Fun in the Michigan courts last week, where judges dismissed that previously reported lawsuit being pursued by the Recording Industry Association Of America against teenager Brittany Chan, who was accused of illegally sharing copyright music via P2P networks. The US District Court ruled that the industry organisation had failed to deliver a functional proposal for the appointment of a 'guardian ad litem' for the defendant.
As previously reported, this has been a long running case which began when the RIAA sued Chan's mother Candy who, the trade organisation claimed, should be help liable for copyright violation committed by her daughter. Candy Chan successfully defended herself saying that she could not be held liable for her daughter's actions, leaving the RIAA facing the prospect of suing the 14 year old Brittany directly. However, in order to do that, Michigan law says a 'guardian ad litem', or 'legal guardian for the proceeding', must be appointed. As the girl's mother had already successfully removed herself from the equation it was up to the RIAA to propose how that should be done. In last week's ruling the District Court was basically saying the trade association had failed to come up with a suitable proposal.
In a written statement, the court said on Friday: "The court finds [the] plaintiffs' failure to respond to the order [to make a suitable proposal] inexplicable in light of the efforts of the court to work with the plaintiffs in advancing this case and the fact that plaintiffs were ordered to provide a proposal. Accordingly, the court concludes that plaintiffs' failure to comply with an order of the court justifies the dismissal of plaintiffs' action".
It is unclear if this case sets any dangerous precedent for the RIAA - ie that teenagers who are guilty of illegally sharing music online can avoid litigation because they cannot be sued directly and their parents cannot be held liable for their actions. The industry association will be hoping that the intricacies of this case will prevent such a sweeping and potentially damaging precedent being adopted by other courts considering its anti-P2P lawsuits.