Camara Goes On Offense Against the RIAA

whisper_jeff writes "Ars has an excellent write up outlining how Kiwi Camara (Jammie Thomas-Rasset's new lawyer) is following the 'Best Defense is a Good Offense' philosophy and going on the attack against the RIAA. Not content to just defend his client, he is laying siege against the RIAA's entire campaign and beginning the work of dismantling it from the bottom up, starting with the question of whether they actually do own the copyrights that were allegedly infringed. And, if you're thinking this is good for everyone who's been harassed by the RIAA, you'd be right — Camara, along with Harvard Law professor Charles Nesson, plans to file a class-action suit seeking to force the RIAA to return all the (ill-gotten) money they've earned from their litigation campaign." We first discussed the efforts of Nesson and Camara to thwart the RIAA last month.

Comments

The RIAA's ill fated motion to bar objections

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

By the way, I submitted a proposed article a few days ago -- which is still in the Firehose -- about the Judge denying the RIAA's motion to bar Jammie from objecting to the defects in their copyright registration documents. I guess the article is being rejected, although it was voted up to "orange" in the Firehose, so you might want to check it out.

Re:Wow!!!

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

I'll ignore the snarky end of your reply

What do you mean you'll ignore it? Damn, that's the best part.

and chalk it up to this being a subject near and dear to your heart.

Instead of my just being a snarky bastard? Well thanks for the more charitable interpretation.

Instead, I'll ask for clarification

I can do that too, although I prefer snarky.

- are the lawsuits not the individual company versus the alleged infringer?

Yes they are. But the actual filing and preparation is done by the RIAA. They just stick the record companies' names in. And when needed they give the record companies papers to sign. And then, if they get a judgment, the record companies assign the judgment to the RIAA, and the RIAA brings its own judgment collection proceeding.

For example, the case at hand is "Capitol v. Thomas" not "RIAA v. Thomas". Or is it the cases are filed BY the RIAA on BEHALF OF the company?

Right.

As for the checks, I'll write that off as me being incorrect. It happens.

Yeah, the settlement checks are payable to "RIAA Litigation Fund" (or something like that).

Oh, and by the way, Matthew Oppenheim, who acts as the "client" and the "principal" of the record companies, for settlement purposes, was at the counsel table during the first trial (and was observed by Ars Technica's reporter as reading my blog on his laptop), and has gotten himself admitted pro hac vice in the case this time around, which means he will be doing some questioning, or argument, or both.