Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RIAA Drops Case, Should Have Sued Someone Else

Posted by Zonk on from the well-why-didn't-you-tell-us-you-were-innocent dept.

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Once again the RIAA has dropped a case with prejudice, this time after concluding it was the defendant's daughter it should have sued in the first place. In the case of Lava v. Amurao, mindful that in similar scenarios it has been held liable for the defendant's attorney fees (Capitol v. Foster and Atlantic v. Andersen), the RIAA went on the offensive. In this case there was actually no attorney fee motion pending, making their motion all the more intriguing. The organization argued that it was the defendant's fault that the record companies sued the wrong person, because the defendant didn't tell them that his daughter was the file sharer they were looking for."

4 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Burden of proof... by FredFredrickson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I was under the impression that the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff.

    But then again, I was also under the impression that the best way to make money is to sell things to your customers instead of sue them, so call me old fasioned.

    --
    Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
  2. Only they could get away with it. by grilled-cheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Only the RIAA could get away with a defence of "it's your fault because you didn't provide us grounds to sue your daughter".

  3. Re:Stupid RIAA by nuzak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about we stop buying their shit?

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
  4. Re:Stupid RIAA by dont+shoot+me · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So what if someone breaks into your house while you're on vacation, stays a while and downloads a ****load of music? Do you have to find out who the intruder was? How can they prove it wasn't some unknown persons and the computer owner is innocent? What about if your daughter's bf comes over while you're out and they download or upload songs? My point is... how can they ever prove who is responsible? The RIAA should be out trying to stop the real pirates who are making lots of $$$$ off them instead of going after kids who can't afford their overpriced CDs? Or is this revenge for CD sales being off?