Copyright Law

RIAA withdraws Lava v. Amurao, argues it should not be assessed attorneys fees; defendant moves to exclude MediaSentry evidence for illegality

By Ty Rogers and Ray Beckerman

A number of motions were filed on January 28th, by both parties, in Lava v. Amurao, pending in White Plains, New York, before Judge Brieant.

First and foremost, the RIAA has moved to voluntarily dismiss its case, with prejudice. In an unusual tactic, it affirmatively argues that it did nothing wrong in pursuing Mr. Amurao, and should not be charged with Mr. Amurao's attorneys fees.

Other motions filed:

By defendant:
--to exclude MediaSentry testimony on ground of illegality;
--to take deposition of Matthew Oppenheim; and
--to compel discovery into the record companies expenses per download.

By plaintiffs:
--for discovery sanctions against Mr. Amurao; and
--for summary judgment dismissing copyright misuse counterclaim.

Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in support of voluntary dismissal*
Exibits to plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in support of voluntary dismissal*
Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in support of motion for summary judgment dismissing counterclaim*
Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in support of discovery sanctions*
Defendant's motion for exclusion of MediaSentry evidence on ground of illegality, compel deposition of Matthew Oppenheim, compel expense discovery*
Defendant's memorandum of law in support of exclusion of MediaSentry evidence on ground of illegality*

* Document published online at Internet Law & Regulation

Commentary & discussion:

p2pnet.net
Slashdot

Keywords: digital copyright law online internet law legal download upload peer to peer p2p file sharing filesharing music movies indie independent label freeculture creative commons pop/rock artists riaa independent mp3 cd favorite songs intellectual property

Full post as published by Recording Industry vs The People on January 29, 2008 (boomark / email).