RIAA Wants To Throw In the Towel On 3-Year-Old Case

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "After three years of pursuing a home health aide in Brooklyn who has never even used a computer, the RIAA has announced it's ready to throw in the towel. Only thing; it wants the dismissal to be 'without prejudice' so it won't be liable for attorney's fees. The courts have been saying that where a copyright plaintiff gives up, the defendant is presumptively entitled to an attorney's fee award. So, Ms. Lindor says 'no way.' She wants the dismissal to be 'with prejudice,' and she wants her attorney's fees." We've been discussing this case and Ms. Lindor's fight against the RIAA for quite some time.

Comments

Re:Attorney's fees are all well and fine.....

[PopeRatzo]

the large 'rights holders', who have engaged in a maelstrom of litigation in reaction to their imminent demise.

Yes, and in a down-turning economy, as the value of their "holdings" declines, they will turn increasingly to this type of litigation-for-profit to try to keep their stock price up.

Re:Attorney's fees are all well and fine.....

[arth1]

What I think would be fair was if any case brought that was dismissed with prejudice would automatically cost the accusers a fine of exactly as much as the damage they sued for.
That would not only reduce the amount of false claims, but also the preposterous amounts the accused are being sued for.

(I say fines and not compensation. Fines should go to the public and never to the accused, who only should get actual expenses covered. In Ius Commune, a firm principle is that neither the accuser nor the accused must ever benefit economically from the justice system. Rewarding the victim makes becoming a victim desirable, just like rewarding the accuser makes accusations more profitable than avoiding the initial issue.)