NewYorkCountryLawyer's Journal: RIAA Drops Patti Santangelo Case

The RIAA is seeking to drop its case against Patti Santangelo, Elektra v. Santangelo, in White Plains, New York. This is the case against a single mom, and mother of five, which received a great deal of press attention in 2005. The case was discussed on Slashdot here, here, and here, was on national television here and here, and received a lot of other press coverage as well. See sampling of articles collected here and see Associated Press coverage here. The RIAA's motion seeks dismissal "without prejudice", which means that they could sue her again for the same thing. Their reason is no doubt to try to insulate themselves from liability for attorney's fees, since a dismissal "with prejudice" would make Ms. Santangelo a "prevailing party" under the Copyright Act, hence eligible for an attorneys fees award. See Capitol v. Foster July 13, 2006, Order Dismissing Case and Finding Defendant to be Eligible for Attorneys Fees.

A question...

[Shadow Wrought]

IANAL, but I have worked in the legal field as either a paralegal or paralegal/techie for 7 years now. It seems that what the RIAA is doing would represent a pattern of frivilous lawsuits. I'm sure they are smart enough to defend against any such charge on any single case, but after you get half a dozen or so, if not more, than can the pattern of behavior become an issue? Not that I can do anything about it, but it would seem like the Bar would be interested in such behavior.

Re:

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

So we have argued. See counterclaim in Elektra v. Schwartz [riaalawsuits.us].

Re:

[Shadow Wrought]

And well written to boot! I have read many briefs (both ours and theirs) which made me shake my head at the grandiose exaggerations, posturing, or just plain mean spirited aggression. I wish you well in your fight.

Re:

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Thank you for your kind words and good wishes.