EatingSteak writes: "The EFF Reports that a woman from Oklahoma got a big win today in the RIAA's case against her in 2004. FTA:
"The decision today is one of the first in the country to award attorneys fees to a defendant in an RIAA case over music sharing on the Internet."
"In his ruling, Judge West found that the RIAA had asserted an untested and marginal theory that veered toward "frivolous and unreasonable" by suing Foster for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement when the only evidence against her was her name on the household Internet account. Much like the judge in Elektra v. Santangelo, West expressed skepticism that "an Internet-illiterate parent, who does not know Kazaa from a kazoo" could be held liable for children in her home downloading music illegally unless the parent had knowledge of the conduct or had giver her permission to do so."
This case was thrown out in July, but Foster's lawyer fees were finally awarded formally to her. Could this be a godo precedent for future cases that (1) IP Address != Infringing Person, and (2) RIAA getting slammed for attorney's fees in the future?"
Furthermore, the RIAA "Facts" page goes on to say: "though some factions of the industry see price resistance — CD prices are relatively low and home videos rentals are still a bargain — consumers don't seem to balk at the rising price of fun in this strong, family-friendly economy."
Wait a minute. Consumers not balking at rising prices of other types of fun (assuming fun == media consumption)? I disagree. Movie theater attendence has has been slipping for a long time, and who says consumers are not balking at high prices of movie rentals? At Blockbuster, a movie rental is $3.95! After taxes, I don't even get a $1 bill back out of my $5. Needless to say, I haven't been spending much time or money there. Finally, I contend that movie rental prices have been decreasing. Now, instead of paying $4 every time I watch a movie, I can just watch all the movies I want for the price of two or three single rentals. And no crap about phantom late fees either. The RIAA should be happy they're still getting as much for CDs as they are, because they're certainly not going to be getting $33.86 anytime soon."