It's no secret the Recording Industry Association of America has sued more than 20,000 people on accusations of unlawfully sharing copyrighted music on peer-to-peer networks.

The lawsuits are generally the same. Investigators for the RIAA usually go onto Kazaa, take screenshots and download some files of music. The RIAA sues.

But then there's the case of a New York family accused of copyright infringement. The case, defended by Ray Beckerman, an outspoken critic of the RIAA and the publisher of the blog – Recording Industry v. The People – was awaiting a decision for about a year from a federal judge on whether the case should be dismissed.

Beckerman argued that merely making copyrighted music available on peer-to-peer networks was not infringement, an argument bolstered by recent opinions in other jurisdictions – but a viewpoint shared by only a handful of judges. Beckerman's argument was that if the RIAA can't prove anybody downloaded the music from an open share folder, then the case would have to be dismissed.

The RIAA takes the opposite angle, and even claims the downloads from its investigators count against the defendant, a viewpoint shared by an Arizona judge.

A hearing in Beckerman's case was set for next week. Yet out of the blue, Beckerman was notified Wednesday that the RIAA voluntarily dismissed the case weeks before – with the "making available" motion-to-dismiss still pending.

For the moment, it seemed like one of the few defense victories in the RIAA's war on file sharing.

But Beckerman got a call Thursday from the RIAA, informing him the case was refiled.

The RIAA hadn't mentioned to the federal court it was the same lawsuit. So it was assigned to another judge. The RIAA demanded immediate discovery, such as depositions and hard drives, in a bid to get to the bottom of who pilfered its music.

The original judge in the case blocked discovery, pending a ruling on the "making available" dismissal motion.

"These people are psychos," Beckerman said in an interview.

Also, the case was captioned under the name Does, meaning the RIAA was somehow pretending it didn't know the family's name allegedly behind the IP address in question.

"This case, it's the exact same internet access account," he said. "It’s the very same act of copyright infringement charged. It's no different."

The RIAA did not immediately respond for comment.

Beckerman has penned letters to both judges alerting them to the switcheroo.

"They're trying to force a settlement and frightening people," Beckerman said in the interview. "That's the only point of this."

Photo Geek&Poke

See Also: