Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Judge Sets Schedule for Discovery on reasonableness of attorneys fees and for Ms. Foster to Request Additional Fees in Capitol v. Foster

Judge Lee R. West, in Capitol v. Foster, pending in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, has (a) given the RIAA until April 16th to conclude its discovery on the reasonableness of Ms. Foster's attorneys fees, and (b) given Ms. Foster until April 26th to file a supplemental request for additional fees:

February 15, 2007, Order, Fixing Schedule for (a) Plaintiffs to Complete Discovery on Reasonableness of Defendant's Attorneys Fees, and (b) Defendant to File Supplemental Request for Additional Fees*

Ms. Foster is represented by Marilyn Barringer-Thomson of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

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

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

check check, one two one wto:

You have requested a PDF which does not exist.
Check URL for errors!


(no need to post this comment Ray, just do what the emphasis says ;-)

greets Alter_Fritz

Ray Beckerman said...

Sorry 'bout that folks......

The link is working now.

Thank you Alter_Fritz!

Dr_Art said...

Ray, do you have any thoughts or opinions on how the recent SCOTUS certiori decision on Phillip Morris vs Williams (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1256.pdf) might impact cases such as Ms. Foster and Ms. Lindor where it appears obvious that the defendants shouldn't be parties joined to the lawsuit? (In this case they held - I'm oversimplifying - that punative damages can't consider harm to unnamed third parties.)

Regards,
Dr_Art

Scott Ferguson said...

"The Court anticipates no extension of these deadlines." I wonder what Judge West is implying? :)

Anonymous said...

Ray, I ran across this article in and wanted to get your thoughts. Why is the RIAA able to give universities 2nd and 3rd warnings about their students downloading when other people are given no warning and handed a lawsuit? has anyone tried to argue this fact in court?

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/4568903.html

Dreddsnik said...

" Why is the RIAA able to give universities 2nd and 3rd warnings about their students downloading when other people are given no warning and handed a lawsuit? "

Simple ...

Bankrupted students drop out of school. Bankrupted students can't pay their college bills.
This would upset colleges enough that they would stop playing nice with the RIAA.

Ray Beckerman said...

They sue the students without any hesitation.

They don't sue the universities because like all bullies, the RIAA are cowards. They don't like to sue universities because universities can fight back.

What I can't understand is why universities are not helping the students to fight back.