Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Counterclaims dismissed in Atlantic Recording v. Raleigh

In Atlantic Recording v. Raleigh, the defendant's counterclaims have been dismissed.

Decision dismissing counterclaims
Order dismissing countreclaims
Amended answer and counterclaims

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


Alter_Fritz said...

Hmm, the "ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL" by Judge Carol E. Jackson is a bit short on explaining the "why".
You have the "Memorandum and Order filed this date" too? I hope the Judge made some efforts to explain her decision there since at least to me some of the counterclaims did made sense and I wonder why this judge dismissed them.

raybeckerman said...

Sorry, I put in the order but not the decision. Now I've posted the decision as well.

Alter_Fritz said...

thanks Ray, I see now this new order seems to be more like a "housekeeping" one due to procedural matters. (At least that's how I read it).
The "why" is explained by the judge already in her order from august 2008 (*)
In my opinion the judge erred here!
While you might have this Noerr-Pennington doctrine and while it seems to excuse and allows many behaviors as long as the perpetrator claims to do the stuff he does with the stated intention to go to court someday later if his earlier extrajudicial behaviour is fruitless, this doctrine IMO should not be used as excuse to rubberstamp the actions of organised music as ok.
The judge for example wrote that the allegations against defendant could be cleared in the discovery process but totally overlooked the behaviour of plaintiffs here and in nearly all the other over 30000 cases where they claim in their first letter to putative defendants that they already have secured all evidence they need to succeed over defendants in court.
Dismissing those counterclaims and thereby not only endorse this "sue 'em all" behaviour by plaintiffs but also rob the judiciary of the opportunity to shed a light on this IMO reprehensible behaviour by organised music seems not fair to me. It seems to me this Judge hasn't "got it" what Plaintiffs have done and still are doing in the last 5-6 years to the judicial process and the law in your country.
Keeping counterclaims "in the pipe" would seem right to me. What this judge did seems wrong and not fair in my opinion. And refering to Noerr-Pennington doctrine seems IMO not right when it comes to the concerted actions that the plaintiffs have shown now in over 35000 instances!


Eric said...

why do judges have such an aversion to class action in these cases?