Wednesday, August 23, 2006

In New Case In Oklahoma, Warner v. Stubbs, Defendant Counters-Sues Against RIAA and Its Lawyers for Attorneys Fees

In a new case in Oklahoma, Warner v. Stubbs, the defendant has countersued the RIAA for attorneys fees:

Answer and Counterclaim*

The defendant alleges:

"12. Tallie Stubbs (“Tallie”) is an individual who resides in Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. Tallie
is 45 years old....

13. Tallie is an account holder with Cox Communications for cable, telephone, and internet services. Tallie became an account holder with Cox Communications in March 2005.

14. On information and belief, Plaintiffs’ only evidence to support their claims against Tallie is her status as an account holder with Cox Communications.

15. Plaintiffs’ alleged claims are neither well grounded in fact nor warranted by existing law or a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law....

16. Tallie seeks relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (2006) from Plaintiffs (their agents and their counsel) because they have multiplied the proceedings unreasonably and vexatiously. Tallie is entitled to recover costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred because of such conduct....

17. Tallie denies that she had any knowledge of KaZaa....

18. Tallie is and continues to be without knowledge of how to download music off of the internet.....

19. Despite being placed on notice that Tallie did not download any songs, the Plaintiffs filed this action against Tallie. Plaintiffs impugn Tallie’s character and subject her to demands which are closely akin to extortion.....

20. Plaintiffs have a pattern and practice of the action complained of by Tallie in her counterclaim. See, e.g., Capitol Records v. Debbie Foster, Case No. 04-1569-W, U.S. D. C. W.D. OK. See, e.g., Priority Records LLC et al., v. Ron Pierce, Case No. Civ-04-1448-R, U.S. D.C. W.D. OK, and, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, et al, Case No. Civ-04-1445-C, U.S. Case 5:06-cv-00793-C. W.D. OK....."

* Document available online at Internet Law & Regulation

Ms. Stubbs is represented by Marilyn Barringer-Thomson, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, the same lawyer who represents Deborah Foster in Capitol v. Foster.

Keywords: digital copyright online 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

3 comments:

StephenH said...

I think the RIAA needs to learn that spy bot evidence is not DNA. Additionally, if the RIAA mistakes just one digit that can lead to an innocent victim. What is even more, is that a computer network with dynamic IP addresses can lead to a computer having one IP address one minute, and a simple act of putting a computer to sleep, or shutting it down and turning it on later a different IP. If Proxy tunneling or VPN tunneling, or if a NAT router or open wireless is used, it can also lead to a wrong person. The same is true if a computer is used by a friend, co-worker, or roommate who does not pay the bill on the account.

DreadWingKnight said...

I would recommend that counterclaim be continued even if the RIAA attempts to withdrawl. We need prescedent on this.

Mistlefoot said...

If someone borrows my car and 'robs' a bank or gas station can I be sued to recover this money? Regardless of whether or not I knew?

Yet if someone borrows my internet to 'steal' music the RIAA wants to sue me to recover an onerous amount.