The RIAA Meets Civil Procedure

By Kristopher Nelson on Sep 14, 2007

Recording Industry vs The People:

In May of this year, the United States Supreme Court came down with the decision in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, — US — , 127 S. Ct. 1955 (May 21, 2007) which established a “plausibility” standard for federal pleadings.

In Interscope v. Rodriguez, it was held that the RIAA’s boilerplate complaint, which it has been using in all of its cases for the past 4 years, and which robotically alleges only the magic incantation of “downloading, distributing and/or making available for distribution”, is insufficient under the Twombly standard, and the Court dismissed the complaint.

. . .

Accordingly I urge all practitioners who have a “making available” complaint to move to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), or, if the time to do so has passed, to move for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), on the basis of Twombly and Rodgriguez.

For more complete details, see: Practice Tip: I recommend that defendants’ lawyers consider making motions to dismiss complaint or motions for judgment on pleadings.

See, your CivPro prof was right! Civil procedure rulings and issues really are critical.

0 comments 0 people listening

Sign in or Post as Guest

Comment help
Get Livefyre

Sort: Newest | Oldest

Related Posts

The current television business model will fail: The television industry is where newspapers were 10 years ago - in denial that they need to change their business model. They have tried, on occasion, to argue that skipping commercials is "stealing" and similar types of arguments. They are, as Henry points out, still making money - so they can afford to ignore the changes. I predict that, as inevitable as the death of their current business is, their attempt to legislate content protections is as inevitable.
Civil law's influence on early United States law: It is a law-school maxim today that the United States is a common-law country, while most of Europe uses civil law: English-derived common law has as its most basic tenet the binding nature of judicial precedent, while Roman-derived civil law privileges statutes. But the more I investigate the history and details of each, the more clear it becomes to me that the United States, at least, owes (almost?) as much of its legal system to civil law as it does to "pure" common law.
Civil law and courts of equity: the common law is hybrid law: The Roman civil law tradition (which prevails in Europe) has had a larger impact on American jurisprudence than is generally acknowledged. Indeed, although the United States considers itself a common-law country, we in fact use a system that combines common (judge-made, customary, adversarial, precedent-focused) with civil (usually statute-based and inquisitorial) law, but which in England focused on "equity" or fairness and justice.

About Kristopher Nelson

I'm currently a graduate student of the history of law and technology at the University of California, San Diego. I also provide law and technology consulting services. Additionally, I'm a non-practicing lawyer and former developer/sysadmin at a biotech non-profit. For more about me and my work, see krisnelson.org or my Google Profile.

Post Metadata

Post title: The RIAA Meets Civil Procedure

Authored by: Kristopher Nelson

Date posted: Sep 14, 2007

Categorized as: copyright • law • news

Tagged with: law

Permalink: http://inpropriapersona.com/the-riaa-meets-civil-procedure/

Shortlink: http://wp.me/pxgNP-1G

Alternate URL: /2007/09/riaa-meets-civil-procedure.html