RSS
Twitter
Once Again (With Feeling): RIAA Told To Pay Tanya Andersen's Legal Fees
from the pay-up,-fellas dept
Despite suing the wrong person multiple times, the RIAA has always pushed back when asked to pay for the legal fees of those wrongfully sued. Tanya Andersen has fought back pretty hard on that claim (and then sued the RIAA separately on other charges as well). Despite multiple tries, the court has repeatedly sided with Andersen pointing out:
Copyright holders generally, and these plaintiffs specifically, should be deterred from prosecuting infringement claims as plaintiffs did in this case. Plaintiffs exerted a significant amount of control over the course of discovery, repeatedly and successfully seeking the court's assistance through an unusually extended and contentious period of discovery disputes. Nonetheless, after ample opportunity to develop their claims, they dismissed them at the point they were required to produce evidence for the court's consideration of the merits..... this case provides too little assurance that a prosecuting party won't deem an infringement claim unsupportable until after the prevailing defendant has been forced to mount a considerable defense, and undergo all that entails, including the incurring of substantial attorney fees.Back in May, the court again sided with Andersen on the issue of legal fees, and has now entered its final ruling telling the RIAA to pay up nearly $108k to cover Andersen's legal fees in defending herself all these years.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
LegalTechDirt?
This is not a complaint, just an observation. There is a lot of articles on the legal aspect of tech news. Maybe you guys need to focus on this 'vertical' (i hate this term) and rename your site LegalTechDirt?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: LegalTechDirt?
Sadly this is America, where a lawsuit is attached to everything, Much of what is wrong with the tech world here is that it is too quick to sue. This is what usually reveals the problems Mike is trying to get across.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: LegalTechDirt?
I think I will sue for Techdirt misrepresenting itself with its name. Sounds good. I win. You owe me $12.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Hopefully the *IAA will learn to think twice about suing someone until they have a solid case. So many BS suits they've filed over the years...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
sadly RIAA will probably opt for appealing and re-appealing, spending more that the 108K and extra fees for the follow up suits instead of paying up and moving on.
I do hope all the ppl appreciate what she is going through.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Well the RIAA has to do something with the money they have received so far. They just can't give it to the artists they are supposedly defending can they? None of the artists(as far as I have read/heard) have received a dime.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
sadly RIAA will probably opt for appealing and re-appealing, spending more that the 108K and extra fees for the follow up suits instead of paying up and moving on.
Of course they will. They've built their cases on a house of cards, and their strategy is to divide, intimidate, and conquer. The business model is simple:
1. Send out thousands of letters accusing people of infringement. Tell them that they can settle up for $5000, or be sued for a couple million dollars in damages.
2. To ensure that people just cough up the money instead of fighting, sue the shit out of anyone who challenges you. Make it clear to everyone else that choosing to NOT pay up will cost them far more than just paying the extortion man.
3. Never lose a case. If someone ever set the precedent of actually beating their claims, then more and more people will resist until the business model isn't profitable any longer. So that means make sure that the case never gets to trial by dragging out discovery, offering a settlement, dropping the charges, whatever it takes.
4. Under no circumstances pay attorney's fees. If people find out that they not only can fight back, but also stand a good chance of not having to pay to defend themselves from the specious charges then a lot more people will be choosing not to settle. Not only does that diminish revenue from the "pay up" letters, but it also costs a lot more for the RIAA in attorney's fees.
5. Profit!
They'll do anything that they can to avoid paying up, because if they do pay up then the house of cards collapses.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The circus
The RIAA has repeatedly shown that it is not interested in whatever legal rights a person may or may not have. What they are trying to do is to scare people into paying money, that it is hard to prove they actually owe. As Mike and many others have said in the past. Why don't they just realize that their business model is outdated, and therefore change it.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:LegalTechDirt
TechDirt is fine. When a lawyer is involved there's always someone pulling something dirty - and that usually includes the lawyer.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
At one point or another it quits being a trial between the plaintiff and the defendant and becomes a lawyer’s circus. The longer they can drag it out the more they get paid. I'm just astounded that the judicial system has sat through this dog and pony show for so long and haven’t investigated just what the RIAA is trying to do, as it wasn't plan enough.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The Larger Goal
Hopefully this will lend credence to her case against the RIAA for racketeering and other charges. That would be the big victory in all this, especially if it reaches class action. As with many cases like this, the judge is sending a message that what they did was wrong, but no one bothers to adjust the laws so that their actions have no merit. It's hard to shake a finger at the **AA when our politicians tweak countless laws in their favor and grant them longer terms on their monopolies. $108,000 is a drop in the bucket for these associations. They've earned much more than that with these strategies and probably will for some time to come until our polluticians realize who their constituents really are. The laws they create provide incentive for this innovative behavior.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: LegalTechDirt?
It's not TechDirt's fault that some of the more entertaining news involves the RIAA, AP, or anyone else (willing to sue / issue DMCA takedown notices for no good reason), being stupid in public.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Every story on here is just more condescending whining about the big-evil-corporations. Shouldn't you be making YouTube videos about conspiracy theories? Definitely taking this site off of my iGoogle homepage.
Toodles.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Buh-bye. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
So what you are saying is that reason has left? Hmmm...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Every story on here is just more condescending whining about the big-evil-corporations
I find this hilarious.
When I write about copyright, people say that I'm whining about big-evil-corporations.
When I write about patents, people say that I'm shilling for big-evil-corporations.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
comon now mike, you should know by now you can't win :P Next best thing to do is laugh.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
William -> Every story on here is just more condescending whining about the big-evil-corporations. Shouldn't you be making YouTube videos about conspiracy theories? Definitely taking this site off of my iGoogle homepage.
And you are not a whiner, I presume
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Yeah, we're all crushed by your departure. Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out chuckles.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
I hope the RIAA keeps fighting this in court, because it just means the amount they have to pay gets larger and larger. They screwed up, as they have been doing all along, and they need to be forced to pay for their screw ups. If every one fought them instead of paying a few thousand in extortion fee's, they would be forced out of business. The RIAA is going to fall apart because of their own stubborn stupidity, but their lawyers will get rich.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Maybe Anderson needs to attach some RIAA property and hold a sheriffs sale, with a court order of course.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Big companies = BIG BULLIES !
Whats the deal with these big companies and their total disrequard for their customers?!Suing innocent people is just SICKENING!I hope everyone wins and the dam companies go broke!Go to hell all you scumbag companies that think youre bigger than the LAW!Go out of business too!Who needs ya!Its like pay up or be sued.Jerks!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment