Friday, December 19, 2008

RIAA brings new "John Doe" case against Mr. Licata's family in Cincinnati, Mr. Licata opposes 'expedited discovery' motion

As a spinoff from Elektra Entertainment v. Licata in Cincinnati, Ohio, a 'throwing in the towel' case, the RIAA -- as it did in Warner Bros. v. Cassin -- brought a 'John Doe' action against Mr. Licata's family.

We have just learned of this, and have posted a copy of Mr. Licata's opposition to the RIAA's motion for 'expedited discovery'.

Defendant David Licata's response to RIAA motion for expedited discovery

Keywords: lawyer 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 portable music player

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Over two years after the alleged infringement took place, that lawsuit was filed

This man asks, isn't there a statute of limitations issue here?

Especially against further members of the family, friends, acquaintances, or any other person(s) who may have so much as touched the computer in question during the year that the RIAA demands to know their identities?

{The Common Man Speaking}

Lior said...

I'm confused: how can you bring a "John Doe" lawsuit when you know who the defendants are? Isn't an essential component of such a lawsuit a declaration that you don't know who the defendants are?

Albert said...

I agree with Lior,

Naming the Defendants as "John Doe" when you already know their names would be a lie.

However, since it has been suggested that an AOL account might have been hacked, the "John Does" might be those unknown hackers.

However, if this is the case, this very well might be the first case of accused filesharing on a DIALUP connection...
If that were the case, it would have took them quite a while to download the songs in question. Does the time in the logs match the slower times on dialup?

Also another question is HOW would the previous defendant be able to help in the identification of the hackers?

Albert