Monday, June 04, 2007

RIAA Drops its Case Against Tanya Andersen

The RIAA has finally dropped its longstanding case against disabled single mother Tanya Andersen in Oregon, Atlantic v. Andersen

The dismissal relates merely to the RIAA's claims against Ms. Andersen, and does not relate to her (a) claim for attorneys fees or (b) counterclaims against the RIAA.

Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice*

Ms. Andersen is represented by Lory Lybeck of Mercer Island, Washington.

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

Ars Technica
p2pnet.net
Slashdot
Heise Online (German)
Spiegel Online (German)
webwereld (Dutch)
Punto Informatico (Italian)
CBC News
p2pnet.net
MacWorld


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

14 comments:

AMD FanBoi said...

So if I get this right, she's the prevailing party, and has a good shot at her attorney's fees, if she choses to pursue them. And these fees are much higher than if the Plaintiffs had quit when they knew they really didn't have anything to start with, and weren't finding anything.

Scott said...

If the RIAA and M. Andersen reach an agreement on attorney's fees or damages, will information about this be entered into the public record?

StephenH said...

I think she should still pursue her counterclaims. I beleive that what the RIAA did to her by their unreliable investigations was illegal, and they should be punished for it. Hopefully, Tanya could establish a precedent that their phishing and forcing people to settle with no forensic evidence is illegal.

Ray Beckerman said...

1. Under Capitol v. Foster she is the prevailing party and eligible for an award of attorneys fees. The plaintiffs actually knew before the lawsuit was even commenced that she had not done it; she offered them the opportunity to inspect her hard drive. They turned it down and sued her anyway. This is a very very good case for attorneys fees.

2. If they enter into a settlement of the attorneys fees, I would anticipate that the RIAA would insist on secrecy.

Sanji Himura said...

Ray,

Warner v. Stubbs also says that if a counterclaim has clear independant judicial basis, then the counterclaim stands.(I'm not a lawyer) Accusing the RIAA under that state's and federal RICO statues, I think, should meet the Stubbs test.

What it all boils down to is the fact that can Ms. Andersen endure the RIAA machine just a bit longer to fight for her countersuit. I think that she has a case, and has actual proof, but again, I'm not her lawyer.

Ray Beckerman said...

I feel confident she and her wonderful lawyer are going to stay and fight.

Alter_Fritz said...

Ray, beware of the flying dutchman!

they could be pissed that you claim that the language they speak in the Netherlands (TLD .nl) is german.

webwereld (German)

;-)

AMD FanBoi said...

sanji himura said: What it all boils down to is the fact that can Ms. Andersen endure the RIAA machine just a bit longer to fight for her countersuit

How about a lot longer? In Foster, the RIAA is dragging it out month by month, delay by delay, motion by motion. It looks like Ms. Foster will take as long to get her money as it took to get the case dismissed in her favor.

Jasper said...

The webwereld article you give a link to is not in German, but in Dutch...

Ray Beckerman said...

thanks for pointing out to me that I mixed up Dutch with German......

i don't think it will take too much longer for a decision to come down in Capitol v. Foster.....i believe the briefing was just finished up.....

Interested Observer said...

Now that Ms Anderson has prevailed against the complaints and assuming she will prevail on her counterclaims could she then go against the plaintiff's and its law firms for malicious prosecution since they have a duty to ensure their claims are supported by the facts before bringing the case?

Jaaz said...

Hopefully the counter-claims does not settle out of court. If it comes out in M. Anderson's favor, could this set the stage for others who counter claim to eventually build a Vexatious Litigation suit against the RIAA, or if it must be more directed/localized, a favored firm of theirs in any given state for which the build up of frivilous lawsuits qualifies as Vexatious?

Markbnj said...

My concern (thanks again for posting this Ray)

is that if the RIAA agrees to attorney fees, but insists on a secret settlement....

Arguh...

jellie said...

(To add to markbnj): Or worse, continues to fight any award for attorney fees...