Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Wants Its $222,000 Verdict Back
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA, unhappy with the Court's decision setting aside its $222,000 jury verdict over $23.76 worth of song files, and throwing out the legal theory on which it was based, has made a motion for permission to file an appeal from the Judge's order, in Capitol v. Thomas. Normally, only final judgments are appealable, and appeals are not permissible in federal court from 'interlocutory' orders of that nature."
It's NEVER been about the money. It's not about compensating the artists. (Ha!)
This is 100% about trying to keep control of an entire industry in the hands of a very rich, very corrupt few.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
...they only filed a motion, and one that probably won't get far. When it gets far, then this should be front page material.
What lawyer, where, thinks its a good idea to sue some lady for $222,000 for $23 worth of illegal filesharing? Its bad enough the RIAA tried it in the first place, but the court shot them down, and they're still at it? You'd think anybody with half a conscience would move on at this point.
GCS/MU/P d- s:- a-- C++++$ UL++ P+ L++ E+ W++ N o K- w--- O M+ V- PS+++ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5- X R++ tv+ b++ DI++ D++ G+ e++ h-
I agree that it would be unusual for the appeal to be granted. But, it does make some sense -- if, on retrial, Thomas wins with the new instruction, then the RIAA will appeal to the 8th circuit on the jury instruction. And, if the 8th circuit agrees with the "Making Available" theory, then the case would go back to the district court where a new jury would have to, again, decide if she made the works available. (Once the second trial has started, I don't think you can go back to the outcome of the first.)
How many juries do we need?
They ( the RIAA ) are afraid if they lose here, the downward spiral will continue with no way of stopping it.
--
Oh Well, Bad Karma and all . . .
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
Thompson seemed to enjoy throwing around frivolous lawsuits as well.
It hadn't really hit me until I saw this sentence with the word 'seem' in the past tense.
Damn but that just looks beautiful. Thompson...seemed.
It just hadn't hit me until right now that he's history. Jeez, but I hope I live long enough to say the same about the RIAA. "The RIAA seemed to like to file frivolous lawsuits."
Ah, that's going to be great. Can't wait.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
If the monopolists let this stuff continue, they begin to lose their monopoly, too. A loss for the RIAA here will push music and other media (likely movies) back into the hands of the competitive market. Then you'd see the industry start to equalize, with less-common artists making more money, and famous artists making less. Mostly, though, the monopolists wouldn't make as much money anymore, and that's what counts.
If plaintiffs were to succeed in an appeal after the termination of the first trial, unlikely as that may be, a new trial could have to happen. To prevent that possibility an Appeals Court might agree to rule now.
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
This has nothing to do with expecting to win, and everything to do with attempting to run up the defendant's legal bills.
Yes. That is the one consistent theme in their strategy.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
... a standard sarcasm-calibration post. That way people can check their sarcasm detector is correctly aligned before moderating or commenting.