LimeWire Antitrust Claims Against RIAA Dismissed

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The antitrust counterclaims imposed by Lime Wire against the RIAA record companies have been dismissed. In a 45-page decision (pdf), the Court relied principally upon the holding of the United States Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly that 'A party's obligation to provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.' Ironically, the Twombly decision was the authority upon which the RIAA's copyright infringement complaint was dismissed in Interscope v. Rodriguez."

Comments

pjwalen sez...

[Creepy Crawler]

stay off my side? I agree with that LimeWire is saying, and I like LimeWire, but their business model is based off illegally downloading music, for the most part. I don't feel like I want this business model fighting fo rour rights. It doesn't give legitimacy to our side.

Re:pjwalen sez...

[sm62704]

Except that LimeWire is and can be used for indie music thats creators WISH to be heard. Indies don't have radio; until recently they had Internet Radio and P2P, but now don't even have Internet Radio, now that the RIAA and its labels have bought legislation from "your" representatives that effectively killed any US based Internat Radio stations.

I, for one, wish that people would STOP putting the RIAA's crap in their "share" lists. But of course, so long as the average clueless computer user doesn't even know that they're actually sharing music, thinking it's just a place to download from, it's not going to happen.

I mean, how in the hell is anybody going to find that great somg named "scatterbrain" that I can't remember who recorded? Do you have any idea how damned many songs have that name? Of course, if you write a song named "scatterbnrain" and your band records your song and you place it on LimeWire, the RIAA is likely to sue you for uploading one of their "scatterbrain"s. You're going to get sued for uploading your own damned song!

Which is really their aim. They can't really give a shit if you download something you can sample from the radio more easily. If you want to find new indie music you're going to get sued.

My "share list" has hundreds of songs. Their creators specifically thanked me when I told them I was putting them on the internet. Of course, none of these guys would touch the thieves at the major labels with a ten foot pole.

-mcgrew

Re:English Please.

[tbg58]

Means that the plaintiff can't use boilerplate (form letter) verbiage as a complaint. In other words, the complaint is too generic or abstract and fails to state specifics, and is therefore not actionable. At least that's how it sounds to this layperson - IANAL.

Re:English Please.

[sm62704]

Maybe I just need my coffee

No, it's just like my saying to my friend Mike that if he adds RAM and defragments his hard drive his computer may run faster and he says "huh? What's a "hard drive? And what do I have to ram it with"?

And like my cluelessly expecting Mike to know what RAM is, what a hard drive is (I used to talk about someone's hard drive and they'd pull out a floppy and say "this?") and about file fragmentation and seeing their eyes glaze over when I explained it, a lawyer will expect us to understand legaleze. It's perfectly understandable English to him.

But just like a lot of nerds would be out of a job if everyone understood computers, there would be a lot less legal work if we all understood legalese, or if the laws themselves were understandable to non-lawyers.

-mcgrew