Wednesday, March 07, 2007

RIAA Moves to Dismiss Counterclaims in Lava v. Amurao

In Lava v. Amurao in White Plains federal court, the RIAA has moved to dismiss the defendant's counterclaims for (a) a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and (b) copyright misuse:

Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims*
Exhibit A to Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims*
Exhibit B to Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims*

Defendant is represented by Richard A. Altman of Manhattan.

Similar RIAA motions have been denied in Capitol v. Foster in Oklahoma and granted in Interscope v. Duty in Arizona.

* 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


Alter_Fritz said...

what a strange RIAA argument:
just because in 1990 a counterclaim for copyrightmisuse was unprecedented does not automaticly mean that such a claim is 17 years later - specially in the light how the Plaintiffs are abusing their copyrights in conspiracy via their mouthpiece RIAA- still unsubstantiated.
ONE court must create a precedence one day!
Why not THIS court?!

FYI dear judge(s) in this case; Please note that the Plaintiffs in their Memorandum now refer to their investigators as Safe-Net. Please take note, these are still the same guys priviously called MediaSentry. They were just bought by the other name company. It is still the same unreliable "investigation" that was "laught out" in computerliterate courts in Canada and in Europe!
Don't let yourself get fooled by those Plaintiffs.

AMD FanBoi said...

Okay, who's this SafeNet that they list as their investigator? Have they changed from Media Sentry, or are they using more than one firm for this work now?

Alter_Fritz said...

AFAIK MediaSentry was this "smart startup that found a way to profit from piracy in a legal way by offering technology dinosaurs their shady services"
And then was there this other company (Safe-Net) that thought that the MediaSentry "profiteers from piracy"-Guys are worth to be bought. And thats what they have done:

Me still wonders how judges in the US allow a company that is known to produce manipulated content to act as evidence gathering guys (the MS-logs)
"Sure your Honor, the defendant is right that we are known to tamper with content and manipulate stuff, but we swear, we were absolutely honest in generating the logs the RIAA expert has no Idea how they were produced, We are relieable evidence producers, honestly we swear!"