Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums :: RIAA ordered to pay a defendant's legal fees

Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums https://mail.karaokescene.net/forums/

RIAA ordered to pay a defendant's legal fees https://mail.karaokescene.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=10308	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Tigrr27 [ Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:15 pm ]
Post subject:	RIAA ordered to pay a defendant's legal fees
Back in November 2004 in one of RIAA's rounds of lawsuits, one of those targeted was Deborah Foster, where the RIAA claimed it had evidence that her IP address was involved in illegal file sharing. When she repetitively claimed she had no knowledge of this activity, the RIAA went decided to go after her daughter Amanda also and won a default judgment against her, since she failed to defend herself. It was not until last July that the U.S. District Judge in Oklahoma City dismissed the RIAA's claims against Deborah. Once her case was dismissed, the EFF along with the American Association of Law Libraries, the ACLU and Public Citizen filed a brief with an Oklahoma district court urging the judge to award her attorney fees. The EFF claims the RIAA forces many innocent Americans through the expensive emotionally draining process to clear their names and that many falsely accused people often settle, as the RIAA carefully chooses its settlement fee to effectively bully people into settling, since it is substantially lower than the legal fees to fight the case. In this case, the judge found her eligible for attorney fees and the RIAA called for further proceedings to determine the amount she was eligible for. She initially requested $105,680.75, but after a lengthy detailed analysis of her itemized expenses and other billing materials, she was found to be eligible for $68,685.23. Up until this, the RIAA has never been ordered to pay attorneys' fees despite the many 1,000's of lawsuits filed each year; many of whom are innocent people that gave up and just settled.

Author:	Tigrr27 [ Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:22 am ]
Post subject:	Re: RIAA ordered to pay a defendant's legal fees
a little more info on this topic... In what appears to be the first such occurrence, the recording industry must foot nearly $70,000 in legal bills incurred by an Oklahoma woman whom it unsuccessfully accused of "vicariously" aiding copyright infringement. Until Monday's ruling in this case, called Capitol v. Foster, the Recording Industry Association of America had never been ordered to pay attorneys' fees as part of its ongoing battle against allegedly illicit file swapping, according to attorney Ray Beckerman, who has been tracking such suits at the blog Recording Industry vs The People. The RIAA, for its part, said in a statement sent to CNET News.com Tuesday: "We respectfully believe that this ruling is in error and is an isolated occurrence." Lawsuit targets have been unsuccessful in recovering such fees in at least five other recent cases. The RIAA's suit against Deborah Foster began in November 2004, when it claimed evidence that an IP address associated with her Internet service provider account was engaging in illegal file sharing. Foster repeatedly asserted she had no knowledge of such activity, and in 2005, the RIAA expanded its complaint to include her adult daughter, Amanda. Because Amanda failed to defend herself against the complaint, the RIAA won a judgment against her by default. The RIAA continued to pursue its claims against Deborah Foster until U.S. District Judge Lee West in Oklahoma City dismissed them last July. The judge went on to find Foster was eligible for attorneys fees, but the RIAA called for further proceedings to determine the amount. Foster requested $105,680.75, but the judge concluded in a lengthy 14-page analysis of her itemized expenses and other billing materials that she was eligible only for $68,685.23. The case was only one of thousands of lawsuits filed against university students, teenagers and grandmothers by the recording industry in its multiyear campaign against peer-to-peer file sharing. But Foster's quest for attorneys fees after her case was dismissed drew a friend-of-the-court brief from advocacy groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union and Public Citizen. The groups argued that the RIAA has effectively bullied innocent parties into settling by offering "a carefully chosen sum that is substantially smaller than the legal fees required to fight the accusations." The organization has also been known to get the identity of its targets wrong in the past. "A fee award would encourage innocent accused infringers to stand up and fight back against bogus RIAA claims, deter the RIAA from continuing to prosecute meritless suits that harass defendants it knows or reasonably should know are innocent, and further the purposes of the Copyright Act by reaffirming the appropriate limits of a copyright owner's exclusive rights," they wrote. The RIAA on Tuesday defended its handling of the Foster case. "Our interest in these cases is enforcing the rights of the record companies and artists, while fostering an online environment where the legal marketplace can flourish and the music industry can invest in the new bands of tomorrow," the group said in a statement. "In the handful of cases where the person engaging in the illegal activity in the household is not the person responsible for the ISP account, we look to gather the facts quickly and do our best to identify the appropriate defendant." Link for reference: http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9745831-7.html

Author:	Tigrr27 [ Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:48 am ]
Post subject:	Re: European File-Sharers May Find Identities Safe
European file-sharers - or at least those residing in the European Union - are on the cusp of a major victory against the powers that be. Advocate General Juliane Kokott has submitted her option to the European Court of Justice that Spanish copyright traffic cop Promusicae is not entitled to the identities of alleged P2P pirates. Promisicae has been pursing alleged uploaders using the Kazaa P2P platform, meanwhile attempting to force the Spanish ISP Telefonica to divulge their identities. Telephonica refused to divulge their personal information, and now it appears their resistance has paid off. Advocate General Juliane Kokott's recommendation to the European Court of Justice is non-binding, however it carries substantial weight. In fact, an overwhelming majority of decisions made by the European Court follow the recommendations of the Advocate General. In this case, Juliane Kokott advised that because this was a civil matter, and not criminal, it would be consistent with European law that Promusicae could not obtain the identities of the alleged infringers. If the European Court of Justice follows Kokott's recommendation, it could have European Union-wide implications for copyright authorities. Organizations such as Promusicae could find their ability to pursue alleged file-sharers severely hampered, considering that a majority of these cases fall under civil jurisdiction.

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/