Some days, you just wish you were kidding - and this is one of them. In yet another act of what is becoming a terror campaign on its own consumers, the RIAA has proven once again that it is incapable of self-restraint. In the recent Michigan lawsuit Warner et al vs. Scantlebury
, the defendant has died. So, in an illustration of its exceeding kindness, the RIAA has filed for a stay in the proceedings
Postponing what, one might ask? Why, the subpoenaed testimony of the man's children, of course. Apparently, the RIAA's lawyers felt that they were too close to a victory in court to drop the case, and have instead opted to press on. Since there's no defendant to question or find guilty anymore, they will go after the estate.
Of course, you can't go and put a dead man's children on the stand directly after such a tregedy, hence why the RIAA's lawyers requested the stay. After the 60 day 'grieving period,' the case will resume.
A direct quote from the request:
"Plaintiffs do not believe it appropriate to discuss a resolution of the case with the family so close to Mr. Scantlebury's passing. Plaintiffs therefore request a stay of 60 days to allow the family additional time to grieve."
Not many other specifics are known about the case at the moment, including the nature of Mr. Scantlebury's alleged crimes, so it's not fair to say that the RIAA is necessarily prosecuting an innocent man (despite the track record of sueing everyone and everything in its path). Still, as Ars Technica
points out, even the Enron CEO Ken Leigh's estate is untouchable due to his death despite a guilty verdict while he was alive - yet the RIAA feels this matter is so urgent that it will continue prosecution for what would (at best) be a few thousand dollars.
Yet another feather in the cap of the RIAA's PR team! Got a thought on the infinite generosity? Let us know your thoughts in our forums
. Hopefully yours are more coherent than mine, which would be nearly illegible due to the swear filters...