AfterDawn: News

Judge demands evidence from RIAA

A Judge has told the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), that if it expects to sue an alleged P2P music pirate in his court, the trade group would have to present some evidence of the crime. As the number of RIAA lawsuits filed moved into the thousands, the trade group appears to be doing less research for each case.

In the Interscope v. Rodriguez case, Judge Rudi Brewster refused to grant a default judgment in favor of the RIAA due to inadequate evidence of copyright infringement by the defendant. The defendant completely ignored the RIAA, never responding to the claims made against her.



The judge said that the RIAA has to present at least some facts to show the plausibility of their allegations of copyright infringement against the defendant, adding that the level of proof presented required him to make a judgment based only on speculation.

Source:
The Inquirer

Written by: James Delahunty @ 14 Sep 2007 19:25

• Previous article

• Man defeats Viacom in DMCA takedown dispute

• Next article

• Sony, Sharp, Hitachi to cut LCD power consumption

• 13 comments

• WierdName

  Lol, people have been talking about stuff that we could do to permanently remove the RIAA and now the solution may come not from us, nor unaided by us... their own stupidity.

  14.9.2007 21:33 #1

• windsong

  I think 20 yrs from now, people might resort to Molotov cocktails as a way of answering riaa threats. A shame it should ever come to that.

  14.9.2007 23:09 #2

• Unfocused

  This is a perfect example of the justice system being used the way it was designed to be.

  14.9.2007 23:22 #3

• locobrown

  At least now dead people won't be sued now, or just because you own a computer.

  15.9.2007 07:31 #4

• pstamer

  Lol. How do you like that riaa? Looks like payback's a biatch!

  15.9.2007 08:34 #5

• nobrainer

  this will no doubt slow down the riaa with their blanket lawsuits, and will cost them more as real research is now required, but who will foot the bill, and where are the riaa getting their funds from? does this mean the artist gets an even worse deal because of the litigation costs?

  15.9.2007 08:54 #6

• borhan9

  Quote:The judge said that the RIAA has to present at least some facts to show the plausibility of their allegations of copyright infringement against the defendant, adding that the level of proof presented required him to make a judgment based only on speculation.I think that this is what we have been trying to say from day one.

  15.9.2007 13:21 #7

• Venom5880

  Originally posted by nobrainer: this will no doubt slow down the riaa with their blanket lawsuits, and will cost them more as real research is now required, but who will foot the bill, and where are the riaa getting their funds from? does this mean the artist gets an even worse deal because of the litigation costs?Actually, at the end of last year, the RIAA requested that royalties were lowered for music artists.
  
  http://gear.ign.com/articles/749/749883p1.html
  
  I don't know if they ever went anywhere with that though.

  15.9.2007 13:32 #8

• jezchrizt

  wow imagine that you need evidence ..christ, and u need to be a judge to know that ? the way the riaa operate can be considered next to extortion or at least entrapment, all this bullshit about ips, personally i can change ip addresses 300 times a day(note i havent tried this, but doubt its that much of an exagerration).

  15.9.2007 15:13 #9

• svtstang

  Originally posted by jezchrizt: wow imagine that you need evidence ..christ, and u need to be a judge to know that ? the way the riaa operate can be considered next to extortion or at least entrapment, all this bullshit about ips, personally i can change ip addresses 300 times a day(note i havent tried this, but doubt its that much of an exagerration).Extortion....maybe not that severe but it seems like it since most people settle out of court thinking they are going to go down if facing a judge....even though they probably would be ok.
  
  Entrapment, not even close. Entrapment only applies to legal authorities, and a blatant attempt on their part to get you to do an illegal act must be proven. Nobody made you download the new Kanye Album did they? Even media defender's Mivi is not considered entrapment and they created a whole website dedicated to piracy (before they got hacked hehe).
  
  On a side note...jesus what took so long judge??? Finally requiring evidence before coming to conclusions...thought that was only a myth we learn in school!

  15.9.2007 20:14 #10

• chinpark9

  One of you asks where the RIAA is getting their money from. Well, sirs, they are getting it from you yourselves. Every time you spend 10 bucks on a recording, at least 7 of those goes to the organisation that is supposed to represent the artists.
  
  Do you suppose they are Sicilians?

  25.9.2007 13:36 #11

• xhardc0re

  the RIAA has proven itself to be nothing more than a terrorist organization.
  

  if you're a college student, do NOT settle with the RIAA http://tinyurl.com/37oz2z
  
  
  ~ SlimPS2 v12US, TaiyoYuden DVD-R, SwapMagic_v3.6 & BreakerPro 1.1 (No mod)
  Writer: HL-DT-ST DVD-RW GWA-4080N 0G03 Software: DVDDecrypt*r,
  lastest Nero Ultra 7 & Alcohol 120% ~

  25.9.2007 13:59 #12

• WierdName

  Originally posted by xhardc0re: the RIAA has proven itself to be nothing more than a terrorist organization.What? Not yet. They still need to start lining people up in front of mass graves with a machine gun behind them before they are a terrorist organization. Other than that, they are terrorizing everyone from US residents to the little ant on the other side of the world.
  

  Doesn't expecting the unexpected make the unexpected expected and therefore mean your expecting the expected which was the unexpected until you expected it?
  Opinions are immunities to being told we're wrong.
  
  

  25.9.2007 14:04 #13