RIAA Defendant Claims Settlement With Kazaa Should Cover Kazaa Users As Well

from the interesting-legal-tactic dept

Lawyer Ray Beckerman is pointing to the defense used by someone in Texas accused by the RIAA of sharing unauthorized music files. While the defendant is making the same claim as others that the $750/song amount is unconstitutional, they’ve also made a different, but interesting defense, saying that they should be covered by Kazaa’s settlement with the recording industry. If you don’t recall, back in July, the founders of Kazaa used some of the billions they got in selling Skype to eBay to settle Kazaa’s lawsuit that had been filed by the recording industry. They ended up paying about $115 million to settle the claims. Since the accused person was using Kazaa, they feel that Kazaa’s payment covers their activity, and to be forced to pay again would be double counting on the part of the recording industry. It may be difficult to convince a judge of this, but if it does work out, the industry may regret pursuing both individuals and the software companies.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “RIAA Defendant Claims Settlement With Kazaa Should Cover Kazaa Users As Well”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Jon Healey (user link) says:

Umm, no

The Kazaa settlement states that it was a compromise, not an admission by the defendants of liability for copyright infringement (paragraph 12, p. 5). Although IANAL, I don’t see how the defendant here could argue that the Kazaa parties were paying to settle his claims when they weren’t even admitting liability for their own behavior.

C. J. says:

Hah, the Q&A provided a good chuckle.

Seriously though: beyond legal fees, money not gained, and perhaps a dent in their larger than life appearance how does a loss like this effect the RIAA?

Though it would be nice for those being sued for downloading off of Kazaa. Other than that, it seems like the RIAA would simply move their sites elsewhere and continue to shun the digital age.

Gene (profile) says:

Directv did this, so will the RIAA

In the 150,000 people directv collected from, Directv collected settlement money from most of those selling devices. Even though there is no law making smart card programmers illegal, Directv made out of court settlements with those selling the legal products. After collecting from the Sellers, they double dipped and collected again from the purchasers. As with any lawsuit for profit business, the real profit comes when you can collect from both the distributor and the purchaser of legal devices like an ISO7816 programmer. By the way, many people today working for Microsoft still buy this programmer that many had to pay Directv to settle. Even the US Army uses the legal product so many people were sued for. Care to decide what you want to purchase next?

ScytheNoire (profile) says:

since we're already all criminals...

since in the eyes of the RIAA and MPAA we are all already criminals or potential criminals, why don’t some people start committing some real crimes and start killing off high-powered people within the RIAA and MPAA.

i can’t imagine any one in the technology industry feeling any apathy if a few RIAA and MPAA lawyers were done away with, along with some old farts who don’t understand technology and the future. while us criminals are at it, do away with some corrupt politicians too.

i’d bet any money violence will happen before this all ends. it’s not such a long shot, and might make a good movie. corporation versus corporation, killing and murdering. time to go write the screenplay… or did Keanu Reeves already star in this movie years ago?

John Wang says:

RIAA feeding itself and no one else, not even its

Lets say I download a song from someone from Snoop Dogg. I get sued for $750 per song, as per the RIAA guidelines, (or in some cases a lump sum of $3500+)

How much of that $750 per song goes back to Snoop Dogg? NONE!!! To the victor goes the spoils and the RIAA laughs all the way to the bank! How can the RIAA say they are losing money per download when they dont even pay the artist who created the song? Just another of many examples how the RIAA is looking out for no one save themselves.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...