RIAA: so certain of their case, they have to play sleazy

The stench of desperation from the major labels is getting so overpowering, it's like the Augean stables on a really hot day.

Their latest dirty trick? Warner had been suing a New York family, and their case had been going badly - the family were being defended by Ray Beckerman; he'd argued that unless the RIAA could prove that files had been downloaded, there were no grounds for the case.

After a long wait for judgement, Beckerman was suddenly told the RIAA had folded - weeks after they'd yanked the case.

Victory, right? Not quite: It was gamesmanship - the RIAA refiled the case, without mentioning it had previously been in court (so they'd get a softer ["different"] judge); they even diguised the case still further by pretending they didn't know the name of the family they'd previously been suing by name.

It might not be illegal, but it's certainly unethical and shows a contempt for process which is worth remembering when the RIAA starts appealing to our better natures.

[Thanks to Gareth for the tip]