June242008
"At any instant, KaZaA users are likely to have thousands of sources for these particular songs to choose from and no reason to choose Ms. Thomas’ computer over any other. And while KaZaA users may engage in a prodigious amount of infringing activity, that tells us nothing about the crucial issue in this case: whether this Defendant transmitted any of these 24 songs during the relevant time period. Testimony from an investigator that he or she downloaded a song simply cannot bridge the chasm between “making
available” and “actual dissemination” to anyone other than Plaintiffs’ authorized agents.
Plaintiffs may complain that they cannot overcome this evidentiary hurdle. But Plaintiffs include some of the largest companies in the recording industry, with nearly
limitless resources when compared to Ms. Thomas. It is Plaintiffs who have threatened litigation against over 30,000 people, many whom are unprepared for the unfamiliar (to a layperson) demands of discovery. It is Plaintiffs who have chosen to target noncommercial activities that occur in the privacy of the home, thereby injecting themselves “behind closed doors” where factual investigation can be difficult. Having put themselves in this position, Plaintiffs should not complain that proving their distribution claims poses evidentiary challenges."
— The Eff is attacking the foundation of all RIAA lawsuits. from Hypebot
(via aprilini)
Reblogged from APRIL'S LOG OF SHIT SHE LIKES.
