RIAA Drop Yet Another Case When Asked To Put Up Evidence

[GhostShip]

It seems if you ask the extortionists to prove their data collection system (run by medisentry) is half reasonable, they would rather not continue the case strangely enough.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080618-dishonesty-and-a-missing-pc-riaa-dropping-umg-v-lindor.html

Just weeks after dismissing Warner v. Cassin and then filing a new lawsuit aimed at uncovering the identity of the alleged infringer, the RIAA has moved to dismiss another contentious copyright infringement lawsuit. Yesterday, the RIAA unexpectedly filed a motion to dismiss UMG v. Lindor without prejudice.

Throughout the course of the litigation, Lindor and Beckerman have raised a number of issues about the nature of the RIAA's legal campaign, including MediaSentry's role and the constitutionality of the statutory damages sought by the labels. Last November, Judge Robert M. Levy ordered the RIAA to disclose the actual expenses incurred for each of the 38 songs named in the lawsuit. Beckerman has also accused the industry of using P2P itself to send music to radio stations, a charge that the industry denies.

Once again its hearteneing to see these criminal style media organisations faced with no choice but to admit the truth, they have brought false claim and charges to extort money from the innocent, lets hope one day these extortionists are imprisoned. 

[Cobra]

It is better for the client because of all that it eliminates such as cost and time, but in terms of case law I wonder if it is almost or just as good as the defense winning the case so that the verdict is on the books.