While this case is important, it has little to do with a standard RIAA case. She's probably going to get attorney's fees not because of the merits of her case in particular, but because the RIAA did not drop the lawsuit against her after it was made rather clear that her children were the more likely culprits, which the judge considered harassment (my words; read the motions/rulings). The motions for attorney's fees are quite clear on this.
That being said, there are some significantly more important cases going on for the likes of the everyday file sharer. In particular, Ray Beckerman finally managed to depose the RIAA's expert witness in UMG vs Lindor, and, while not absolutely crushing him, showed him to be a very poor witness on which to build an airtight case. The outcome of that case could have a huge impact on how these cases are done in the future. A disastrous result for UMG might well discourage further lawsuits. Before you get excited, though, that case is months from being solved.
In addition, there are some other cases going in which the defendants might get fees on their own merits, but they need some time to resolve. It's amazing, but these cases are the first ones that might actually go to a trial.
The idea of immigration as a human right is an important one that we take for granted these days, especially in the US. The US is a system of 50 separate governments, all of which get along well enough that one need not register one's very presence in any particular place--freedom of movement is taken for granted. The government does not have the right to know your location, let alone restrict it. Since most Americans are well off enough that the idea of emmigration never really enters the equation, we simply don't see the results of restricting it.
This right is rapidly being eroded in other parts of the industrialized world. Most of Europe has a legal requirement that anyone taking up residence for more than a given number of weeks need register with the police, and every overnight hotel stay in temporary accomidation is also reported to the police and interpol. One does not always have the right to simply exist somewhere. To be fair, though, these systems are generally a long ways from actually restricting who is allowed to live in a given area; China is relaxing (already relaxed?) these rules based largely on unworkability.
Many argue that the US' traditional open policy of immigration need be rewritten for a changing world, and they make good points. The world is indeed not the same, but in many ways those changes result in a smaller world, with families built across borders and job opportunities shifting rapidly. Most modern Americans would say that it's up to a worker to keep themselves trained for the job market, but not up to a worker to move to where the work is.
I love to travel, see new places and meet new people. The idea that corporations can offshore labor and import the products while I cannot export my job skills as anything other than a teacher of English is absurd to me. I've lost several job opportunities in Germany because it's just not worth the legal hassles (and in some cases downright impossible) for a company to hire an American.
I'm all about Free Trade, because I believe that economic ties bring the world to peace in a way that straight diplomacy never could. But the trade isn't very free if labor isn't free to move.
Slashdot Mirror
Who was cheering, exactly?
While this case is important, it has little to do with a standard RIAA case. She's probably going to get attorney's fees not because of the merits of her case in particular, but because the RIAA did not drop the lawsuit against her after it was made rather clear that her children were the more likely culprits, which the judge considered harassment (my words; read the motions/rulings). The motions for attorney's fees are quite clear on this.
That being said, there are some significantly more important cases going on for the likes of the everyday file sharer. In particular, Ray Beckerman finally managed to depose the RIAA's expert witness in UMG vs Lindor, and, while not absolutely crushing him, showed him to be a very poor witness on which to build an airtight case. The outcome of that case could have a huge impact on how these cases are done in the future. A disastrous result for UMG might well discourage further lawsuits. Before you get excited, though, that case is months from being solved.
In addition, there are some other cases going in which the defendants might get fees on their own merits, but they need some time to resolve. It's amazing, but these cases are the first ones that might actually go to a trial.
Beckerman's blog, which is great reading for those interested in this stuff, is http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/
Bhuga
The idea of immigration as a human right is an important one that we take for granted these days, especially in the US. The US is a system of 50 separate governments, all of which get along well enough that one need not register one's very presence in any particular place--freedom of movement is taken for granted. The government does not have the right to know your location, let alone restrict it. Since most Americans are well off enough that the idea of emmigration never really enters the equation, we simply don't see the results of restricting it.
This right is rapidly being eroded in other parts of the industrialized world. Most of Europe has a legal requirement that anyone taking up residence for more than a given number of weeks need register with the police, and every overnight hotel stay in temporary accomidation is also reported to the police and interpol. One does not always have the right to simply exist somewhere. To be fair, though, these systems are generally a long ways from actually restricting who is allowed to live in a given area; China is relaxing (already relaxed?) these rules based largely on unworkability.
Many argue that the US' traditional open policy of immigration need be rewritten for a changing world, and they make good points. The world is indeed not the same, but in many ways those changes result in a smaller world, with families built across borders and job opportunities shifting rapidly. Most modern Americans would say that it's up to a worker to keep themselves trained for the job market, but not up to a worker to move to where the work is.
I love to travel, see new places and meet new people. The idea that corporations can offshore labor and import the products while I cannot export my job skills as anything other than a teacher of English is absurd to me. I've lost several job opportunities in Germany because it's just not worth the legal hassles (and in some cases downright impossible) for a company to hire an American.
I'm all about Free Trade, because I believe that economic ties bring the world to peace in a way that straight diplomacy never could. But the trade isn't very free if labor isn't free to move.