In one of the usual "fishing" expiditions launched by the RIAA a judge has thrown out their nameless (john Doe) lawsuit on clear and helpful gounds.
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2008/11/judge-quashes-boston-university.htmlIn one of the "John Doe" cases targeting Boston University, consolidated under the heading London-Sire Records v. Does 1-4, after the university advised the Court that it could not identify John Does #8, 9, and 14 to a reasonable degree of technical certainty, Judge Nancy Gertner deemed the letter a motion to quash, and granted it, quashing the subpoena as to those defendants:
The Court treats Boston University's 9/23/08 Letter as a Motion to Quash and GRANTS the motion with respect to Doe Defendants # 8, 9, and 14. The University has adequately demonstrated that it is not able to identify the alleged infringers with a reasonable degree of technical certainty. As a result, the Court finds that compliance with the subpoena as to the IP addresses represented by these Defendants would expose innocent parties to intrusive discovery. Accordingly, under the test laid out in its 3/31/08 Order, the Court declines to authorize discovery and quashes the subpoena as to Does # 8, 9, and 14.
This is a common sense move for any university faced with trying to assertain which out of potentialy hundreds of users was responsible for what they claim, often the claims are worthless and have no technical merit but in this case at least the discussion has not reached such a stage, as usual when dealing with cases involving the RIAA more money will be brough to bear in appeals, political interference etc as is often the case when its common sense to the rest of the world there is no case.
Judge Gertner is it seems a Judge worthy of the name, unlike some who take no time to look into the cases presented before them.
