p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA owes Oklahoma mum
p2pnet.net News:- Big Music’s RIAA owes money to Oklahoma mother Debbie Foster, but we hope she’s not holding her breath while she waits for them to pay.
Foster trounced Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG, the Big Four Organized Music cartel members when she demanded a summary judgment dismissing their case against her.
In the manner of all bullies, the Big Four’s RIAA ran for the hills, leaving her eligible for certain costs.
Now, all Foster has to do is force the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) to pay her what she’s due, and with that in mind she’s filed a motion for attorney’s fees.
“Essentially, its uniform practice has been to sue people based on the most tenuous thinking: they sue a person who paid for an internet access account which the RIAA investigators, through a ’secret’ and ‘proprietary’ method, claim to have linked to a dynamic IP address, which a subpoenaed ISP has identified as being paid for by a certain ‘John Doe’ defendant,” says Recording Industry vs The People’s Ray Beckerman.
“They then sue that person, without regard to whether that person did or didn’t do anything.”
The RIAA, “acted in bad faith in bringing the lawsuit against Debbie Foster,” says her lawyer, Marilyn D. Barringer-Thomson.
“First, prior to commencement of this action, plaintiffs knew that Debbie Foster did not engage in any infringing conduct and plaintiffs could not have been motivated to file this action to obtain an injunction against Debbie Foster.
“Second, Debbie Foster informed plaintiffs very early on that she had no knowledge of any infringement and requested specific details of the alleged infringement … plaintiffs refused to dismiss her with prejudice insisting instead that they were entitled to recover sums from her. Plaintiffs were not motivated to file and maintain this lawsuit to recover any profits or any fair and reasonable multiple thereof.
“Finally, the true motivation for the filing of the instant suit can be gleaned from the evidence in the District Court file. Thus rather than pursuing resolution of a fairly minor dispute in good faith, the record suggests that plaintiffs and their counsel filed and maintained this suit in an attempt to extract a significant payment from perceived ‘deep pocket’ defendant Debbie Foster (and in an attempt to garner publicity for plaintiffs and their lawyers).”
Meanwhile, New York entertainment attorney Steve Gordon, formerly in house counsel at SONY and the author “The Future of the Music Business”, had this comment on Capitol v. Foster, says Beckerman:
“This case demonstrates weakness in RIAA’s cases in general. If they cannot back up their claims of infringement with legally required evidence, this could affect all their cases and encourage more defendants to fight back - especially if, as in this case, the court awards attorneys fees for the defendant.”
Also See:
already trounced - Oklahoma Mum takes on RIAA, July 13, 2006
Beckerman - Deborah Foster Asks Court to Assess Attorneys Fees Against RIAA in Oklahoma, August 8, 2006
p2pnet newsfeeds for your site.
rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss
Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
February 8th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
So I’m a divorced mom, and I’m sued by the RIAA for something I haven’t done and didn’t even know existed until now. Of course I’m innocent, but the thing is–I have young teen children…. I make sure they eat properly, wear clean clothes, stay healthy, and of course, have computers so they can do their homework. Suddenly I’ve introduced Limewire and KazaA into their bedrooms without knowing it, and of course, being kids, they don’t know they just infringed copyright.
Do I pay up or let my kids be sued–in which case, I’m paying anyway, right? And if I have more than one child, there could be more than one lawsuit of course.
So I do the math, and I pay up. Move on. Next family.
I don’t feel good about it. I’m sorry for letting down the cause. I’ll call those bastards tomorrow and ask them where I send my check.