RIAA Promises Not To Incorrectly Sue Woman A Second Time If It Doesn't Have To Pay Her Legal Fees

from the sorry-about-that dept

Thu, Mar 29th 2007 12:43am — Mike Masnick

It seems like the RIAA is increasingly having to tuck its tail between its legs and run and hide, as more of the people they're suing are fighting back (and winning). While some have succeeded in getting the RIAA to pay their legal fees, the RIAA is still fighting against that. In one case, the recording industry lawyers are now promising to a judge that they absolutely won't sue a woman again on the same claim, so long as they don't have to pay her legal fees for wrongly suing her in the first place. It's not clear what kind of bargain that is, or why a judge should go for it. If they made a mistake in suing the woman, they should pay her legal fees and promise not to sue her again on the same claim.

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

39 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Paul, 29 Mar 2007 @ 2:35am

RIAA Promises Not To Incorrectly Sue Woman A Secon
Just when you think you've heard everything...

I've thought about what would happen if they came a knocking on my door. Screw em, send me to jail. Let's every single one of us go to jail and take up what little space is left. I think I could stand up for myself and fight rather well, but, why? Why not just get everyone together on this issue and stand up as one against the RIAA.
Hey my son downloads on my computer as well, want to take him away too. Oh wait, so has my wife. Think we would get a cell together? Hope not... Bubba just might be a welcomed sight. My son is now in training, 1 2 3 drop the soap, 1 2 3 drop the soap... Good boy, keep up the great work.
Look, I serve my country for 20 years and retired. I'm 47 and I work hard. I can't afford $3000.00 nor do I have it. So bag me and make my family suffer. Thanks Judges of America, maybe you can help us stand up too.
Here's another thought too. Do you honestly believe that out there in the music world there is not one artist, band member, back up, or management person who isn't downloading illegal copy righted material. Find those and bring them in front of the judge, wouldn't that be a shot in the heart of the RIAA.

Hey everyone, have a great day....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul J Pappas, 29 Mar 2007 @ 2:56am

RIAA Promises Not To Incorrectly Sue Woman Again
Oh, I'm sorry. What was the question again? Get the feeling I can't stand the RIAA? In regard to the article, They should pay her fee's and not be allowed to try her again.

While they're at it, ask the RIAA if their face hurts when they say stupid shit.

Again, everyone have a great day... I know I will.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Poster (profile), 29 Mar 2007 @ 3:02am

New Motto
The RIAA: We Don't Have A Damned Clue What We're Doing Anymore
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bignumone, 29 Mar 2007 @ 3:16am

This is just silly
Not only do I think they should pay her legal fees and not sue her again, but pay the court costs and pay her for her time spent in court and preparation (The greater of $10/hour or her current wage).
We are not talking about a simple misunderstanding but a shot gun approach to law. This seems to be happening enough that a prescedent should be set. Remember, they are using tax-payer funded resources and taking up people's time.
It just isn't right!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
icepick314, 29 Mar 2007 @ 3:56am

cut bait and scram.....
RIAA KNOWS they don't have a chance to win so they want to cut loss and end this but longer they drag this, more they'll pay at the end...

just end the case and pay the lawyer's fee before it goes even higher...

i'm sure the defendant's lawyer is smiling EVERYDAY as the fees go higher and higher everday with such an easy case...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
duder, 29 Mar 2007 @ 4:41am

Lawyers
Whatever happens the lawyers always win
[ link to this | view in thread ]
duder, 29 Mar 2007 @ 4:48am

Lawyers
Whatever happens the lawyers always win
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sanguine Dream, 29 Mar 2007 @ 4:53am

Re: Lawyers
That is the problem these days. It's not about lawyers on two sides of a case with each trying to prove the other wrong anymore. It's about trying to get paid. Having to pay lawyers such outrageous fees is why people go for such huge settlements in court these. Won a $30mil settlement? The firm that did your case will get at least $10mil off the top. And after taxes and legal fees you are lucky if you walk away with 7-10mil.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You never know, 29 Mar 2007 @ 4:58am

This is a bit of an ominous statement. “Promises Not To Incorrectly Sue Woman A Second Time”. Does this mean that they plan to sue every body again and again, or go back and sue every one who settled? Does anyone else feel a bit like a cash cow?
-moooooooooooooooooo-
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Confused, 29 Mar 2007 @ 5:54am

Technicality?
So if they promise not to sue her again for downloading, say, song "XYZ" ... what's to stop them from going after her tomorrow for downloading song "123"???

Something tells me they would do it too...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SomePerson, 29 Mar 2007 @ 6:13am

Re: Technicality?
---[ So if they promise not to sue her again for downloading, say, song "XYZ" ... what's to stop them from going after her tomorrow for downloading song "123"???
Something tells me they would do it too...]-----

Of course they would. This is the "MAFIAA" we're talking about... They'll do anything in their power to treat all their "customers" like criminals and piss everyone off so much, in 5 years, no one will be buying music anymore. But I guess that's what they want. Hey MAFIAA...Keep pissing us off and soon you won't be able to afford those silly lawsuits. I can't wait for that day to come.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2007 @ 6:24am

This is almost as bad as getting parking tickets for parking on the street near where I work. All the available street parking reasonably close is 2-hour parking, but my company's parking lot isn't nearly big enough for all its employees, nor is there any room to expand it. There is no logical reason to make it 2-hour parking, except that they know it will be a cash cow due to people working downtown being forced to park there during work hours.

It's the same thing with the RIAA. It's pretty obvious that all they're doing is trying to hand out parking tickets and rake in the big bucks from honest people. You know, I think there should be some sort of quota limit or something, where a company can only file so many lawsuits per year, like 20 or so. That'd fix 'em.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lar3ry, 29 Mar 2007 @ 6:33am

Why can't we be friends?
That reminds me of a song by War...

"I know you're working for the RIAA,
they wouldn't have you in the Mafia."

(OK, maybe I changed a word...)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DeTOX, 29 Mar 2007 @ 6:48am

Kill the RIAA
I hope this woman slams them and has them pay every bit of her fees plus time for lost wages and even better for emotional distress. Hmm I'd say that might be worth 1mil or more total. These people have ran wild long enough, oh yeah maybe they don't want to pay because they claim they are a not for profit org. Well I don't know of any not for profit trying to strike up deals with people and have them pay. If they have had people pay up for their accusations where does that money go, I bet not to any artist. Fuck'em. The internet will take them down. Don't fuck with the internet Mafia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA, 29 Mar 2007 @ 7:20am

Cease and Desist
Dear Lar3ry,
You are to immediately stop using our lyrics. You are clearly violating our IP.

Furthermore, we are suing you for $250,000. Since we are nice people, we'll let you settle this for a mere $3,000.

Your's truly,
RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
collegemom, 29 Mar 2007 @ 7:23am

Re: RIAA Promises Not To Incorrectly Sue Woman A S
you took the words out of my mouth and made me smile!

they can go....well...you know ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
cb, 29 Mar 2007 @ 7:32am

Correction: It's the MaRIAA not the Mafia. The Mafia isn't that stupid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul, 29 Mar 2007 @ 7:57am

Re: RIAA Promises Not To Incorrectly Sue Woman A S
And which words was that collegemom.

Drop me a line at navyguy0302@hotmail.com

Tell me what you think. Oh no an internet boo boo... I can't wait to see my e-mail get flooded...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
charlie campbell, 29 Mar 2007 @ 8:02am

riia
When will these people give up and find a life. As a musician myself, I find it embarrassing that the riaa claims it protects the artist. It only lines their pockets.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Todd, 29 Mar 2007 @ 8:09am

This is just like them. So, what? If they have to pay, they are going to sue her again?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2007 @ 8:30am

ATTN Paul: (first poster)

If you don't want to go to jail, don't steal. Just because it's not a physical CD doesn't mean that the same time and energy was put into making those MP3's you download as the plastic CD you wouldn't walk of a record store with under your coat.

I'm sure there IS a band member somewhere that doesn't pirate illegal music...how do I know this? Because I don't pirate and I'm in a band.

