backtop


Print 31 comment(s) - last by emmet.. on May 19 at 5:13 AM

Florida judge not amused, already told them once

A Florida judge denied an RIAA attempt to dismiss counterclaims filed against it in Atlantic v. Boyer yesterday, allowing all six of the complaints to proceed.

Last month, defendant Eva Boyer filed six counterclaims in response to a standard RIAA copyright-infringement suit filed against her by Atlantic, Warner Bros., UMG, and Sony BMG. She accused the RIAA of civil conspiracy, computer fraud, trespass, deception, extortion, and abuse of process – and each claim was upheld by United States District Judge Richard A. Lazzara.

Recording Industry vs. The People notes that Boyer’s claims are nearly identical to the five out of six surviving claims filed against the RIAA in UMG v. Del Cid, which settled in October of last year. Coincidentally, Atlantic v. Boyer and UMG v. Del Cid share the same presiding judge, in addition to the same counsel for both the plaintiffs and the defendant.

Writing on Slashdot, Vandenberg & Feliu, LLP attorney Ray Beckerman, who coauthors Recording Industry vs. The People, says he underestimated the RIAA’s “chutzpah” for filing the same motion to dismiss a second time:

“I opined that ‘it is highly unlikely that the RIAA will make a motion to dismiss counterclaims,’ since I knew they'd be risking sanctions if they did,” wrote Beckerman under his alias, NewYorkCountryLawyer. “In essence [they] thumbed their nose at the judge, making the dismissal motion anyway.”

In its motion to dismiss, one of the RIAA’s claims (PDF) argued that Lazzara’s prior ruling in UMG v. Del Cid was “wrongly decided,” accusing the court of failing to heed proper burdens of proof, citing revised standards in Twombly v. Bell Atlantic. Lazzara disagreed, noting that a review of the case, and its resulting order, “reflects otherwise.”

Seemingly annoyed with the RIAA’s repeat claims, Lazzara denied the RIAA’s motion to dismiss the morning after it was filed – going so far as to tell Boyer to not worry about filing a response:

“Because the Court has previously resolved all of the issues raised in Plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss,” wrote Lazzara, “and because the Court is not convinced that its prior decision was wrong, the Court needs no response from Defendant and the motion is due to be denied.”

The RIAA has ten days to answer Boyer’s counterclaims.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Beautiful!
By eye smite on 5/7/2008 12:22:08 PM , Rating: -1
Noooooo, it shows how prejudice and ready to argue people are over a point that's true and valid. The idiocy is their's, and they exhibit it very well, despite the fact that they're supposed to be sophisticated humans. I refer back to The Human Animal, you might try googling it and seeing how well their behavior matches that of a base animal. However, the delusion of being so sophisticated must persist in order for them to enjoy their little worlds. So sad.


RE: Beautiful!
By Denigrate on 5/7/2008 1:19:25 PM , Rating: 5
Short. Bus. Rider.

You eat up propaganda from your prefered crap flingers and think that the rest of us are morons because we can't see the "brilliance" of your flawed positions.

You might try thinking for yourself someday. At that time, you'll see that no one side has all the answers.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki