Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy


Peer to peer related lawsuits are continuing to be filed by RIAA against pretty much anyone it stumbles upon. A defendant in such a lawsuit usually receives an offer to settle as RIAA counts on defendant's fear of paying even more pushing them to choose settlement as the lesser of two financial troubles. Many have already fallen to this fear being afraid to challenge RIAA, but as it turns out, RIAA can easily be challenged because there is a good deal of evidence that goes in favor the defendant and contrary to RIAA's interests.

As quoted by p2pnet, Anders Bylund said in a recent Motley Fool article:

"Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG have suffered another telling blow to their carefully orchestrated campaign to bend their customers to their wills by suing them.

Oklahoma mother Debbie Foster “proved once again that when the RIAA comes knocking, it pays to slam the door,” p2pnet posted at the beginning of this month.

Now, in a first for RIAA victims, after having used every trick in the legal book to avoid paying Foster’s attornies’ fees, as they’d been ordered to do, the labels’ RIAA has been told to pay her not $55,000, as she’d originally asked, but almost $70,000."


There are so many of these stories that I sometimes hesitate to make them featured news. They should be common knowledge by now and RIAA should be getting punished severely for what they are doing.

But this story will just blow you away. RIAA is suing a 10 year old girl, Kylee Andersen, which is actually a daughter of Tanya Andersen which is being sued previously by RIAA as well. So that's two baseless lawsuits brought upon one family. They are baseless because it is not until deep into the process that the defendants learn what exactly are they being accused of and because they in fact did not have anything to do nor were even capable of doing what they are accused of.

"Giving the content cartel everything they want may well keep the lawyers away, but it may also destroy the value of the site. It legitimises corporate blackmail and may even help to persuade legislators that the copyright system isn’t broken enough to need fixing, letting them ignore other approaches.

One such approach is Creative Commons, a global project which tries to make copyright and licensing a lot simpler and clearer so that sharing and creative reuse are encouraged." -- Read more