any of this information to the
court for the specific reason that, he is waiting for a response
from Sony Corporation to a project he has proposed to them and
in which he hopes to obtain the services of the corporation.
6. The field in which Mr. Kuntz works is in the production of
historical CD Rom's. The possibility of even other submissions,
of Mr. Kuntz's projects for further development and or
distribution to Sony Corporation is highly possible and very
likely.

James Damiano___________________________

EXECUTED THIS ____ DAY OF _____________ YEAR OF 1999

56. JUDGE SIMANDLE FAILED TO TO ACKNOWLEDGE BLATANT ADMISSIONS
OF GUILT BY THE DEFENDANTS
57. AFTER A MASSIVE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE WHICH INCIMINATED THE
DEFENDANTS WAS PRODUCED TO THE COURT, IN WHICH THE COURT FAILED
TO ACKNOWLEDGE, PLAINTIFF FELT DEFEATED BEFORE THE HEARING EVER
STARTED WHICH TAINTED HIS UNSWORN TESTIMONY.DEFENDANTS HAD IN
THEIR POSSESSION PLAINTIFFS
MATERIALS FOR ELEVEN YEARS FROM WHICH THE INSTANT LAW SUIT
DERIVES.
58. PLAINTIFF'S MATERIALS WERE SOLICTED BY DEFENDANTS FOR OVER A
PERIOD OF ELEVEN YEARS.
59. PLAINTIFF WAS TOLD BY HIS ATTORNEY ROBERT CHURCH THAT JUDGE
ROSEN'S CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER WAS BROADLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
60. DEFENDANTS HAVE LEFT ALL ISSUES OF THEIR SOLICITATION OF
PLAINTIFF'S MATERIALS UNCONTESTED FOR TWO YEARS AND TWO MONTHS
AFTER PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS WERE PUBLISHED ON THE WORLD WIDE
INTERNET.
61. TO THIS DAY DEFENDANTS HAVE NOT CONTESTED THE ISSUES OF
SOLICITATION OF PLAINTIFF JAMES DAMIANO'S SONGS.
62. SOLICITATION IMPLIES MOTIVE TO COPY AND MOTIVE TO COPY
IMPLIES MOTIVE TO INFRINGE
63. PLAINTIFF MOVES THE COURT TO RULE IN LIGHT OF THE FOLLOWING
EVIDENCE
64. PLAINTIFF'S FIRST MOTIVE TO PUBLISH INFORMATION ON THE
INTERNET WAS TO PROVE TO THE COURT THAT DEFENDANTS WOULD NOT
CONTEST THE ISSUES OF SOLICITAITON OF PLAITIFF'S INTELECTUAL
PROPERTY IN WHICH THEY STILL HAVE NOT DONE. THIS IS GROUNDS
ENOUGH FOR LIFTING SAID PROTECTIVE ORDER
65. PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTIVE WAS TO FIND AN ATTORNEY TO REPLACE
STEVEN M. KRAMER AFTER HIS SUSPENSION AND DISBARMENT
66. PLAINTIFFS THIRD MOTIVE WAS TO HAVE DEFENDANTS DOWNLOAD THE
WEBSITE AND PRODUCE IT TO THE COURT. AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN
GUILT.
TO PRODUCE TO THE COURT ALL EVIDENCE IN WHICH STEVEN M. KRAMER
REFUSED TO PRODUCE TO THE COURT.

67. TO HAVE THE WEBSITE DOCKETED AND PUT ON RECORD.TO ENLIGHTEN
THE COURT TO EXISTING ISSUES OF FACT
68. TO ENLIGHTEN THE COURT TO EVEN OTHER UNRSESOLVED ISSUES OF
FACT.
69. TO EXPOSE TO THE COURT STEVEN M. KRAMER'S CONFLICT OF
INTEREST THAT HE REPRESENTED WMOT RECORDS , AN AFFILIATE OF CBS
RECORDS.
70. PLAINTIFF HAS ACOMPLISHED WHAT HE FELT NEEDED TO BE
ACOMPLISHED BY PUBLISHING INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET TO PROVE
TO THE COURT THAT DEFENDANTS WOULD NOT CONTEST THE MASSIVE
ISSUES OF SOLICIATION OF HIS MATERIALS PLAINTFF DELETED HIS
WEBSITE UNDER DURESS FROM THE PROTECTIVE ORDER
71. PLAINTIFF JAMES DAMIANO MOVES THE COURT TO VACATE THE
CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER FOR ALL THE REASONS CONTAINED HEREIN.
72. PLAINTIFF AGREES TO NOT SELL ANY INFORMATION WHICH WAS
PROTECTED UNDER JUDGE ROSENS CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER
73. PLAINTIFF JAMES DAMIANO HAS A RIGHT TO TELL HIS STORY UNDER
THE FIRSTAMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA.
74. PLAINTIFF'S FORMER ATTORNEY WHO REPRESENTED HIM IN THE
INSTANT CASE WAS DISBARED WHICH PREJUDICED PLAINTIFF AND CAUSED
A GREAT DEAL OF CONFUSION.
75. PLAINTIFF'S FORMER ATTORNEY WHO REPRESENTED HIM IN THE
INSTANT CASE AND HAD A CONFLICT WITH CBS RECORDS .
1. THE TRUTH CANNOT BE LIBELOUS and therefore cannot be
EXPLOITED
1A. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the
following evidence:
1B. That defendants Sony Music Entertainment and Bob Dylan do
not contend that Plaintiff James Damiano is not telling the
truth about the issues of fact published on his website
concerning their solicitation of his songs, the eleven years
history of his association with CBS / Sony Music and Bob Dylan's
entourage and therefore the publishing of this information
cannot be libelous and plaintiff has the right to publish this
information under the first amendment of the Constitution of the
United States of America.
1C. The court must acknowledge and rule in light of the absence
of a denial by defendants of plaintiff's allegations of
defendants solictation of plaintiff James Damiano's songs.
1D. Defendants do not contend that plaintiff is not telling the
truth about the issues of facts published in his website
allegating that they made promises to the plaintiff concerning
his songwrting career.
1E. In fact Defendants do not contend that plaintiff James
Damiano is not telling the truth about any of the information
published on his website therefore the information contained in
plaintiff's website cannot be libelous. The truth cannot be
libelous AND THEREFORE THE COURT SHOULD HAVE NO INTEREST IN
CONCEALING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD. OR THE
HISTORY OF DAMIANO'S ELEVEN YEAR ASSOCIATION WITH CBS , SONY
MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT AND BOB DYLAN'S ENTOURAGE.
1F. Without a denial from defendants of the allegations
published on plaintiff's website, defendants admit to their own
guilt by contending that the issues of fact cited on Plaintiffs
website are damaging to Bob Dylan. Here, clearly the defendants
admit to the court themselves that the issues of fact they
refuse to contest and refuse to deny are damaging to Bob Dylan
and aApparantly admitting that plaintiff's allegations are
meritous. Again the truth cannot be libelous. The absense of a
denial is evidence enough to vacate Judge Joel B. Rosen's
confidentiality order designating all discovery materials as
confidential and defendants motion is proven to be a nullity.
1G. Without a denial from defendants this court must accept
these issues of fact as truth and plaintiff has the right to
publish this information under the first amendment of the
Constitution of the United States of America.

1H. WHAT INTEREST DOES THE COURT HAVE FOR CONCEALING THE HISTORY
OF FACTS OF THIS CASE . IT IS NOT EVERYDAY THAT AN AMATUER
SONGWRITER HAS HIS SONGS SOLICITED BY A SONGWRITER OR RECO0RD
COMPANY OF THE MAGNITUDE OF BOB DYLAN AND OR SONY MUSIC
ENTERTAINMENT. THIS FACT IN ITSELF IS OF PUBLIC INTEREST.
THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE REVEALS STEVEN M. KRAMER'S CONFLICT OF
INTEREST WHICH HE NEVER REVEALED TO JAMES DAMIANO.
Steven M. Kramer reresented WMOT Records which was an affiliate
of CBS Records / Sony Music Entertainment in which Bob Dylan has
been in contract with for over thirty years.

PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS

'LAUNDERING' TOOK RECORD CO. TO CLEANERS
Wednesday, November 21, 1984
Section: LOCAL
Edition: 9STAR
Page: 8
By JOSEPH R. DAUGHEN, Daily News Staff Writer
TEXT: A federal bankruptcy trustee has accused officials of Bank
Leumi Le-Israel of conspiring with fugitive dentist Lawrence W.
Lavin and boxing promoter Mark Stewart to loot a Philadelphia
record company of more than $2 million.
In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia Nov.
2, Jonathan H. Ganz, trustee of WMOT Enterprises Inc., contends
that Lavin and Stewart obtained an interest in the firm "by
fraud," used it to "launder" profits
from Lavin's alleged drug dealings, then stripped it of its
assets and threw it into bankruptcy.
Lavin and Stewart were aided in the alleged conspiracy by two
officials of Bank Leumi's Philadelphia branch, loan officer
James Patterson and vice president Irving Feldman, the suit
says.
Lavin, 29, was indicted by a federal grand jury on Sept. 10 and
charged with being the kingpin of a 13-member ring that
allegedly sold $5 million worth of cocaine a month.
He was released the next day after posting 10 percent of
$150,000 bail and has since disappeared, along with his wife,
Marcia, 28, who is six months' pregnant, and their 3-year-old
son. He subsequently was indicted on Oct. 1 for allegedly
evading $548,000 in income taxes.
Stewart, 42, was indicted the same day and charged with
conspiring with Lavin to impede the collection of the dentist's
taxes.
Stewart, of Margate, N.J., was the boxing promoter at the former
Playboy Casino Hotel and now operates a limousine service in
Atlantic City.
The trustee's lawsuit accuses Stewart, Lavin, Patterson, Feldman
and Bank Leumi of engaging in "an organized pattern of
racketeering activity" and of ''unlawful diversion of WMOT's
assets."
Patterson and Feldman, the suit charged, aided Stewart "to
conceal their prior approval of loans" to Stewart-owned
companies that "were incapable of generating funds from
legitimate sources to reduce the outstanding indebtedness" of
more than $1 million.
Donald C. Marino, Patterson's attorney, dismissed the
allegations as "pure nonsense."
"They don't have a single witness to testify to any of this,"
said Marino.
Feldman said he left Bank Leumi 2 1/2 years ago and has no
knowledge of the matter.
Edward S. Ellers, Bank Leumi's Philadelphia attorney, said the
bank ''denies any wrongdoing, denies any liability to any of the
plaintiffs, and will vigorously defend its position."
Stewart could not be reached for comment.
Joining trustee Ganz as plaintiffs in the suit are the new
owners of WMOT, lawyer Michael Goldberg, accountant Allen Cohen
and brothers Jeffrey and Mark Salvarian.
Among the artists recording for WMOT, which has been inactive in
recent years, were Fat Larry's Band, Philly Creme, Blue Magic,
Slick, Brandi Wells and Frankie Smith, whose single, "Double
Dutch Bus," sold more than a million copies.
A separate federal suit seeking $2 million in damages is pending
in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia against Bank Leumi,
Stewart and Patterson by attorney Steven Kramer, who represents
the former owners of WMOT, Steve Bernstein, Alan Rubens and
David Chackler.
Kramer said he is seeking permission from U.S. District Court
Judge Louis Bechtle to add Lavin as a defendant.
WMOT, incorporated in 1971, developed a reputation as an
aggressive independent record producer specializing in
the "Philly sound."
In June 1980, the company reached an agreement with CBS Records
that would ''assure effective marketing and distribution of
WMOT's records nationwide," said the Ganz lawsuit.
WMOT obtained an $80,000 line of credit from Bank Leumi in July
1980, the suit said, and by December of that year had drawn out
all $80,000.
Although the company had "earned substantial amounts" through
record sales, WMOT was at that time experiencing cash-flow
problems because of a time lag between sales and actual receipt
of money, the suit stated.
The agreement with CBS specified that WMOT would not begin
receiving royalties until February 1981, the suit said, causing
the company to be faced with a cash shortage from December 1980
to February 1981.
Steve Bernstein, who was then WMOT's president of operations,
said in an interview that he and his partners asked Bank Leumi
to increase WMOT's line of credit by at least $25,000 to keep
the company going until its royalties came in.
In return, Bernstein said, he and his partners offered in
writing to assign $116,500 in royalties to Bank Leumi and to
mortgage their homes.
The bank officials WMOT dealt with, according to the suit, were
Patterson and Feldman, who also were the loan officers in charge
of Stewart's Bank Leumi accounts.
Stewart owned four companies that owed Bank Leumi a total of
$1,149,291 in
December 1980, when WMOT was seeking the credit increase, the
suit said.
In mid-December, Patterson and Feldman rejected WMOT's request
for a credit increase, and the record company turned to Stewart
for help, the suit stated.
The lawsuit said Feldman "endorsed Stewart as a good customer of
the bank with substantial financial resources and a good deal of
management experience."
Feldman did not disclose that Stewart owed more than $1 million
to Bank Leumi, the suit said.
Bernstein said in the interview that he and his partners entered
into an agreement with Stewart on Dec. 24, 1980. Under the
agreement, Bernstein said, Stewart would set up a new company,
TEC Corp., which would assume all WMOT's debts, pay the
company's operating expenses, negotiate credit terms and lines
with Bank Leumi, and provide new capital.
In return, Stewart, through TEC Corp., would receive a 60
percent ownership interest in WMOT, said Bernstein.
In January 1981, Stewart became chairman of WMOT.
Over the next nine months, according to the suit, "large sums of
cash" were delivered by Lavin to Stewart, who
allegedly "laundered" the money by depositing it in WMOT's Bank
Leumi account and other accounts Stewart maintained at the bank.
These funds were then transferred out to Stewart or Lavin "in a
manner intended to make tracing the funds difficult or
impossible," the suit stated.
From January 1981 until March 1982, Lavin was paid $700 a week
by WMOT although "he performed no services whatsoever," the suit
alleged.
Between January 1981 and May 1982, the suit stated, WMOT
received more than $1 million in royalty checks, including
$841,123 from CBS. Bank Leumi permitted Stewart to use $540,000
of this to reduce the debt owed to the bank by another Stewart
company unrelated to WMOT, the suit said.
In addition, the suit said, "Leumi permitted to be improperly
endorsed, negotiated and deposited to accounts other than
accounts of WMOT" CBS royalty checks totaling $288,000.
During the same period, the suit alleged, Stewart increased
WMOT's debt to Bank Leumi from $80,000 to $1.3 million.
The Bank Leumi loans to WMOT were used by Stewart to pay off
debts other Stewart companies owed Bank Leumi, according to the
suit.

