Response from: BRUCE    (03/11/07 3:43am)

As an Attorney, the best defenses to the draconian RIAA are the following arguments:

The RIAA benefits (and has benefited) enormously from spreading their music around as much as possible by giving kids a "taste" for nearly a whole decade of free and unfetterd music downloading from the internet, and then forcing them to buy them at markedly increased prices - analagous to getting people hooked on crack cocaine with free samples, and then extorting all of their money when they become hopelessly addicted to free downloading (this is, at the very least, "contributory negligence" on the part of the RIAA because for too long, they made it too easy to download free music, with no repercussions, and over time this became part of mainstream teenage culture and vernacular).

Now those teens are adults, and they were literally weaned for their entire lives on, and were created into a generation of, free music downloaders. The RIAA's cruel efforts to stop them through financial intimidation and vicious lawsuits now strikes these kids as being totally alien and unnatural, like telling them that now playing video games or eating spaghetti is illegal, punishable by hefty monetary fines or jail time.

Kids have been freely recording their favorite songs and using them in their private capacities ever since music has been played on the radio, since the 1950s, using recording cassettes and CD burners.

Why is recording music played on the radio, and then playing it for one's self-enjoyment at home or in the car, different from downloading it from the internet?

There is no question that the RIAA has been contributorily negligent in the decade long free downloading frenzy, by letting it go on virtually unfettered for almost a decade, and it is the RIAA that should be forced to bear any and all financial losses.

The legal doctrine of "laches" exists when equity aids the vigilant, and not those who procrastinate regarding their rights by neglecting to assert a right or claim that, together with lapse of time and other circumstances, prejudices an adverse party. Neglecting to do what should, or could, have been done to assert a claim or right for an unreasonable and unjustified time causes disadvantage to another. Laches is similar to a "statute of limitations," except that it is equitable rather than statutory, and is a common affirmative defense raised in civil actions. In general, when a party has been guilty of laches in enforcing his right by great delay and lapse of time, this circumstance will at common law prejudice and sometimes operate in bar of a remedy which is discretionary for the court to afford. In courts of equity, delay will also generally be prejudicial.

Since the RIAA did nothing about it really, and raised an entire generation of kids who thought it was normal, and also contributed to this problem by making it rather easy, then it is the RIAA who should bear the financial losses due to free music downloading, not the kids.

Response from: narcanon    (06/29/07 7:24am)

That's an interesting review Bruce, very informative. This case is already difficult and it looks like things are starting to move along.

Response from: center drug rehab treatment    (07/01/07 5:07am)

That's an interesting review Bruce, very informative. This case is already difficult and it looks like things are starting to move along.

Response from: Business Loan    (08/02/07 4:37pm)

This is absolutely great news! Now lets hope Marilyn Barringer-Thomson will be strong enough not to accept the likely buyout offer from the dark side and that she will keep fighting for the good cause and the tiny innocent guys against the MAFIAA*

Response from: CrazyPoster    (09/20/07 10:44am)

I think that technology will be able to stay a step in front of the curve and elude law enforcement

Response from: Photo Scanning Blog    (12/14/07 1:42pm)

The RIAA is so ridiculous. They shouldn't just pay the attorney fees, but they should pay Debbie Foster for the time they spent of hers without any reason. I'm researching a similar lawsuit right now and it's all just so frivolous.

Response from: sexy lingerie    (04/28/08 2:56pm)

I think the foster case will become an example and be reffered to many times in the future

Response from: italy property    (06/06/08 7:43am)

These lawsuits can be such a waste, its so easy to accuse and ruin someones life

Response from: Cocaine Treatment    (06/22/08 1:23pm)

SOmetimes the defendant deserves to get money if they are wrongfully accused.

Response from: Alcohol Rehabilitation    (06/22/08 1:24pm)

We need to clamp down on lawsuits because its cost taxpayers way to much money.

Response from: çeviri    (12/02/08 9:34am)

I think that technology will be able to stay a step in front of the curve and elude law enforcement..

Response from: Wise Bread

That usually means buying it, of course.  And if you think buying music can be pricey, imagine the cost of paying the RIAA off in an effort to stay out of court.Can I legally download non RIAA music?

Response from: Digital Music - The Future

In Capitol v. Foster: Justice At Last and RIAA Lawsuit Setback: Defendant Wins Attorney Fees, defendant Debbie Foster of Oklahoma was granted attorney fees. RIAA dropped the suit against the mother after it appeared her daughter was the likely...