Magistrate Suggests Fining RIAA Lawyers

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Angered at the RIAA's 'gamesmanship' in joining multiple 'John Does' in a single case without any basis for doing so, a Magistrate Judge in Maine has suggested to the presiding District Judge in Arista v. Does 1-27 that the record companies and/or their lawyers should be fined under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules, for misrepresenting the facts. In a lengthy footnote to her opinion recommending denial of a motion to dismiss the complaint (PDF, see footnote 5), Judge Kruvchak concluded that 'These plaintiffs have devised a clever scheme to obtain court-authorized discovery prior to the service of complaints, but it troubles me that they do so with impunity and at the expense of the requirements of Rule 11(b)(3) because they have no good faith evidentiary basis to believe the cases should be joined.' She noted that once the RIAA dismisses its 'John Doe' case it does not thereafter join the defendants when it sues them in their real names. Arista v. Does 1-27 is the same case in which student attorneys at the University of Maine Law School, "enthusiastic about being directly connected to a case with a national scope and significance", are representing undergrads targeted by the RIAA."

Comments

Re:The fat lady

[AJWM]

And the lawyers don't just tack the fines onto the bills they submit to the RIAA because...?

Good luck

[Philotechnia]

I wish those student lawyers the best. The RIAA typically gets the best justice money can buy. If they can win this suit, they'll have long careers ahead of them.

Re:Typical

[insertwackynamehere]

The GP was refering to a DA not a private lawyer. A DA would have different motives.

Re:Not really

[Jason Levine]

So, if I'm reading this properly, the RIAA would be forced to do one of two things:

1 - Sue the batches of people as a group. This wouldn't stand long as it would be easy to prove that their alleged wrongdoings weren't connected in nature.

2 - Submit the John Doe suits separately. This would backfire as judges wouldn't be too happy to see a giant stack of individual lawsuits being added to their docket. The RIAA would quickly see their lawsuits getting tossed out by judges and perhaps even fines issued for wasting the court's time.

NewYorkCountryLawyer, if you're reading this, can you verify whether I'm reading this right?

Re:Not really

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Well according to procedures, that is how it is supposed to be. If 200 people have wronged you, you can bring 200 lawsuits if the people had nothing to do with each other. It is a lot cheaper for the RIAA to file for one lawsuit and tack on 200 John Does. And this is not the first time the RIAA has been told not to lump all the defendants together. A federal court told the RIAA in Fonovisa vs Does 1-41 (2004) that they may not file all unrelated John Does together. Yes, that is "how it is supposed to be". In a society of laws, that is. The RIAA lawyers think they are above the law.