Tanya Andersen Decides To Drop Racketeering Charges Against The RIAA

from the this-is-for-the-best dept

Business Week has a fantastic and detailed article going through the history of Tanya Andersen's legal battles with the RIAA. As has been pointed out from early on, the RIAA went after her with very little evidence, bullied her to settle and pay up, and then tried to force her to agree not to countersue before it would drop charges. Andersen and her lawyer, however, refused to give up -- and not only won against the RIAA, but had the RIAA pay up on Andersen's lawyers' fees. After all that, she and her lawyer have filed a series of lawsuits against the RIAA alleging illegal investigative practices and racketeering.

While it's great to see her fighting back, we'd always said that the racketeering claim was a huge stretch, based on the specifics of the law. It doesn't do anyone any good to file a racketeering charge if it can't be proven. So, it's good to see that Andersen appears ready to drop that claim. At the very end of the article, it notes that a judge has pushed back on Andersen's filing, and she plans to drop the racketeering and fraud charges. Instead, a new filing will focus on "conspiracy, negligence, and abuse of the legal process." Again, "conspiracy" seems like a long shot -- but negligence and abuse of the legal process seem a lot more interesting. Either way, there will be plenty to follow in this case.

Filed Under: copyright, piracy, racketeering, riaa, tanya andersen
Companies: riaa


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    BTR1701, 29 Apr 2008 @ 5:06am

    Re: Re: Conspiracy

    > fraud is actually both a criminal and civil claim

    That would be great if she were alleging fraud. However, acording to the article she's not; she's alleging "conspiracy, negligence and abuse of legal process".

    And I say that as a licensed attorney (since we apparently need to establish our credentials with every post).

    > If she is claiming that the parties worked in
    > tandem to defraud people, then each is guilty of
    > conspiracy to commit fraud.

    Yes, that's why I asked what she's claiming they conspired to do. According to the article, it's unclear. It just says "conspiracy", nothing more.

    > Remember, criminal means jail time & civil means money.

    No kidding. I've been practicing law for years. I hardly need a remiedial lesson in the difference between a criminal and civil case.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: I Invented Email
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.