It's looking pretty damn likely that the Recording Industry Association Of America are going to have to write a cheque for just under $70,000 to bring to an end their long running dispute with Deborah Foster over alleged P2P copyright violation.
As much previously reported, Foster was one of the more controversial targets of the RIAA's somewhat out of control legal team. They accused her of illegally sharing music via P2P network Kazaa, but she denied the allegations, pointing out she was pretty IT illiterate and wouldn't know how to share music via Kazaa even if she wanted to. The RIAA promptly sued Foster, beginning a long running legal dispute, despite the RIAA's somewhat questionable case against the accused.
The trade body continued with their litigation even after it became apparent it had been Deborah's daughter Amanda who had actually done the file sharing, and even after they had won a separate lawsuit against the daughter by default (by default because Amanda Foster failed to respond to the litigation). The industry association claimed that Deborah Foster should still be held liable for copyright violation because it was her computer the daughter had used to illegally share the music.
It was something of a test case for the RIAA, who were keen to find away of overcoming the problem of how to take action for file sharing that was conducted on a computer with multiple users - if you could make the owner of the computer liable, even if they hadn't actually done or known about the file sharing, then there'd be less work and cost involved in litigating against those filesharers. Unfortunately, for the RIAA, the test case went against them, with the court ruling that it would be unfair to hold "an internet-illiterate parent, who does not know Kazaa from a kazoo" liable for copyright violation they didn't know about, just because it was conducted on their PC.
The RIAA's case was ultimately dismissed, and the trade body was ordered to pay Foster's not insignificant legal costs. The trade body appealed the legal costs decision, and then later disputed the figure the successful defendant was demanding. But this week the courts ordered the RIAA to pay Foster $68,685.23, less than she had originally requested, but still a significant cheque for the trade body to have to write.
Those who oppose the RIAA's excessive use of litigation against individuals who share music online have welcomed the court's continued insistence that the trade body cover Foster's legal costs, because they hope it will encourage other innocent parties - who may in the past have opted to pay a $5000 out of court settlement rather than risk the costs of fighting accusations made against them - to instead defend themselves through the courts. In reality the number of people falsely accused by the RIAA isn't that high, so the significance of the Foster ruling probably isn't as big as some might suggest, though it should make the trade body wary of pursuing action where their case against a defendant is not so clear cut, and should certainly bring to an end efforts to make people liable for copyright violation committed by others on their computer.