Case History
December 5th 1994....Suit filed in Camden by Steven M. Kramer.
August 6th, 1996 Judge Joel B. Rosen granted a protective
order. " Based upon the record before me, the defense has
shown ''good cause" designating all discovery materials
including deposition transcripts as "Confidential information".
December 16 1996 Judge Simandle grants Defendants motion for
summary Judgement.
January 21, 1997 Steven M. Kramer files recondiseration motion
one week late after an extension was granted by the court.
August 20th, 1997 Judge Simandle denies Plaintiff's motion for
reconsideration.
Aug 27th 1997 James Damiano uploads website titled "Eleven
Years" (James Damiano Vs. Bob Dylan) September 14th 1997
defendants file a motion for award of attorney's fees and
sanctions for $870,000.00 September 8th, 1997 Robert Church Esq.
filed an appeal with the United States Supreme Court for the
Third Circuit.
March 16, 1998 Steven M. Kramer files a late brief in opposition
to Defendants award for attorney's fees. March 18th, 1998 James
Damiano produces to the court a written document titled "The
Impeachment of Elliot Mintz (Dylan's manager) This document
compares blatant adverse impeachable testimony by Elliot Mintz
containing blatant admissions of guilt and also perjury.
March 31, 1998 Steven M. Kramer is suspended from the practice
of law in New Jersey.
June 29, 1998 James Damiano produces to Judge Simandle a five
hour video tape of sworn depositions titled "The Impeachment of
Elliot Mintz and Tony Tiller who was the Associate Director of
Marketing for CBS Records. This document compares blatant
adverse impeachable testimony by Elliot Mintz and Tony Tiller
containing blatant admissions of guilt by their own testimony
and therefore also perjury. Steven Kramer Esq. refused to submit
this evidence to the court and voiced his refusal of James
Damiano's request to send the video tape to Judge Simandle to
Robert Church Esq. during a telephone conference call.
June 30th 1998 Judge Simandle enters Administrative temination:
On June 29th , 1998, this court received a supplemental
submission, directly from plaintiff James Damiano, concerning
this case, in which the briefing schedule of Defendants motion
for attorney's fees was completed by submission of Defendants
reply memorandum on
April 3rd, 1998: and the court noting that the suspension of Mr.
Damiano's prior attorney, Steven M. Kramer Esq. from the bar of
this court took effect on March 31st, 1998 and : The court
wishing to receive the parties views whether this motion for
substantial amounts of sanctions against Mr. Damiano and Mr.
Kramer may go forward to adjudication in it's present status:
The views of Mr. Damiano, Mr. Kramer and defendants' counsel
would be appreciated within ten days hereof: The absence of a
response will be deemed a waiver of repsonse: In the meantime,
awaiting these repsonses, no further action can be taken upon
this motion and the docket ill temporarily be administratively
terminated without prejudice to reopen: an administrtive
termination is not a dismissal and it does not reflect upon the
merits of the case: It is this 30th day of June 1998 hereby
ordered that the clerk shall administratively terminate this
case and the pending motion of Defendants for attorneys' fees
and costs: [docket item 103-1] upon his docket without prejudice
pending further proceedings. signed Judge Jerome B. Simandle
August 1998 Steven M. Kramer disbared by the Appelalate Division
of the Supreme Court - New York United States of America vs.
Steven Michael Kramer.
September 25th 1998 : In a Memorandum Opinion of the United
States Court of Appeals Judge Stapleton The district court
ordered summary judgement in favor of the defendants in this
copyright infringement suit on December 17th 1996 Defense
counsel advised the court on December 31st, 1996, that plaintiff
would be filing a motion for reconsideration under rule 59 (e)
and asked for an extension of the time to do so. The district
court granted an extension untill January 14th, 1997.
Plaintiffs' Rule 59 (e) motion was not filed untill January
21st, 1997. That motion was denied on August 20th, 1997. The
notice of appeal was filed on September 8th, 1997 over nine
months from the entry of a final judgement. The timely filed
rule 59 (e) motion tolls the time for taking an appeal during
the time the motion is pending and unresolved. An untimely filed
rule 59 (e) motion does not toll the time for takin an appeal.
Plaintiff had ten days from the entry of summary judgement to
file his rule 59 (e) motion for reconsideration. Rule 6 (b)
provided that this period could not be extended by the district
court. Excluding weekends and Christmas, the period expired on
December 31st, 1996. As we have noted no rule 59 (e) motion was
filed on or before December 31st, 1996. When a court grants an
unauthorized extension and a party justifiably relies on it by
filing during the extended period, under very limited
circumstances, the filing may be treated as timely even when the
effect is to confer upon the court of appeals jurisdiction that
it would not otherwise have. See [Kraus vs Conrail] 899 F.2d
1360 (3rd Cir. 1990). Here, however, plaintiff's Rule 59 (e)
motion was not filed during the unauthorized extension. It was
not filed until a week later. It follows that, even giving
effect to the purported extension, there was never a timely
filed Rule 59 (e) motion and no tolling ocurred. This appeal
will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. signed Judge
Stapleton.
On July 12, 1999 Dylan's law firm Hecker Brown Sherry & Johnson
filed a motion for an order vacating the Court's June 30, 1998
Order for Administrative termination of the matter and reopen
this matter for adjudication of defendants' Motion for Award of
Attorneys' Fees and Sanctions against James Damiano and Steven
M. Kramer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.P.11,28 U.S.C. 1927 and 17
U.S.C. 505. This motion is returnable August 6th, 1999. On July
20th 1999 Judge Simandle granted defendants motion to reopen
their motion for award for attorney's fees.
November 29th, 1999 James Damiano was found guitly contempt by
Judge Simandle of violating Judge Joel B. Rosen's order for
confidentiality and ordered to pay defendants attorney's fees or
their motion to hold James damiano in contempt for diseminating
discovery materials designated as confidential on the internet.
The deposition schedule for James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan is
complete. with the exception of Mikie Harris and Bob Dylan.

