Tuesday, August 15, 2006

Report that RIAA Has Dropped "This Particular Lawsuit" Against Mr. Scantlebury

Apparently the uproar in the 'blogosphere' about Warner v. Scantlebury provoked a reaction.

Cory Doctorow reports in Boing Boing that an RIAA spokesman called him to report that the RIAA has dropped "this particular lawsuit" out of an "abundance of sensitivity".

Query: what do they mean by "this particular lawsuit"? The lawsuit against the decedent would have had to be withdrawn anyway. Are they going to now sue Mr. Scantlebury's son? Or have they given the Scantlebury family enough "grief"?

Complete article:
"RIAA's "abundance of sensitivity" ends harassment of grieving family">

About Cory Doctorow

Background on Warner v. Scantlebury.

Further coverage and discussion:
Wired Blogs
Ars Technica

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

1 comment:

Alter_Fritz said...

in my opinion it would be even "bigger" of them if they drop ALL cases where the defendend is telling "i didn't do it"
(yes i'm aware that even those guilty of copyright infringement might want to use that defense)

And in those cases where the defendent admits a copyrightinfringement they would be human being enough not to try to extort thousands of dollars from them but simply the normal 79 cents per track fee that a legal license would cost.
In that case they would even get more money from the guy then if he would have bought it in a non russian download store.
In case the RIAA would do THAT, maybe then the words of Katherine B. Forrest "Plaintiffs, well-known and respected record companies[...]" [boldings by me] would win some truth back.
I guess these days, no one that have heard of their "~20.000 or more times terror campaign" for something worth 79 cents each, have any "RESPECT" for them.
Maybe fear, if they have a social status in society where they could loose something while being extorted by RIAA. But definetly NOT respect! Thats wishful thinking by RIAA-lawyers in their letters to judges!