Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RIAA Backs Down Again in Chicago

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the can't-win-them-all dept.

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA seems to have a problem making things stick in the Windy City. It has once again backed down in BMG v. Thao, after suing a misidentified defendant. Same thing occurred last October in Elektra v. Wilke. In the Thao case, the RIAA based its case on information that the cable modem used to partake in file sharing was registered to Mr. Thao. However, it turned out that Mr. Thao was not even a subscriber (pdf) of the ISP (pdf) at the time of the alleged file-sharing, and therefore did not have possession of the suspect cable modem at that time."

5 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Glad to see it by jcgf · · Score: 4, Informative

    I love seeing these cases where RIAA has been shown to be a bit skimpy on their evidence. Hopefully it will make more people fight back.

  2. Re:Something is wrong with dates by Jarjarthejedi · · Score: 3, Informative

    You would be right if it was Feb. 15 2004. The letter read that the IP was used "02/15/2005" which is a while after the May 14th cancellation. Nothing to see here, the RIAA's just sued another innocent person with flimsy evidence...

    --
    There are two kinds of fool One says 'This is old therefore good' Another says 'This is new therefore better'- Dean Ing
  3. Re:This makes no difference at all... by Frodrick · · Score: 4, Informative
    Unfortunately, Thao made the mistake of letting the RIAA drop the suit WITHOUT prejudice which means that
    1. it could theoretically be refiled, and
    2. no attorney's fees are awarded.
  4. Re:I hope ... by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 2, Informative

    They bought the law suit forward, if they loose or decide not to pursue further, they should pay the costs incurred by the defendant. It's not the defendants fault that the RIAA didn't make sure their position was watertight before moving forward. Of course the RIAA should then have the right to sue the people who did the shoddy investigative work, assuming they did not deliver on the contract.

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  5. Re:I hope ... by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Informative

    And verify it how? WIth the ISPs records? Thats the only way you can validate it. with records from the same people that gave it to you ( and botched ) it in the first place.

    Im sorry, if the ISP gave them bad information, its their ISP's fault in this case.

    And yes, i agree it does help show that just having an IP and a date isnt a good case to stand on, but its not their fault when they asked for data from the ISP involved.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----