Are The RIAA's Investigation Techniques Illegal?
from the put-to-the-test dept
Having victims of the RIAA's shotgun legal approach fight back is certainly nothing new. In fact, having people charge the RIAA with racketeering for its actions has happened quite a few times at this point. However, this latest case against the RIAA is a little different. Filed by the same woman who charged the RIAA with racketeering two years ago, Tanya Andersen, the latest case doesn't just focus on the legal strategy, but also on the technology strategy of spying on what users are uploading -- again claiming it violates both racketeering laws and computer fraud and abuse laws. It notes that the process by which the company MediaSentry tries to figure out who is offering files isn't just flimsy, it's illegal.
Ray Beckerman has a link to the full complaint (warning: pdf file). It talks about how flimsy the evidence is, how it's easily falsified, how MediaSentry knew that -- and how it still claims that it offers positive identification on uploaders. The suit also points out that in Oregon (where the suit is filed), MediaSentry is not properly licensed as a private investigator, which breaks the law. Then, the suit goes in for the kill -- focusing on how the RIAA proceeds to use this weak and flimsy evidence to bully and scare people into paying up, abusing their private information and not giving them nearly enough time (or information) to counter the claims. The filing also contains a rather detailed description of the specific actions the RIAA took to intimidate Andersen and her daughter -- despite Andersen providing an awful lot of evidence that she was completely innocent of the charges. It's quite a filing, and should make for an interesting case should it get anywhere. The RIAA will likely do as much as it can to get the case dismissed or buried (as they did with Andersen's previous case), but so far Andersen has shown a very strong willingness to fight for what's right.
Ray Beckerman has a link to the full complaint (warning: pdf file). It talks about how flimsy the evidence is, how it's easily falsified, how MediaSentry knew that -- and how it still claims that it offers positive identification on uploaders. The suit also points out that in Oregon (where the suit is filed), MediaSentry is not properly licensed as a private investigator, which breaks the law. Then, the suit goes in for the kill -- focusing on how the RIAA proceeds to use this weak and flimsy evidence to bully and scare people into paying up, abusing their private information and not giving them nearly enough time (or information) to counter the claims. The filing also contains a rather detailed description of the specific actions the RIAA took to intimidate Andersen and her daughter -- despite Andersen providing an awful lot of evidence that she was completely innocent of the charges. It's quite a filing, and should make for an interesting case should it get anywhere. The RIAA will likely do as much as it can to get the case dismissed or buried (as they did with Andersen's previous case), but so far Andersen has shown a very strong willingness to fight for what's right.






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
It would be so nice if this case got somewhere. Of course if it did then the RIAA would take the lessons learned from it and setup shop in an even more underground setup and pick where it left off. And that is assuming that they don't cover this up like most of their activities.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I was waiting for the day someone finally going fight back..
I hope she suit this asshole so good they will stop fucking with people and follow the proper doors..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Rooting for Tanya
With a new suit filed directly against the RIAA as well as the music companies and MediaSentry, this allows Tanya to keep fighting them regardless of what happens in the original suit by the RIAA.
I'm hoping this new turn of events is able to bear some fruit on getting these pointless lawsuits to stop clogging our judicial system.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
question
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: question
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Hmmm...
You'd think that if several different people filed similar lawsuits over racketeering, then maybe, just maybe, these common folk might be on to something...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
They seem totally oblivious that they've not just alienated a bunch of kids who want to ""steal" music, they've also managed to turn a number of people like myself, who was a very strong supporter of their organizations a mere five years ago, into some of their most vocal opponents, even though we have no interest or desire in the more improper uses of file sharing.
Of course, with all the other cases, the RIAA will use any means it can think of, including substantial cash offerings, to make sure this case does not go to trial.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
maybe others will follow
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Crazy beats big!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
any chance
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
funding
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: funding
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
funding
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
She almost had them last time...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
You go girl!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Class Action
So if this case is successful would a group be able to file a class action lawsuit of some sort?
Say a racketeering or invasion of privacy case?
Just curious.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Class Action
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
We need a link to donate to her defense fund, lol
I'll take the $$ I would have spend on CD's over the last couple months and send it her way.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I just have to ask...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
There's a fund
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
she's not..
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
...same $__t, different day!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This is pointless
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: funding
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: ...same $__t, different day!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is pointless
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
MediaSentry is a weak outfit. Exploit their weaknesses.
And for all you lurking RIAA wannabe snoopers, bring it on bub.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment