Exonerated defendant sues RIAA for malicious prosecution: "Former RIAA target Tanya Andersen has sued several major record labels, the parent company of RIAA investigative arm MediaSentry, and the RIAA's Settlement Support Center for malicious prosecution, a development first reported by P2P litigation attorney Ray Beckerman of Vandenberg & Feliu.
Earlier this month, Andersen and the RIAA agreed to dismiss the case against her with prejudice, making her the prevailing party and eligible for attorneys fees.
The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Oregon late last week and accuses the RIAA of a number of misdeeds, including invasion of privacy, libel and slander, and deceptive business practices. "
USA law is quite different than Australian law - this probably would have been dealt with in the original proceedings in Australia. In fact, there is a procedural argument that she could be barred by not raising it in the original proceedings.
Where Australia leads the USA by a substantial margin is the relative absence of poorly conceived or prepared proceedings, such as the RIAA here or the "pants judge."
In some Australian states such as New South Wales, the attorney filing the original claim must certify that there is a reasonable prospect of success - it would be very hard for the RIAA to do this in Australia based on the flimsy evidence and baseless damages calculations that appear to be often used.
Earlier this month, Andersen and the RIAA agreed to dismiss the case against her with prejudice, making her the prevailing party and eligible for attorneys fees.
The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Oregon late last week and accuses the RIAA of a number of misdeeds, including invasion of privacy, libel and slander, and deceptive business practices. "
USA law is quite different than Australian law - this probably would have been dealt with in the original proceedings in Australia. In fact, there is a procedural argument that she could be barred by not raising it in the original proceedings.
Where Australia leads the USA by a substantial margin is the relative absence of poorly conceived or prepared proceedings, such as the RIAA here or the "pants judge."
In some Australian states such as New South Wales, the attorney filing the original claim must certify that there is a reasonable prospect of success - it would be very hard for the RIAA to do this in Australia based on the flimsy evidence and baseless damages calculations that appear to be often used.
No comments:
Post a Comment