On 7/17/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Allan Stirling</b> <<a href="mailto:Dibblahmythml0015@pendor.org">Dibblahmythml0015@pendor.org</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Kevin Hulse wrote:<br>> On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 10:35:38AM -0700, David Brodbeck wrote:<br>>> On Jul 17, 2007, at 8:41 AM, Joe Borne wrote:<br>>>> But today all of that changed. As of today, someone has successfully
<br>>>> fought the RIAA and then forced them to pay out for the malicious<br>>>> prosecution - to the tune of $68,000.<br>>> I suspect they'll appeal the ruling.<br>><br>> This is true. However, most people don't register anything
<br>> beyond the initial verdict. This will still stand as David managing<br>> to give Goliath a black eye. The PR damage is done and can't be<br>> undone.<br><br>This is completely off-topic, even having read the entire
<br>document, but the assumptions here seem unjustified.<br><br>The defendant (as far as my limited legal knowledge goes)<br>paid her legal council the sum of $100,000 give or take.<br><br>She gets $68,000 reimbursed by the courts.
<br><br>So isn't she in fact $22k worse off than if the case never<br>took place?</blockquote><div><br>Or, $32k, if the math was correct :)<br><br>-Dave <br></div><br></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>David Frascone<br>
<br>Scrute the inscrutable, eff the ineffable.