Jul 13 2006

RIAA Case Against Mother Dismissed With Prejudice; Court May Award Attorneys Fees Against RIAA

  • Written by soulxtc
  • 6 Comments

In Capitol Records v. Foster, in federal court in Oklahoma, a case against a mother — whose only connection to the alleged filesharing was that she was the person who paid for the internet access — has been dismissed with prejudice.

Faced with the mother’s motion for leave to file a summary judgment motion dismissing the case against her, and awarding her attorneys fees, the RIAA made its own motion for permission to withdraw its case.

The Court granted the motion and let the RIAA drop its case.

The Court went on to hold that the defendant, Ms. Foster, is the “prevailing party” under the Copyright Act and is therefore eligible for an award of attorneys fees.

Related Posts

  1. RIAA Must Pay $107,834 in Legal Fees
  2. Debbie Foster to RIAA : Dude, where’s my legal fees?
  3. RIAA fails in fileshare suit
  4. Tallie Stubbs Counter-Sues RIAA and its Lawyers for Attorneys Fees in Oklahoma
  5. Big Win for Innocent RIAA Defendant
Zeropaid on Facebook

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments

  1. VAMPYRE BLADE

    she won because she didnt cave into their threats they couldnt prove that she did anything but pay for internet

  2. Signa

    just like they cant prove that some one wasnt accessing my wireless internet. such a simple and effective loophole if i ever get challenged

  3. Ne007

    Signa that is not a loophole. You are responsible for securing your network therefore you are responsible for everything downloaded. Even if a neighbor comes over and downloads something. You are responsible. If someone downloads off of your non-secure wireless router…not making it secure is where you went wrong.

  4. Unsueable Davey Brown

    So isn’t this the first only time one of these lawsuits has been fought to conclusion? The Record companies lost. That’s an interesting statistic to keep ready for the next time you’re arguing with someone who claims the Big Four are an invincible opponent and we should all just bend over and take it.

  5. phalkon30

    I’m surprised this wasn’t a bigger story here would have thought people would be very interested.

  6. Rpaczy

    Signa that most definitely is a loophole. It would be even better if they came and seized your puter and you happened to have Windows ME running on it showing yourself to be a complete n00b. You’re not responsible to secure your wifi that’s how come they come set from the factory in unsecure mode. So Ne007 just hush you have no idea.

Trackbacks url:

Leave a Comment...

Giganews Newsgroups


1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars Loading ... Loading ...

  • methylated: Number one tool for searching rare music. Nothing comes close. There are two servers now, so download both of the cli...
  • zeropaid: Sure, except Apple started with DRM on everything, recognized their mistake, removed DRM from audio tracks: http://www....
  • streamOG: Jared, DRM didn't kill the music industry any more than it made the movie/video industry. You can't say con...
  • soulxtc: Exactly. The only way to fight P2P is to inspect each and every data packet. If I have to choose between totalitarianism...
  • Victim of PirateBay: lol PirateBay SUCKS you go to thier website and all of a sudden you are attacked with viruses and spyware. Anyone that l...
  • Yatti420: UTP isn't the throttling part.. You want UTP enabled if you run behind a Sandvine box though thats for sure.. ...
  • @TheHuxCapacitor: Hmmm, Couple of things for me - There's no causal relationship proven in the study between P2P and decline in sales...
  • Stan: I would love to get Ayn Rand's perspective on this situation. The labels may have changed, but the selfishness, ...
  • sdsd