Rolando Amurao has filed his Appellant's Brief in Lava v. Amurao, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, bringing to that Court's attention the issue of whether a defendant should be entitled to his attorneys fees where the RIAA has voluntarily dismissed the case, after first causing the defendant to incur significant expense.
The brief points to two recent decisions of the Seventh Circuit, which held that the fact that defendant's victory was achieved by virtue of the plaintiffs' having "thrown in the towel" does not negate the principle that a victorious defendant is presumptively entitled to an attorneys fee award, and points to Atlantic v. Andersen and Capitol v. Foster -- two other "throwing in the towel" cases -- as examples of what the lower court should have done, but did not do, in Lava v. Amurao.
The RIAA's response is due September 3rd.
The oral argument will be in October.
[Needless to say, a ruling in favor of Mr. Amurao here would have an enormous effect on the RIAA's tactics. They would have to think twice about bringing cases against innocent people like Mr. Amurao, Ms. Andersen, Ms. Foster, Ms. Santangelo, Ms. Lindor, Ms. Schwartz, and all the others who were subjected to the horror of being defendants in federal copyright infringement cases for something they did not do. -R.B.]
Keywords: digital copyright law online internet 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 intellectual property