RIAA Trying To Avoid a Jury Trial

Joe Elliot writes "Faced with a jury trial set to begin on October 1, the RIAA has filed a motion for summary adjudication of specific facts: that the RIAA owns the copyrights to the songs in a file-sharing case; that the registration is proper; and that the defendant wasn't authorized to copy or distribute the recordings. If the judge rules in their favor, Ars notes that it may turn into a Novell v SCO situation where the only thing left to be decided are the damages. There are some significant problems with the copyright registrations — they don't match up. 'Thomas argues that since she lacks the financial means to conduct a thorough examination of the ownership history (e.g., track the ownership of "Hysteria" from Mercury to UMG) for the songs she is accused of infringing the copyright to, her only opportunity to determine their true ownership is either via discovery or cross-examination at trial.' Ars also notes that the RIAA's biggest fear is of losing a case. 'A loss at trial would be catastrophic for the RIAA. It would give other defense attorneys a winning template while exposing the weaknesses of the RIAA's arguments. It would also prove costly from a financial standpoint, as the RIAA would have to foot the legal expenses for both itself and the defendant. Most of all, it would set an unwelcomed precedent: over 20,000 lawsuits filed and the RIAA loses the first one to go to a jury.'"

Re:Good story

[Anonymous Coward]

And the award for understatement of the year goes to...

It would give other defense attorneys a winning template while exposing the weaknesses of the RIAA's arguments. It would also prove costly from a financial standpoint, as the RIAA would have to foot the legal expenses for both itself and the defendant.

Hmm, destruction of your whole business model, financially costly? Really?

Just for the record, I am too...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just so everyone knows... I, too, am trying to avoid a jury trial. Heck, I'm trying to avoid ANY trial. Heck, I'm on the run from the police. Heck, I haven't done anything and I'm on the run. That is just how fscked up the justice system is.... I'm scared and I haven't done anything wrong.

Jury trials are both good and bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Jury trials are good if RIAA is subject to them

Jury trials are bad if IBM is subject to them

Hence it is proven that jury trials are both good and bad.

Re:Good story

[Andrewkov]

Yeah, I can imagine how this would go:

Judge: Now we will hear comments from the jurors..
Juror #7: (jumps to feet) FIRST POST!!!!
Juror #2: Powned!
Juror #5: Common guys, -1, off topic.
Juror #12: In Soviet Russia, first post owns you!
Juror #2 snickers ...

Some interesting side notes...

[Bonewalker]

List of songs from the article:

• "Appetite for Destruction"
• "The Comfort Zone"
• "Control"
• "Frontiers"
• "Let it Loose"
• "Get a Grip"
• "Hysteria"
• "If You See Him"

Based on the titles, if these aren't RIAA anthem songs, I don't know what would be. No wonder they want to get her!

Also... A handful of defendants have managed to be exonerated, most notably Debbie Foster, Patricia Santangelo, and Tanya Andersen--who is now suing the RIAA for malicious prosecution. Why are all the women getting off? If Jammie Thomas wins, there's another one! I am pretty sure men are being discriminated against...or are only women actually fighting the RIAA?

Re:Just for the record, I am too...

[vux984]

Pretty much.

Its a "You did $500 in unfair and illegal damages to us, an association of mega-corporations (and that's a high estimate). So we're going after you for $75,000 in unfair but legal damages to you, and that's not counting the stress, lost time at work, and other intangibles."

Re:Good story

[Brownstar]

The story was linked to in a Slashdot article. Of course it's a good story, otherwise it wouldn't get past the editors and make it to the frontpage.

So pointing it out is redundant....

(and yes this is probably a troll, or flamebait. Possible Funny)