▁for ▁her ▁reasonable ▁att or ne ys ▁fe es , ▁since ▁the ▁R I AA ' s ▁purs uit ▁of ▁its ▁case ▁was , ▁at ▁best , ▁" m arg inal ", ▁and ▁was ▁being ▁purs ued ▁to ▁extract ▁a ▁settlement ▁from ▁someone ▁who ▁was ▁clearly ▁known ▁not ▁to ▁be ▁the ▁direct ▁in fr inger . ▁The ▁Court ▁noted ▁that ▁the ▁mere ▁fact ▁that ▁M s . ▁F oster ▁was ▁a ▁person ▁who ▁paid ▁for ▁an ▁internet ▁access ▁account ▁was ▁not ▁a ▁basis ▁for ▁a ▁copy right ▁in fr ing ement ▁law suit ▁against ▁her . ▁M s . ▁F oster ' s ▁motion ▁for ▁att or ne ys ▁fe es ▁had ▁been ▁supported ▁by ▁an ▁am icus ▁cur iae ▁brief ▁of ▁the ▁American ▁Civil ▁Libert ies ▁Union , ▁Public ▁Cit izen , ▁the ▁Electron ic ▁Front ier ▁Foundation , ▁the ▁American ▁Association ▁of ▁Law ▁L ibr aries , ▁and ▁A CL U ▁Foundation ▁of ▁Oklahoma . ▁ ▁Other ▁instances ▁in ▁which ▁the ▁R I AA ▁was ▁known ▁to ▁have ▁been ▁forced ▁to ▁back ▁out ▁of ▁a ▁case ▁to ▁avoid ▁a ▁loss , ▁are ▁Prior ity ▁Records ▁v . ▁Brit t any ▁Chan ▁in ▁Michigan , ▁Virgin ▁Records ▁v . ▁T amm ie ▁Mar son ▁in ▁California , ▁and ▁Ele kt ra ▁v . ▁Wil ke ▁in ▁Illinois . ▁ ▁End ▁of ▁mass ▁law su its ▁Hil ary ▁Rosen ▁was ▁the ▁R I AA ' s ▁president ▁and ▁chief ▁executive ▁officer ▁from ▁ 1 9 9 8 ▁to ▁ 2 0 0 3