Magistrate Judge: Neither Ray Beckermann Nor The RIAA Vexatious

from the now-stop-name-calling dept

Remember last year when the RIAA sought to have lawyer Ray Beckermann declared a vexatious litigant and asked for sanctions? Well, a magistrate judge has now said that the RIAA's complaints were "largely overstated" (shocking, I know) and that Beckermann should not face any sanctions:

"Although defendant's counsel took an unusually aggressive stance and, at times, veered into hyperbole and gratuitous attacks on the recording industry as a whole, I do not find clear evidence of bad faith on counsel's part."

Beckermann had filed a similar complaint in response, claiming that the RIAA was vexatious, but the judge ruled against that one as well (again, I'd say reasonably). All in all, this looks like sour grapes on the part of the RIAA who wasn't used to any lawyers actually challenging its lawyers on its overly aggressive legal campaign. As the article notes, the federal judge overseeing the case could still rule otherwise, but on the whole, it seems like this little distracting tangent may be over.

6 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Woman Admits File Sharing; Challenges Constitutionality Of Copyright Act

from the now-that's-chutzpah dept

A few years back, there was a research paper released that posited that the fines sought by the RIAA for copyright infringement were unconstitutional. While this argument has been brought up in some court cases, and even considered by judges, it's yet to have been an important part of any decision. That may be about to change.

In the Elektra vs. Barker lawsuits, where earlier rulings had clearly sided with the RIAA on the question of whether or not "making available" was infringement, defendant Denise Barker is taking a new tack: admitting to infringement, but challenging the constitutionality of both the fines and the Copyright Act itself for establishing those fines. Instead, Barker notes that a reasonable "loss" on a downloaded piece of music is about $3.50 (which even sounds high). Considering that the fines start at $750 and go up from there, there's a reasonable argument to be made that the fines are excessive (and there's some case law to support that).

While it's an interesting argument, the chances of a judge buying it seem slim (especially considering the court already sided with the RIAA on most of the "making available" thought process). It will be a fascinating lawsuit to watch, but the odds are pretty strong against having the court decide that the Copyright Act is unconstitutional.

41 Comments | Leave a Comment..

RIAA Goes Judge Shopping After One Judge Actually Pushes Back

from the sneaky,-sneaky,-sneaky dept

The RIAA has been known to pull all sorts of tricks over the years to get what it wants, but this latest one may be the most sneaky of all. Last week, Ray Beckermann was notified that the RIAA was dropping one of the cases it had filed against one of his clients, Warner v. Cassin. In that case, a judge had been reviewing a dismissal motion, and appeared to find Beckermann's argument that "making available isn't distribution" compelling. So, perhaps it wasn't a huge surprise that the RIAA dropped the case before they lost it. But, then, a day later, Beckermann discovered that the RIAA had refiled the identical case in the same court, but rather than using the defendant's name, Cassin, it had filed it under a John Doe complaint, as if they didn't know who the defendant was. As such, the case got handed to a new judge. Basically, it appears that the RIAA didn't like where one judge was heading with the case, so got it dismissed and immediately refiled the case (potentially under false pretenses) and had it handed to another judge. Beckermann, of course, has made all of this clear to both judges -- but it seems incredibly sneaky that the RIAA would even think to go that far. Hopefully the court recognizes this judge shopping for what it is.

35 Comments | Leave a Comment..