Stop whining. Sure the RIAA has a very very bad business plan but don't hate them because they're against illegally downloading music.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MadJo (profile), 29 Mar 2007 @ 8:32am

Double Jeopardy?
Isn't this covered by double jeopardy.
You can't get sued a second time for the same offense? Or am I mistaken?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SomePerson, 29 Mar 2007 @ 9:13am

Re:
Stop whining. Sure the RIAA has a very very bad business plan but don't hate them because they're against illegally downloading music.

Ahh I see the anonymous RIAA employee has decided to chime in, once again. Go fuck yourself, RIAA coward.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paul, 29 Mar 2007 @ 9:19am

Re: Anonymous Coward
I never said I didn't want to go to jail. I said go ahead and put me in jail moron. Although you may not download illegal music I'm sure that for each one of you who don't there is one who does.

Technically speaking, if I can copy music which is broadcast over the radio to a tape and share it with a friend what is the real difference. The fact that laws are out dated in regard to technical advances. If you want to put an end to the IRAA then lets work to find a way to bring everyone together on this issue just as non-smokers have to gain their rights to a smoke free environment and stop them. The power is with the people and numbers, something most have forgotten.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ASCAP, 29 Mar 2007 @ 9:23am

Dear RIAA (above)
Dear RIAA-
You our out of your jurisdiciton. You do not own the rights to any lyrics. You are there to protect the copyrights of recorded works. Lar3ry's singing the cover of WAR's 'why can't we be friends' in no way violates any of your protection rights, and Lar3ry has the right to sue you for harassment.

However, we have contacted Lar3ry, and as he has claimed to sing the song himself as a parody, he has broken no copywright laws. He has paid his royalties through us to the publisher for the song's use. He has chosen to record that parody with a local recording agency which you represent, you are now legaly obligated to protect Lar3ry. However, attempting to falsely sue one of your own artists is a breach of your contract with the local recording agency, and you will be recieving a counter suit.

Have a nice day,
ASCAP, the enforcers of published words
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2007 @ 9:28am

RIAA coward is just frightend
that he will go to jail for stealing 25 years from the artists

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6473877.stm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hi, 29 Mar 2007 @ 9:29am

against illegally downloaded music?
so...exactly how long has LEGALLY downloaded music been around?
As long as downloaded music has been around?
Hell, no.

It took Apple, which isn't even a music company, it's a freakin' hardware company, to start selling MP3s. And sometimes I think you can't even consider that a viable legal option to downloading music because of all the DRM restrictions.

Let's be clear about this. The RIAA isn't against ILLEGALLY downloaded music, they've been against downloaded music, period, for about seven years now. And that's just ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The infamous Joe, 29 Mar 2007 @ 10:08am

PI*r^2 jerk.
I'd like to point out to anyone that paid attention to the troll (AC #21), that downloading music isn't stealing. The only reason anyone connects it to stealing is because the RIAA used their considerable money to run a black propaganda campaign and link the two in your mind. Downloading music, regardless of how much you hate it, is copyright infringement.

Don't be fooled by double speak. The RIAA is double plus ungood for us all.

I'd humbly propose that we all get together in this: The next time you download a CD or handful of tracks.. send the artists some token of money for the tracks you like. Mail it directly to them, saying that you downloaded their music illegally, you enjoyed tracks x, y and z, and that you're sending this check to compensate them for their time and talent.

I'd like to see the RIAA go after someone for hurting the artists then the artist made more money from the illegal download versus a legal sale.

Good day.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Peter, 29 Mar 2007 @ 10:12am

Re:
Downloading a song from the net is not stealing, a copy is made, the original song is still there at the web site. Granted there might be copywrite infringment but there was no theft.
Merriam-Webster Online
Main Entry: steal
Pronunciation: stl
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): stole /stl/; sto·len /st-ln/; steal·ing
to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as a habitual or regular practice
[ link to this | view in thread ]
teknosapien, 29 Mar 2007 @ 10:13am

Wait what was that?!?!?!
Ok This just reeks of dumbness and I cant believe that this has as far as it has. They state that they wont sue her again -- does this mean that they wont "wrongfully sue her again". what about a counter suit is that even possible ?

To beat the bastards at their own game start getting your music from www.archive.org all legal all the time
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2007 @ 10:33am

Re: parking
ride the bus?
the 2hr parking is meant for shoppers and visitors, not for workers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SATAN, 29 Mar 2007 @ 10:52am

They should go back
They should go back to what they were doing before, making shitty music we don't want to buy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wyndle, 29 Mar 2007 @ 11:01am

Re: parking
Go to your local Chamber of Commerce and find out if there are any plans to build more parking garages. In my area, the downtown used to be the worst for parking but now has two pay garages and recently opened the fifth free garage. Sure, you'd have to walk two or three blocks but the cost of your time to walk is likely to be less than the cost of all of the parking tickets. Or look into mass transportation - Dallas has the DART system and constantly adding new lines. There is plenty of free parking at the far stops.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
cb, 29 Mar 2007 @ 11:32am

1. Last night I recorded a movie off HBO. Stealing or OK ? Fair use ? Yes ?
2. Today I recorded a song from my cable. Stealing or OK ? Fair use ? Yes ?
3. Now I just recorded as song off my FM radio. Stealing or OK ? Fair Use ? Yes ?
4. Now I record a song off of my XMRADIO. Stealing or OK ? Fair Use ? Yes ? No?
5. I download a song off the internet. Stealing or OK ? Fair Use ? Yes ? No ?

I paid for all the services except for the FM radio signal. So how can I be stealing if I've already paid for it ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The infamous Joe, 29 Mar 2007 @ 12:07pm

cb... Charlie Brown??
IANAL.

It's not stealing. If I said "How many goals did the Red Sox score last night?" You'd look at me like I'm retarded. If you were in front of me I'd be giving you that same look now. :) It's copyright infringement, my yellow and black shirt wearing friend, not stealing. You have not taken anything from anyone, you have merely made an exact replica of said thing. Theft is not about getting something that doesn't belong to you so much as taking something that doesn't belong to you from someone else. Since my Vanilla Ice mp3 is still on my hard drive, you haven't taken anything from me, so you aren't stealing.

As for your questions, it's all fair use. They don't care about people who download, they care about the uploaders. Look at it like a junkie/dealer thing. The quickest way to stop the "problem" is to remove the source. Ah, but therein lies the rub.

Most p2p software sets by default that when you download something, you allow others to download it, in turn, from you. In fact, with the wonderful creation of bit torrent software, your upload to download ratio can affect your download speeds. (That means that if you don't upload, your downloads will take forever) When you've gone from making a personal copy for personal use to distributing it across the world digitally, regarless of if you knew or meant to do so, they can get you for copyright infringement. (not stealing)

Again, I am not a lawyer by trade in any form or fashion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marty, 29 Mar 2007 @ 1:42pm

Re:
Are you buying into the propaganda? Watching too many of those RIAA commercials. Let's set the record straight... it is NOT stealing! It is called copyright infrigement, and there is a difference!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2007 @ 2:43pm

Re: cb... Charlie Brown??
"The quickest way to stop the "problem" is to remove the source."

now wait a minute...
I thought the labels don't want to be devastated by consumers that buy their CD's.
you are not supposed to remove this source CD's and those jerks that produce them!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
NotAFileSharer, 29 Mar 2007 @ 8:19pm

RIAA settlement offer...
Though I don't belong to any file sharing networks (and never have), I have no reason to believe that the RIAA won't sue me at some point. That means I'll end up having to bring a countersuit against the RIAA for slander and defamation of character. To that end, as this will undoubtedly cost the RIAA and it's members massive amounts of money (not to mention legal fees) when I win, I'd like to offer the RIAA a pre-litigation settlement offer. I'm a reasonalble person. I'm sure we can reach a settlement that both parties feel is equitable. Please contact me at notafilesharer@youshouldnthavesuedme.com for information on where you can send the settlement check.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John, 30 Mar 2007 @ 9:04am

This is bogus, they SHOULD pay her legal fees. These nonsense lawsuits will soon be over anyways, people are starting to use encrypted file sharing applications like GigaTribe, ( http://www.gigatribe.com ).
[ link to this | view in thread ]