U.S. District Court judge Richard A. Schell has refused to grant the RIAA unfettered access to a defendant's computer hard drive in Texas, instead ruling that the drive and its data must be inspected by a neutral third party computer forensics expert agreed upon by both the defendant and the RIAA's counsel.

Ray Beckerman explains, "This ruling is of great importance, and should be considered a model to be followed in all future RIAA v. Consumer litigations. The chicanery and gamesmanship that is going on behind the scenes with the hard drive report in the UMG v. Lindor case, which my office is handling, demonstrates that it is not safe to permit the RIAA to conduct its own, behind the scenes hard drive analysis by its own so called expert. The SONY v. Arellanes decision balances and protects the rights of both sides in a fair and evenhanded manner, which is usually anathema to the RIAA."

Anathema or not, it's important to remember that this is one case in one jurisdiction. If there is one thing that can be said about law as a certainty, it is that law moves at its own (typically slow) pace. Every tiny victory adds up though, and as we build the wall of defense from the cumulative effect of every contra-RIAA ruling, it is important to remember that not everyone is winning, and that middle-class American familes who can little afford it are being taken to the cleaners every day by the opposition.

[via Recording Industry vs. The People]