RIAA Pays Tanya Andersen $107,951

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Well, Phase I of the RIAA's misguided pursuit of an innocent, disabled Oregon woman, Atlantic v. Andersen, has finally drawn to a close, as the RIAA was forced to pay Ms. Andersen $107,951, representing the amount of her attorneys fee judgment plus interest. But as some have pointed out, reimbursement for legal fees doesn't compensate Ms. Andersen for the other damages she's sustained. And that's where Phase II comes in, Andersen v. Atlantic. There the shoe is on the other foot, and Tanya is one doing the hunting, as she pursues the record companies and their running dogs for malicious prosecution. Should be interesting."

Comments

Re:*HAPPYDANCE*

[Fieryphoenix]

How in the world can the first post be redundant? Moderater clue: redundant means something has already been said before. See what I did? Adding before once I had said already made before redundant.

Re:this was on hackaday first...

[Cala]

Every repost is a repost of a repost.

Re:Hooray Underdog!

[Amouth]

presdence..

right now they are sueing anyone they can get the name of, and trying to set examples with them

so far if evedence showed they where not going to win they dropped charges and walked away - leaving them no extra cost but the defended a pile of bills

with this as an example - and if she can get the second one a win.. it is a presedence to show a judge the next time they sue an innocent person>

which would then start costing them alot - making it so that they sure as hell better have all their ducks in a row before they think of sueing someone.

and depending on the ruleing of the second case it could cause other cases where they walked away to come back up and people sueing them for the same thing.

this is good - and ithas the chance to cost them alot..

while yes 200k isn't that expensive to them.. if there is the chance that each time they sue someone it could cost them 200k+ if they are wrong.. they will makesure they are right first.