Beaverton (OR) – The epic legal battle between the major record labels and an Oregon single mother is almost at an end.  Beaverton resident Tanya Andersen has been awarded $107,883 in legal fees from her three year-long fight against the RIAA.  While the amount sounds impressive, it is approximately one-third of the $298,995 that Andersen had demanded.

Federal Magistrate John Acosta reviewed the fees request after the RIAA dropped their lawsuit of illegally downloading music against Andersen.  You may remember that the RIAA initially sued Andersen back in 2005.  The case was dismissed with prejudice in June 2007 and Andersen countersued afterwards.  Both sides have been fighting over the legal costs since then.

The RIAA said the case was a simple copyright infringement case and argued that Andersen only deserved $31,000.  They also claimed that she only required a single attorney, but Andersen showed up with as many as six lawyers at some hearings.

Judge Acosta awarded Andersen’s attorney Lory Lybeck an hourly rate of $325 per hour instead of $375 that Andersen sought (No Mortons Steakhouse for you!).  Acosta also disagreed with Andersen's request of a fee multiplier of X 2 for the difficulty of mounting a unique and "high-risk" defense.

Both sides have until May 27 to object to the award and it’s a safe bet that Andersen and the RIAA aren’t happy.  This could go on for several more months.

Hopefully many more cases of dismissed with prejudice in the future

May 16, 2008 09:16     

The RIAA is basically using blackmail on thousands of people around the United States... We can't be sure that you shared files but if you pay us a few thousand dollars we won't pursue the case in court against you. Maybe if 10% of those cases turn out this way they will stop and only sue people they actually have direct and inconclusive evidence agaisnt.
Greg report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +7

Illegal SHARING, not downloading

May 16, 2008 10:38     

Why can't these articles ever get it right? Seriously, she wasn't sued for downloading music. She was sued for sharing music. There's a world of difference between the two.
Task report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +6

RIAA going down?

May 16, 2008 11:59     

It would be great if this was the beginning of the end for the RIAA. :)
TomLeeM/BigWarpGuy report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +7

not downloading

May 16, 2008 12:38     

If you use most p2p applications to download music, then you are automatically also sharing because that is how p2p works. so it may as well read "downloading" because when p2p is involved, the other is guaranteed to be there. beware downloading pirate music, because you will be also sharing it.
Ryker Abel report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Modern Legal Cartels

May 17, 2008 08:24     

Crime continues to become big business. In the past, it was simple, alcohol, drugs, jewels. Today it's more complicated, so the crime lords hide behind legal holdings they bargain for out of politicians and call it "music rights" And the World continues to spin...
Narg report abuse vote down vote up Votes: -1

@ryker

May 17, 2008 19:03     

not if you are tranfering the downloaded music to a diffent folder and your share folder is empty . Not to mention I disable uploading. A true pirate takes what he can and gives none back.
pyrosity report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0

Re: Modern Legal Cartels

May 18, 2008 00:00     

Interesting you should mention, drugs and alcohol when discussing the music industry. How many illegal drugs and and abusive amounts of alcohol are bought with the "legally" sold music? I'm sure the music industry could stand to give up a few bucks. The world just might be a better place.
Overkill report abuse vote down vote up Votes: +0