Monday, September 25, 2006

Lime Wire Sues RIAA for Antitrust Violations

In Arista v. Lime Wire, in Manhattan federal court, Lime Wire has filed its answer and interposed counterclaims against the RIAA for antitrust violations, consumer fraud, and other misconduct. Lime Wire alleged that the RIAA's

goal was simple: to destroy any online music distribution service they did not own or control, or force such services to do business with them on exclusive and/or other anticompetitive terms so as to limit and ultimately control the distribution and pricing of digital music, all to the detriment of consumers. (Counterclaim, paragraph 26, page 18).


This case is but one part of a much larger modern conspiracy to destroy all innovation that content owners cannot control and that disrupts their historical business models.(Counterclaim, paragraph 28, page 18).

Lime Wire has demanded a trial by jury.

Answer and Counterclaim of Lime Wire defendants*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary and discussion:

English language:
Digital Music Weblogs
Digital Music News
Good Morning Silicon Valley
Broadband Reports
Axiom Sun
New York (Must be registered to read article)
Stay Tuned
Torrent Freak

Other languages:
Forum Italia
Radio Al Aire


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


DreadWingKnight said...

Here's hoping LimeWire wins. It'll be enough of a kick in the teeth for these anti-p2p groups to make them think twice.

mu_mu said...

Good for limewire. I really appreciate when we have companies stand up for them selves and don't let them selves be played. I hope we can support companies such as limewire, and understand that not only is it illogical due to the type of information, but it is also useless to try and stop people from sharing with each other what they like and enjoy. Using other people's intelectual property (whether it be entertainment (music/movies/games) or it be fashion, recipies or ways to do business is something that we do all the time, and most of the times we hardly pay for that IP. It's interesting to see RIAA go against people who share IP, and have people bend over so easily it shows how weak they are when up against lawsuits. I am curious why RIAA isn't being asked to pay data charges associated with the transfer of it's IP over other people's networks.

Chris REX said...

I hope iTunes Napster AllofMP3 and everyone that has been sued by the RIAA joins in on this, it needs to become a giant class action lawsuit. Its about time for this witch hunt to end and for "us" to rebel and guillotine the heads of the RIAA.

medic927 said...

does anyone remember when congress was investigating this during the Napster allegations,one those interviewed was Don Henly from the Eagles,who stated that the artists are not benefiting from this at all !!! the recording industry is reaping the profits & benefits.I also found it interesting that Senator Schumer had to excuse himslf from this because his own dtr. had made him a disk that she downloaded from the web for him as a birthday present. obviously politicians can benefit from this
but JQ public can't.
Has anybody studied history? Gee Standard oil did something like this by stamping out competion, regulating prices that they saw fit to profit from. Hi Mr. Getty.When will this stop? you have congress bending overbackwards to accomdate the lobbyist, business but when comes to JQ Public its bendover. I also wonder if they the RIAA has paid royalties to Thomas Edison family for his invention of the record and record player from which the RIAA is benefiting. if the RIAA was around mr. edison's time wonder how much of his inventions would be copyright infringment from lets say the town cryers, the oil companies because of the light bulb. Congress needs to hear from the public, there is more of us than businesses or lobbyists.

Robin M. Smith said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

It's about time. I can't believe the music industry even trys to think they're not getting their share. They have gotten their share already by selling 8 tracks, Lps, cassettes, and then Cd's. Alot of them from the same album, just different form. It's kinda like what nintendo and playstation do, except the people just figured out a way around this scam.

Anonymous said...

Did win this suit?

I saw some info on other legal issues about

Anonymous said...

[URL=""][/URL] download lime wire full free @ !

Mark said...

After all this court talk... Should we feel safe using Limewire or not ? I dont know much about the laws and have used Limewire in the past and would like to continue.
Should we feel like someone is going to come knocking on our door for using it ?
Thank You. ( Oregon )

Unknown said...

about time someone pushed back

gator35016 said...

Drug companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to develop new drugs. They are then given exclusive rights to produce and sell the new drug and thereby profit from from their work for about 17 years. After that the developer loses exclusive rights; the drug can be copied as a generic drug; the price drops significantly and the public benefits.
Authors often spend years in research and rewrite before publishing a book. They are given a well deserved period to profit from their labors. Eventually their rights end and their work is declared public domain. We benefit from such law because we can download millions of pages of all sorts of written material from the world's libraries.
Why has our law allowed primarily a promoter to profit in perpetuity from another's work that they could not create. They never yield anything of value to the public domain. Rather they bilk the public year after year with exorbitant, ever increasing fees and attack the public to intimidate and keep us subservient making sure the public interest assumes no recognition.

The answer is political power. Millions of campaign dollars buy the vote of our elected reps in both major parties to support RIAA.

As long as we can't get angry enough to let our reps know how we feel--just a phone call or e-mail away--then things probably will not change.

Limewire has done the right thing in counter suing RIAA and Limewire's demand for a jury trial is likely RIAA's most feared trial component. Let the public hear the augments and let the public speak in their own interest. RIAA has played the vicious 800 pound gorilla long enough. Get rid of the mobsters in silk suits and let the music play.

Cancel said...

Im happy to see that others feel the way i do its about time a company took a stand. It makes me sad to see how low people go these days to strip money off each other. If your going to sue P2P network companies you might has well sue the entire country. Everyone breaks the copyright laws at some point from your highest government officials right down to your common american citizen. Ive seen teachers that have to do so just so their students will have the needed material to get a decent education. The RIAA has no right to single out P2P companies. You guys are right the entertainment industry does get its fair share of money for sales and then some. Everyone makes a copy of their favorite CD or cassete to send to their friends and family P2P networks just make this easier. Its no different than copying a CD and sending it, its just over a computer the RIAA has just used the computer factor to sue people nothing more. I'd be willing to bet most everyone associated with the RIAA shares musis etc. themselves. I have talked to some people that are afraid to even use copied media period. Even if they have paid for it from these P2P services because they think the Police will show up at their front door.