New Attorneys Fee Decision Against RIAA

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA has gotten slammed again, this time in Oregon, as the Magistrate Judge in Atlantic v. Andersen has ruled that Tanya Andersen's motion for attorneys fees should be granted. The Magistrate, in his 15-page decision, noted that, despite extensive pretrial discovery proceedings, 'when plaintiffs dismissed their claims in June 2007, they apparently had no more material evidence to support their claims than they did when they first contacted defendant in February 2005.....' and concluded that 'Copyright holders generally, and these plaintiffs specifically, should be deterred from prosecuting infringement claims as plaintiffs did in this case.' This is the same case in which (a) the RIAA insisted on interrogating Ms. Andersen's 10-year-old girl at a face-to-face deposition, (b) the defendant filed RICO counterclaims against the record companies, and (c) the defendant recently converted her RICO case into a class action"

Re:Precedent!

[MarkRose]

There are a lot of precedents being set against the RIAA lately, and it leads me to believe that maybe... just maybe... there's light at the end of this tunnel.

Tunnel indeed. Hopefully this legal diariaa will have this shit cleared out of the tubes quickly and regularity can be restored.

Hold It!

[Phoenix Wright]

maybe... just maybe... there's light at the end of this tunnel.

Are you sure that's not the light from an oncoming train? I hope you're right. What are we doing in this tunnel anyway?

Re:Hold It!

[nrgy]

I don't know why we are in a tunnel but it sure does smell like ASS in here.

Legal Advice from Slashdot

[Nymz]

Unless the recipient seeks independent legal advice from someone who's actually aware of these cases before settling, the short answer is "Not a lot".

Serves them right. If they had been reading Slashdot everyday, then they would have known better :-)

Re:One step closer...

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Although I shouldn't respond to you - I will. This is nothing about Americans not paying their way. This is about cases being brought to court with inadequate evidence, or simply no significant evidence at all, in a hope that the case will either be settled by the defendants simply to avoid the expense of the case - but not as an admission of their guilt - or as a way of frightening others. If they had adequate evidence then the case should be in court, but they haven't.

Well you're only saying that because you actually RTFA, as opposed to the ignoramus -- probably in the employ of the RIAA -- to whom you were responding.

Re:One step closer...

[DustyShadow]

Well then here you go my friend: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgP-23AQROo [youtube.com]

instant karma got 'em

[scottsk]

Gotta love the irony ... the RIAA members spent a couple of decades pumping out filthy rap trash as mainstream "entertainment" which encouraged people to break the law in more ways than I ever thought possible. Now, when they need it the most, they can't get anyone to obey the law! Instant karma got 'em!

Re:One step closer...

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Does the RIAA pay their shills well? Where do you apply?

I doubt they pay well. Where would they get the money from? The big 4 record companies' mounting losses?

But if you really want the job I think you should send your application to their attorneys, who seem to be the ones running the show.