Legal Question in Business Law in California

Re: riaa law suites

The public is not "paying" for the lawsuit per se. The lawsuits are being filed by the record industry. They pay for their own attorneys and their own court-required filing fees.

True, the public DOES pay for the courts to operate in general. In that context the public is paying for the lawsuits. I do not know the cost to the system of any individual lawsuit based on the time it takes for clerks to work on the case as well as any time a judge might spend on. I suspect that the cost of any individual case is minimal considering the tens of thousands filed in California each year.

I have no connection whatsoever to anyone in that industry nor with anyone accused of being a violator. However, your assumption that the RIAA lawsuits are "frivolous" is a bold and probably erroneous assumption. The record industry is protecting the copyright owners from blatant copyright violations. The unauthorized, unpaid copying of material in violation of a copyright is NOT legal. It sounds to me like the RIAA suits are not frivolous. It is just that they are going after individuals whose violation may seem relatively minor, although still violations of the law.

It should be noted that the copyright laws permit treble damages as well as the recovery of attorneys fees. Thus, I really would not want to be on the receiving end of one of these lawsuits and have to pay the attorney's fees for the copyright holder.

J. Caleb Donner

LEGAL WARRIORS (R)