John Doe #48 has served his reply memorandum of law* in Motown v. Does, pointing out that the RIAA's opposition papers were "smoke and mirrors" since, among other things, they
-ignored controlling legal authorities;
-offered no evidence at all;
-made a fabricated contention that Does 1-99 acted together;
-did not dispute the facts contained in the affidavit of programmer Zi Mei;
-attempted to confuse the Court by mixing up "expedited" discovery with "ex parte" discovery;
-cited completely irrelevant authorities;
-frivolously argued that "ex parte" decisions, including the Court's own "ex parte" ruling in this case, should be treated as authoritative precedents;
-frivolously argued that treaties are the same as statutes, and that a treaty should take precedence over the statute which authorized it;
-frivolously argued that the Court was bound by a letter from an employee of the Copyright office;
-frivolously argued that merely having files in a shared files folder is in and of itself a copyright infringement; and
-ignored the RIAA's own testimony before the FTC that most people with file sharing software do not even know what files on their computer are subject to being "shared".
The reply memorandum completes the briefing of John Doe's motion to (a) vacate the ex parte discovery order, (b) quash the subpoena, and (c) sever and dismiss as to John Does 2-99, in Motown v. Does 1-99, Docket No. 05 CV 0112 (NRB), pending before Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, in Manhattan.
Judge Buchwald has stayed her previously issued ex parte discovery order and subpoena pending the determination of John Doe #48's motion.
* Available online at Internet Law & Regulation
Keywords: copyright download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs