Monday, September 10, 2007

RIAA Pays Only Part of Interest in Capitol v. Foster; Judge Denies Motion to Deem Judgment Satisfied

In Capitol v. Foster, where the judge ordered the RIAA to pay Ms. Foster interest on the attorneys fees judgment she'd received from July 16th to the date of payment, the RIAA instead paid only part of the interest, computing from August 16th instead of July 16th, causing Judge West to deny the RIAA's motion to declare the judgment satisfied.

September 10, 2007, Order Denying Motion to Deem Judgment Satisfied*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Keywords: digital copyright online law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs




3 comments:

stevger said...

I bet the judge is regretting the way he reduced the fees for the defendant now, seeing how obnoxious the RIAA really is.

AMD FanBoi said...

I believe I called this one early. That the RIAA wouldn't pay the full amount, although I expected them to try to cheat on the interest rate.

Mike said...

Being a parent, perhaps I'm reading too much into his words, but Judge West sounds almost exasperated:

"While the court regrets the additional resources that will be expended over trivial sums, it has little option but to find that the plaintiffs' have failed to establish that they have satisfied the judgment against them."
(emphasis added)

That almost sounds like something I'd tell my 10 year old after repeating the same instructions half-a-dozen times. "You leave me no choice but to ground you over something as silly as not chewing with your mouth closed".

Am I the only one here that wants to see the RIAA push this one and have Judge West amend the judgment back to Ms. Thomas' original request?