Judge In RIAA v. Mom Case Sees The Issues
from the proof? dept
Recently, the story of the woman fighting the RIAA over the lawsuit filed against her for file sharing has been getting plenty of attention. When we originally wrote about it, we pointed out many of the issues suggesting that anyone who fights the RIAA probably has a strong case, since the RIAA has to prove a lot to show that the person they filed the suit against is actually guilty. However, most people settle because it's far cheaper than actually going to court (and risking a loss). The discussion about the case has grown a lot in the past few weeks and Copyfight points to Mike Godwin's analysis where he wonders why the RIAA would ever sue in situations where the case wasn't completely solid. It's just going to make them look bad. He also points to the initial transcript from the first court appearance by the woman, Patricia Santangelo, pointing out how the judge snapped at the RIAA's lawyer for suggesting that the case could just be "handled" by the RIAA's "settlement" or "conference center." Actually, the more interesting part of the transcript comes earlier, when the judge (after noting her fear that her kids would download something and get her sued) says: "Well, I think it would be a really good idea for you to get a lawyer, because I would love to see a mom fighting one of these." Between all these quotes, it seems that the judge sees that the RIAA is simply bullying people into settling, rather than making sure they have real cases. As Copyfight implies, the judge is making it clear to the RIAA that this is a court case and not an education campaign, as the RIAA likes to think of it. While it would be great if this case does go to court, all this publicity is upping the ante for the RIAA to push for a settlement as quickly as possible. The cost of them losing this case would be tremendous -- and they absolutely could lose. It wouldn't be surprising if they cut and ran, and maybe gave the woman some free music to get her to quiet down. Hopefully, she won't accept that.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Has this been continued?
what has happened after this?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Has this been continued?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
riaa vs woman
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Background Documents and Transcript
Once the judge in the case suggested Santangelo hire a lawyer to help her case, she tapped New York's Morlan Ty Rogers, who quickly suspected that the case might be the first one in which a defendant could fight the RIAA, and maybe even win... Rogers, who recently filed a motion to dismiss the complaint against Santangelo... U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon is expected to issue a judgement in the Santangelo case soon.VH1
Text transcript of a preliminary conference between a lawyerless Santangelo, the RIAA lawyer, and the judge. thedigitalmusicweblog
A blog devoted to the RIAA's lawsuits of intimidation brought against ordinary working people... We are lawyers in New York City. Recording Industry vs The People
[ link to this | view in thread ]
who archived those ads?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: who archived those ads?
BTW the blog that I mentioned in my first reply (last link) looks like being essential reading.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: who archived those ads?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: who archived those ads?
Also, had the followup where a record exec pointed out that the ads actually were libelous against the kids by saying they were "convicted" of stealing music, when that wasn't the case at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not just the RIAA
Bottom line is to stick it out if you can- they will almost always fold.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
cookies
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]