RIAA Case Against Mother Dismissed

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In Capitol Records v. Foster, in federal court in Oklahoma, a case against a mother -- whose only connection to the alleged filesharing was that she was the person who paid for the internet access -- has been dismissed with prejudice. Faced with the mother's motion for leave to file a summary judgment motion dismissing the case against her, and awarding her attorneys fees, the RIAA made its own motion for permission to withdraw its case. The Court granted the motion and let the RIAA drop its case. The Court went on to hold that the defendant, Ms. Foster, is the 'prevailing party' under the Copyright Act and is therefore eligible for an award of attorneys fees. The Court then indicated that it would decide the attorneys fees award question upon receipt of a motion for attorneys fees."

Comments

Attorney fees

[JedaFlain]

I don't see how it's going to hurt the RIAA much to pay the fees of the small time lawyer the mother likely hired to defend her from a whole law firm of RIAA goons.

Re:Attorney fees

[nickheart]

It's no about having to pay a little cash

It's the fact that the RIAA decided to try to "make an example" out of someone and failing miserably. I say Kudos to the judge for this! I can only hope that this could start a snowball effect to just stop this DRM movement.

Obligatory

[HangingChad]

HA-HA!