Plaintiff is seeking an attorney or law firm to refile the law
suit. All discovery is complete and in chronologically displayed
binders with exhibit numbers..
Attorney' s may request through e-mail the secured attorney site
which contains the depositions which have been deleted from this
website.
James Can be contacted at 732-262-0365, by Toll free Voicemail:
1-888-Excite2, ext. 291-331-2391or by the e-mail address below:
James_...@excite.com


Racism
a diversion of reality
that
the worst
segregation
in the world today
Is not between
Black or white men
Muslims or Christians
But
between the Rich
and the
poor.

For James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan infringement update
Click on link below

see also http://_dylan_.homestead.com/

For litigation update page go to link below:
http://www.themusicvine.com/xi/citizen/home/users.rage?
user=JAGGAR_VIRT34385
Dear Attorney:
James Damiano is from the Morristown area: He has been
involved in a lawsuit with Bob Dylan for over 4 years and there
has been 3 million dollars spent on this litigation. After
all this and also sixty hours of depositions defendants have not
filed a counter-suit.

His previous attorney "Steven M. Kramer" was sanctioned 38
times, disbared for ethics violations in other law suits, and
continues to practice law in California.

James recently learned that Mr. Kramer represented an affiliate
company of Sony / CBS records documenting Mr. Kramer's
conflict, which Steven M. Kramer never revealed to James.
Evidence of this conflict have been published in the
Philadelphia Enquirer.

Kramer did a fabulous job litigating Mr. Damiano's law suit,
however he refused to provide the most revealing and
incriminating evidence to Judge Simandle.

The website address I have sent you is by no means a
comprehensive account of the incriminating evidence he has
against Sony, CBS Records and Bob Dylan.

He has extensive incriminating evidence, blatant admissions of
guilt by defendants on sworn video taped depositions, etc.

The website provides a comparative analysis of a song Bob Dylan
released titled "Dignity" and James Damiano's song "Steel
Guitars". "Dignity" was nominated for a grammy.

Dignity bridged Dylan's career for a span of six years, when his
fans were asking why hasn't Dylan released a song in six and a
half yeras.

In a span of six and a half years from 1990 to 1997 Bob Dylan
released only one newly written original song titled "Digntiy"
All other songs released by Dylan during that period of time
were songs taken from songs in the public domain, traditional
folk songs and previously released Bob Dylan songs.

Should you lay out the albums on the table year by year you can
see for yourself that the credits reveal "produced or arranged
by Bob Dylan" (not written by Dylan).

When interviewed by the New York Times and asked the , reason why
he had not released a song in six and a half years Dylan
replied that the answer was simple. He did not release new
material because of the bootleg situatuion.

Dylan in a New York Times interview said that he was afraid
someone would steal the songs.

A more extensive account of plaintiff's long documented
association with CBS/ Sony and Dylan may be read at Mr.
Damiano's website at the url link supplied below. I believe you
will find it most interesting. The site starts out with an
account of his first contact with CBS Records through his
audiditon with John Hammond Sr. and follows through a 17 year
documented history of his associtation with CBS Records and
Dylan up and through the law suit.

The attachment contained herein is a comparative analysis of a
song Bob Dylan released titled "Dignity" and James Damiano's
song "Steel Guitars". "Dignity" was nominated for a grammy. Mr.
Dylan also infringed upon other material I wrote.

James has been found in contempt for diseminating discovery
materials on the internet. The reason he diseminated the
material, is that he his previous attorney Steven M. Kramer was
not producing to the court vital information which was
incriminating to the defendants.

After Mr. Kramer got disbared James submitted the information on
a pro se basis yet Judge Simandle refused to docket Mr.
Damiano's motions.

Although Defendants filed the motion to hold Mr. Damiano in
contempt the did not contest the allegations cited in Mr.
Damiano's website.

You can also see James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan infringement update
at the link below

http://dylan_damiano_litigation.homestead.com/index.html


Dear Attorney:
James Damiano is from the Morristown area: He has been
involved in a lawsuit with Bob Dylan for over 4 years and there
has been 3 million dollars spent on this litigation. After
all this and also sixty hours of depositions defendants have not
filed a counter-suit.

His previous attorney "Steven M. Kramer" was sanctioned 38
times, disbared for ethics violations in other law suits, and
continues to practice law in California.

James recently learned that Mr. Kramer represented an affiliate
company of Sony / CBS records documenting Mr. Kramer's
conflict, which Steven M. Kramer never revealed to James.
Evidence of this conflict have been published in the
Philadelphia Enquirer.

Kramer did a fabulous job litigating Mr. Damiano's law suit,
however he refused to provide the most revealing and
incriminating evidence to Judge Simandle.

The website address I have sent you is by no means a
comprehensive account of the incriminating evidence he has
against Sony, CBS Records and Bob Dylan.

He has extensive incriminating evidence, blatant admissions of
guilt by defendants on sworn video taped depositions, etc.

The website provides a comparative analysis of a song Bob Dylan
released titled "Dignity" and James Damiano's song "Steel
Guitars". "Dignity" was nominated for a grammy.

Dignity bridged Dylan's career for a span of six years, when his
fans were asking why hasn't Dylan released a song in six and a
half yeras.

In a span of six and a half years from 1990 to 1997 Bob Dylan
released only one newly written original song titled "Digntiy"
All other songs released by Dylan during that period of time
were songs taken from songs in the public domain, traditional
folk songs and previously released Bob Dylan songs.

Should you lay out the albums on the table year by year you can
see for yourself that the credits reveal "produced or arranged
by Bob Dylan" (not written by Dylan).

When interviewed by the New York Times and asked the reason why
he had not released a song in six and a half years Dylan
replied that the answer was simple. He did not release new
material because of the bootleg situatuion.

Dylan in a New York Times interview said that he was afraid
someone would steal the songs.

A more extensive account of plaintiff's long documented
association with CBS/ Sony and Dylan may be read at Mr.
Damiano's website at the url link supplied below. I believe you
will find it most interesting. The site starts out with an
account of his first contact with CBS Records through his
audiditon with John Hammond Sr. and follows through a 17 year
documented history of his associtation with CBS Records and
Dylan up and through the law suit.

The attachment contained herein is a comparative analysis of a
song Bob Dylan released titled "Dignity" and James Damiano's
song "Steel Guitars". "Dignity" was nominated for a grammy. Mr.
Dylan also infringed upon other material I wrote.

James has been found in contempt for diseminating discovery
materials on the internet. The reason he diseminated the
material, is that he his previous attorney Steven M. Kramer was
not producing to the court vital information which was
incriminating to the defendants.

After Mr. Kramer got disbared James submitted the information on
a pro se basis yet Judge Simandle refused to docket Mr.
Damiano's motions.

Although Defendants filed the motion to hold Mr. Damiano in
contempt the did not contest the allegations cited in Mr.
Damiano's website.

You can also see James Damiano vs. Bob Dylan infringement update
at the link below

http://dylan_damiano_litigation.homestead.com/index.html


acl...@aol.com <acl...@aol.com>

e.g. <1234567...@deja.com>

Wolfds

unread,
Mar 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/9/00
to
King of the frivolous lawsuits, James Damiano, offered the following gem:

>I can see your not a real judge! James
>

Not as clearly as we can see that *you're* not a real songwriter! Have you no
shame? No dignity?

Dave

Robert Onthis

unread,
Mar 9, 2000, 3:00:00 AM3/9/00
to
You notice he only signed the ones with talent? Sounds like sour grapes to
me...

virtuefilms1

unread,
Oct 16, 2021, 11:56:11 PM10/16/21
to
On Thursday, March 9, 2000 at 3:00:00 AM UTC-5, Robert Onthis wrote:
> You notice he only signed the ones with talent? Sounds like sour grapes to
> me...

virtuefilms1

unread,
Nov 27, 2021, 11:55:21 PM11/27/21
to
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages