I liked this exchange...

From an RIAA lawsuit:

5 MS. SANTANGELO: The reason why, when they called and
6 they wanted to make a settlement, I no longer have that
7 computer that the IP address was on, that they say the music
8 was downloaded onto, because it had developed a major -- a lot
9 of major viruses, apparently, and was wiped out and taken by my
10 ex-husband. He was going to try to get it fixed. And I guess
11 he has it down in North Carolina right now. So, at the time, I
12 have nothing in front of me to say, okay, this is what
13 happened. And I have five children, so I wasn't real sure how
14 it had happened, to be honest.
15 THE COURT: I have some guesses.
16 MS. SANTANGELO: I realized when I looked at this that
17 the downloads, I guess they call it Exhibit B, the screen name
18 that this Kazaa was under doesn't belong to anyone in my
19 family. And that's most likely why I was never notified by AOL
20 or any of my -- the companies that I have online service with
21 that my children had downloaded anything. Apparently, it
22 belongs to a friend of my son, who is now 14.

I wonder where this will go. I'm particularily puzzled about the claim that AOL did not notify her of the illegal activity because the screen name used for Kazaa did not belong to her. I don't think AOL ever gets down to a Kazaa screen name, so I don't see how that is relevant.

I also wonder if legally she can be hold accountable for illegal activity that took place using her computer (I assume her son's friend was allowed to use the computer).

Besides the fact the judge seems sympathetic to her claims, I would be curious to see where this goes.