Friday, December 14, 2007

Dismissal Motion Denied in Interscope v. Kimmel

The motion to dismiss made by the defendant in a Binghamton case, Interscope v. Kimmel, has been denied.

December 10, 2007, Order Denying Motion to Dismiss*

* 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






4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Nice to know that the Two Dismissal Rule doesn't mean at all what it says. Glad we cleared that up.

--FUU

Russell said...

What is the significance of the prevailing party.

Anonymous said...

Maybe the judge in question takes his lead from the NJ State supreme court, which actually held that a state law regarding candidates for elected office didn't actually mean what it says. It would be nice to see his reasoning, rather then just "because I said so"

Wonder if this is appealable.

-B

Art said...

Russell, under copyright law the prevailing party can make a motion for reimbusement of costs and attorney fees.

Regards,
Art