by Mike Masnick
Wed, Aug 27th 2008 9:11am
One of the more well-publicized lawsuits involving the RIAA was the Howell case, which got a lot of press when some folks misread the RIAA's filings against Howell. Either way, that point became meaningless when the judge ruled in Howell's favor that "making available" is not infringement by itself. Of course, that argument was just for the RIAA's attempt at a summary judgment. So the case still went on, and it turns out that Howell was caught destroying evidence -- a big no-no. So, despite all of this, it's no surprise that the RIAA has prevailed in the overall case. It does make you wonder why people who have strong evidence against them still end up fighting the RIAA. It's completely admirable to fight the RIAA if they're using faulty or flimsy evidence and you're innocent, but when the evidence suggests otherwise, what good does it possibly do to fight them in court? In the meantime, the RIAA will certainly talk up this "victory" but will skip over the part that it wasn't on the actual issues, but over Howell's decision to destroy evidence.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Major Record Labels Use Lawsuit Against MP3Skull To Try To Backdoor In SOPA
- No, Getting Your Music Played On The Radio Is Nothing Like Slavery
- Judge Walton Catches The DOJ Withholding Info About NSA Metadata Lawsuits
- Court Rejects RIAA's 'Making Available' Theory In Infamous Howell Case
- EFF Files Brief In Howell Case, Says 'Making Available' Is Not Infringement