RIAA Sues Homeless Man 245
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In a Manhattan case, Warner v. Berry, the RIAA sued a man who lives in a homeless shelter, leaving a copy of the summons and complaint not at the homeless shelter, but at an apartment the man had occupied in better times, and had long since vacated. The RIAA's lawyers were threatened with sanctions by the Magistrate Judge in the case, for making misleading representations to the Court which the Magistrate felt were intentional. The District Judge, however, disagreed with imposing sanctions, giving the RIAA's lawyers 'as officers of the Court the benefit of the doubt,' and instead concluded — in his 6-page opinion (PDF) — that the RIAA's lawyers were just being 'sloppy' and had not made the misstatements for an improper purpose.'"
Explanations? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:WTF!?!?!? (Score:5, Interesting)
The RIAA gets dumber by the day... (Score:5, Interesting)
1) RIAA physically finds homeless man to sue. Serves with papers.
2) RIAA extorts (er, "offers settlement") to homeless man.
3) Homeless man appears in court for trial, maybe even with pro-bono attorney. (Free heat, maybe even free food. Could judge offer temporary housing--like sequestering a jury???)
4) Homeless man loses case big time, owing hundreds of thousands of $$$.
5) Homeless man declares bankrupcy.
6) Homeless man sues RIAA for mental stress.
Seriously, under what circumstance could the RIAA win? Bragging rights?
Re:You know the lawyers at RIAA are insane... (Score:4, Interesting)
The Onion may have some of the best satirists around right now, but that doesn't make their job any easier. Not with our current crop of politicians and corporate managers that are competing to outdo the Onion's writers with stories like this.
And it seems that even some judges are taking part in the competition
Re:The sanction actually is in the ruling... (Score:5, Interesting)
Further, if thee lawyers bring another flimsy case forward, a review of precedent can show the same lawyer bringing frivolous cases forward in the past and eventually that will lead to harsher punishments by the courts.
And if nothing else, if the lawyer goes for a job with a new firm, then a review of that lawyer's previous cases will show that a judge had it entered into the court record that he/she was incompetent.
Re:I'm amazed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And again... (Score:3, Interesting)
Link in parent is malicious. Do not click.
Re:I'm amazed (Score:4, Interesting)
As much as I dont like the RIAA and the rest, the real problem is tort legislation in America, not the lawyers who abuse it or make an honest mistake. Change torts, change everything. These guys shouldnt be allowed to sue like this without some kind of real damages threshold, and in case of IP law they should pay the court if they lose.