macnn/electronista
05/15/2008, 1:30pm, EDT
Thursday, May 15thRIAA hit with legal fees in P2P case
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) will have to pay $107,834 in legal fees as a result of a failed lawsuit, a US federal judge has ruled. For two years, running until June 2007, the RIAA pursued a case against Tanya Andersen, accusing her of illegal file sharing; that case was dismissed with prejudice however, and Andersen and one of her lawyers were allowed to seek compensation for their defense. At points in the case, as many as six attorneys for Andersen were present in court.
The compensation is said to be the highest awarded against the RIAA in terms of legal fees, and far more than the RIAA's proposal of $30,000. The judge did not grant the $298,995 asked for by Andersen lawyer Lory Lybeck though, noting that Lybeck's work on a counterclaim for Andersen was not eligible for compensation, along with some "generalized" billing, and part of his hourly rate.
Andersen and the RIAA have until May 27th to object to the amount of compensation. [via Ars Technica]
Filed under: industry
Other story tags: lawsuits, RIAA, piracy, P2P
, 
, 8
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
Top
subscribe to comments
for this article
Way cool!!!!
I hope this keeps happening. Those mothers should pay for every gestapo move they attempt.
The slime get it in the end.
Only Fair
RIAA has every right to go after people illegally sharing music.
HOWEVER, the risk is that they will make mistakes, as they did in this case. They should be held liable for these mistakes, and it looks like they will.
If I remember this instance correctly, this user never had the software (she was a mac user, and the software only ran on a PC). Personally, I am also very pleased she is getting reimbursed (as well she should).
This will not discourage the RIAA, since there are many hundreds more (my niece included) who got caught and had to pay large fines. Her fine was over $8,000.
A bright spot today!
nt
And...
And there was much rejoicing... (yaaaay)
not enough.
I agree RIAA has a right to pursue claims. I do not agree that reimbursement for attorney fees is adequate compensation to those falsely accused and dragged through a trial/hearing/countersuit. This represents a loss of time the falsely accused can never get back, a burden beyond "mere" attorney fees.
If the RIAA is going to file suit against someone, they'd better be damned sure they are not mistaken.
Glad to see this
The RIAA uses it's weight to intimidate those accused into settling with the RIAA regardless of guilt or fairness, ie there is no way they can defend themselves without a strong defense team. I think this should be the norm, if you bring a case against someone and you lose, you're responsible for that persons legal fees. It would be a measured response. ie, I walk in with one lawyer with a measurable winning track record. The you should be able to expect to have a comparable lawyer to defend you. Of course if you lose, you pay your own fees. It would eliminate the legal strong arming of the little guy, and translate into the accuser of making sure they really have a case. On the flip side, if I was guilty and I knew it it'd be in my best interest to settle and not tie up the courts b/c I broke the law.
i want to see...
...a story about how the RIAA takes the money it wins in court and gives it back to the artists. Oh yeah.. kind of hard to do since the RIAA wants to lower royalties. I have yet to hear of any band that got money from the RIAA from the result of a lawsuit.
Maybe I am wrong?
Nothing was announced
But everyone knows about it already...... lol