Thursday, January 17, 2008

Tanya Andersen to get her attorneys fees against the RIAA

The Magistrate Judge's decision (Westlaw cite: 2008 WL 185806) granting Tanya Andersen's motion for attorneys fees in Atlantic v. Andersen has now been affirmed by the District Judge, Hon. James A. Redden.

This means that Ms. Andersen will get her attorneys fees, and the only question remaining is how much.

January 16, 2008, Order and Opinion Affirming Magistrate's Recommendations and Granting Defendant's Motion for Attorneys Fees* (Westlaw cite: 2008 WL 185806)
September 21, 2007, Decision of Magistrate Judge Donald C. Ashmanskas Granting Attorneys Fees Motion* (Westlaw cite: 2008 WL 185806)

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:
Ars Technica
The Register
Digital Media Wire (French)
Portal IT

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


Hellslam said...

Were I a stockholder in Atlantic, or any other member of the RIAA, I would take careful note of this decision.

Anonymous said...

There can be no serious dispute that the parties' legal relationship has been materially altered.

There can be no serious dispute that the plaintiffs have been thumped in every major regard.

Of course, the battle over what constitutes valid fees is only beginning.

-Dodge Magnum

Anonymous said...

Game, set and match.

Of course, the RIAA never gives up, no matter weak their case is. Even when by all rights their case should be dead, buried and forgotten, their lawyers exhume the rotting corpse and attempt to dress it in a fresh suit so they can drag it back into court and pretend it is still alive.

StephenH said...

This is a big blow to the RIAA. The RIAA should have know all along that Tanya was one tough lady, and so was her daughter Kylee. Next of all, the RIAA should have told Settlement Support Center to investigate serious claims of innocense, and paid attention to Gary Millin's testimony in BMG Canada v John Doe about MediaSentry's investigations being unreliable. Failure to do this should be an important lesson for the RIAA that spy bots are unreliable and this will cost them bigtime having to pay these fees (plus have to fight a counterclaim motion in the form of a class action). You go Tanya!

Scott said...

In effect, the RIAA is going to end up financing part of the class action lawsuit against itself. This is way cool.

Anonymous said...


You remind me of the scene in the Monty Python movie where King Arthur has hacked the arms and legs off of the Black Knight, who is protesting, "Come back and fight you coward. It's only a flesh wound."


Anonymous said...

"You remind me of the scene in the Monty Python movie where King Arthur has hacked the arms and legs off of the Black Knight, who is protesting, "Come back and fight you coward. It's only a flesh wound.""

That sounds about right :-) I was thinking more "zombie movie meets Weekend at Bernie's"
--Except that the RIAA is far more ominous than the comedic comparison would suggest. They are willing to tenaciously sue people on the weakest of grounds and continue to sue them even after it becomes clear they are suing the wrong person. They can and do ruin people's lives emotionally and financially based on tenuous or even false allegations--and they fight and fight not to have to pay attorney's fees for reasonable defense of their baseless and ruinous charges.


Reluctant Raconteur said...

It wouldn't surprise me to see this as part of a Discworld story. Lawyers sue people so that is what they do.