Oregon judge gives RIAA a free pass

In a bizarre interpretation of how a judge is supposed to base his decisions on evidence rather than feelings, Judge Michael R. Hogan considering a motion to quash an RIAA subpoena against the University Of Oregon has decided that the lies the RIAA told the court - sorry, the "misrepresentations the RIAA made to the court" were probably an honest mistake.

Well, maybe they were made in good faith, but they were still wrong - isn't it siding a little too much with one party for Hogan to decide to ignore their errors? And doesn't a representation riddled with "honest mistakes" make their case a little less solid? Should OJ Simpson have argued he was making honest mistakes rather than breaking the law?