RIAA Extortion Machine Under Counter Attack

[GhostShip]

Folks who have been treated shoddily by the RIAA's "sue em all lawyers" are now demanding settlements from them to cover legal and other fees.

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2006/08/in-new-case-in-oklahoma-warner-v.html

In a new case in Oklahoma, Warner v. Stubbs, the defendant has countersued the RIAA for attorneys fees:

The defendant seeks relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927 (2006) from Plaintiffs (their agents and their counsel) because they have multiplied the proceedings unreasonably and vexatiously. Tallie is entitled to recover costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees reasonably incurred because of such conduct....

Despite being placed on notice that the defendant did not download any songs, the Plaintiffs filed this action against the defendant . Plaintiffs impugn the defendant  character and subject her to demands which are closely akin to extortion.

Plaintiffs have a pattern and practice of the action complained of by the defendant  in her counterclaim. See, e.g., Capitol Records v. Debbie Foster, Case No. 04-1569-W, U.S. D. C. W.D. OK. See, e.g., Priority Records LLC et al., v. Ron Pierce, Case No. Civ-04-1448-R, U.S. D.C. W.D. OK, and, Sony BMG Music Entertainment, et al, Case No. Civ-04-1445-C, U.S. Case 5:06-cv-00793-C. W.D. OK....."

It looks like folks are starting to see through the rhetoric to the facts of the matter, merely saying someone is an infringer is not classed as evidence and not having evidence and continuing to attempt to sue is in my opinion extortion, nothing more or less.

[GhostShip]

Heres another case being brought.

http://digitalmusic.weblogsinc.com/2006/08/22/foster-seeks-50-000-in-legal-fees/

Ms. Foster is the Oklahoma mother who fought back against the RIAA, made a motion for summary judgment, and won.

When we last checked in on Ms. Foster and her case, she'd filed a brief with the court seeking attorney's fees in the amount of $200/hr but, I was unable to find any information on how many hours she might be seeking.

Ray Beckerman to the rescue (as usual). Over at Recording Industry vs. The People, Ray says that the attorney for Ms. Foster could be asking for as much as $50,000 in "fees and disbursements" from the RIAA.

I've never been so happy to see an attorney ask for a large amount of money.

If this trend continues it will become rather worrying for the RIAA and their extortion teams as it would show evidence of a trend of vexacious litigation (false claims) and leave the lawyers involved in a indefensible position and a route for those sued to ask for possible disbarment of the lawyer from practicing litigation.

[GhostShip]

Wow the RIAA are caving in fast it seems to avoid the extortion precedent I mentioned would happen if they lost 2 similar cases.

http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2006/08/riaa-drops-stubbs-case-in-oklahoma-one.html

In Warner v. Stubbs, in Oklahoma, the defendant filed her answer and counterclaim against the RIAA on August 23, 2006. In it she likened the RIAA's tactics to "extortion".

The very next day, on August 24, 2006, the RIAA turned around and asked the Judge for permission to withdraw its case.
Ms. Stubbs is represented by Marilyn Barringer-Thomson, of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, the same lawyer who represents Deborah Foster in Capitol v. Foster.

I get the idea that they want these cases hidden from the public as fast as possible and in any way possible.
Both cases stem from the Cartels law suits against alleged copyright infringers, one was awarded against them when they withdrew the case providing no evidence and this case has not even got rolling and they are withdrawing, it does ask the question why are they bring cases where there is clearly little or no evidence of copyright infringement ?

Perhaps Cary or Dan would like to explain their reasons ?

I personally think that this trick is designed to leave the accused person out of pocket with lawyer fees, in which case any lawyer bring such frivolous and vexatious cases to court should be banned from practicing litigation..