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.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2005 @ 9:42am

    No Subject Given

    The RIAA patching things up by giving you some free music is like McDonalds settling my salmonella poisoning case by giving me tubs of expired "special sauce". "Here's your free music. If you put it on an MP3 player, we will sue you. If you put it on a CD, we will sue you. If you put it on a computer other than this one (it lacks an audio player, speakers or a sound jack) we will sue you. If you somehow manage to hear a song, transcribe it note for note onto musical score sheets, and pay a poor busker $5 to hear it played on a street corner, we will sue you. If you sniff the IP packets as we upload you the song files, ascribe random notes to each of them, and train an African grey parrot to sing the appropriate notes when exposed to each packet, we will sue you. If we can come up with market share figures that suggest that piracy is ruining our business, we will sue you. If someone tailgates our CEO on the way home from work, we will sue you. The only term of this settlement is that we retain our right to sue you, and as soon as media furor dies down, we will sue you. If there's anything we've forgotten to mention, we will sue you.

Add Your Comment

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

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.