Saturday, January 17, 2009

RIAA drops another "John Doe" case without getting discovery, BMG Music v. Does 1-14, Greensboro, North Carolina

You may recall that the RIAA recently dropped its "John Doe" case against Rhode Island College students, where the ISP was located in Austin, Texas, in Arista Records v. Does 1-22, without getting its "ex parte discovery order".

We have learned of it dropping another "John Doe" case, this one in Greensboro, North Carolina, targeting students at NC State and UNC Charlotte, again without getting its "ex parte discovery order", BMG Music v. Does 1-14.

2 of the defendants had settled with the RIAA. The other 12 will now never be identified. 4 of the 12 were represented by Steve Robertson and his firm, Robertson & Medlin, of Greensboro, North Carolina, the same lawyers representing a group of NC State students in Raleigh, NC, in John Doe cases and in regulatory proceedings against MediaSentry.

The internet service provider, Shenandoah Telecommunication Company, had moved to quash the subpoena in question last year, but its motion had been denied.

Notice of Voluntary Dismissal

Commentary & discussion:

Slashdot
Sir Arthur's Den





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

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

This man would like to know more about the arguments advanced by Robertson & Medlin against the RIAA which have proven so troublesome to them.

{The Common Man Speaking}

Leilani said...

The unfortunate part here is that having retained counsel the Doe defendants are now stuck paying legal costs for defeating the fishing expedition.

Albert said...

Can the Defendants lawyer file for fees, since the Defendants are the prevailing party? Even if they cannot get fees, my understanding is the rules require the costs be paid before they would be permitted to re-file the case.

I dont think this has anything to do with the PI case against MS, since my understaning is that was dismissed. I got this email from them on December 15: "The Board dismissed the complaint ruling that the Private Protective
Services Board had no jurisdiction in the matter."

This is all they said. My best guess is that their lack of jurisdiction was because they were not physically in NC when they did the investigation. Of course the risk this ruling might change if MS showed up to testify in NC may influence them as well... Or maybe it is because MS is not on the payroll, they are unwilling to come testify.

In any case, I hope the Does do get their fees.

Albert

Another Kevin said...

I'm cynical enough to wonder whether these dropped cases merely mean that the RIAA managed somehow to determine the identity of the Does by extrajudicial means.

Ray Beckerman said...

No, Another Kevin, I would not have reported on these were that the case.

These are all cases in which I have verified that the RIAA did not get the discovery.