[A2k] RIAA sued in class action: allegations include: negligence, fraud and misrepresentation, racketeering and corruption, abuse of the legal process

[Michelle Childs]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/17/
riaa_anderson_class_action_lawsuit/

RIAA gets some class
...action lawsuit
By Austin Modine in Mountain View =E2=86=92
Published Friday 17th August 2007 19:53 GMT


The RIAA has been slapped by a class action lawsuit, filed by Tanya
Anderson, a single mom from Oregon who claims the organization's
goons impersonated her 10-year-old daughter's grandmother over the
phone to extract evidence.

Charges filed against the RIAA include =E2=80=94 deep breath now =E2=80=94 =
counts
of negligence, fraud and misrepresentation, racketeering and
corruption, abuse of the legal process, malicious prosecution,
outrage and intention to inflict emotional distress, computer fraud
and abuse, trespass, invasion of privacy, libel and slander,
deceptive business practices, misuse of copyright laws, and civil
conspiracy.

The case was spotted by the ever-watchful folks at The Recording
Industry vs The People. You can grab a copy of the complaint at their
website.

The lawsuit fingers the RIAA, a number of record labels under the
organization's umbrella, and MediaSentry - a firm the RIAA uses to
sniff out individuals suspected of illegally swapping copyrighted music.

Anderson claims the non-profit RIAA engages in a coordinated
enterprise scheme of threatening and intimidating litigation to
maintain a music distribution monopoly.

The suit alleges MediaSentry "conducts illegal, flawed and negligent
investigations for the RIAA and its controlled member companies." It
goes on to say that for years the group has entered a secret
agreement targeting private citizens.

 From the filing:

     MediaSentry and the RIAA know that their investigations are
illegal and flawed. MediaSentry is not licensed or registered to
conduct private investigation of private US citizens. Moreover, in a
March 2004 sworn deposition MediaSentry's then president admitted to
various serious flaws in the investigative scheme which all
Defendants know result in misidentification of individuals.

The process

The lawsuit describes the RIAA's sinister machine, which it alleges
clogs and abuses the federal court with baseless lawsuits.

First, the RIAA and controlled members file information farming suits
against anonymous "John Doe" parties to coerce internet service
providers into identifying the users behind particular IP addresses.
Because no specific parties are named, the lawsuit claims those
targeted are often deprived of due process and never know the RIAA is
harvesting their private information. After the information is
gathered, the anonymous suits are typically dismissed immediately
before the individuals know they have been "secretly sued," robbing
them of the opportunity to appear in court to protect their identities.

The RIAA's next step is sending "threatening and misleading letters,"
that contain false allegations and omissions. The letters are
confusing, claiming the recipient has both "already been sued," and
"have not yet been named as a defendant." The letters tell the
recipient that all the necessary evidence has been secured and the
recipient has 10 days to make contact with the RIAA before a federal
lawsuit is filed against them.

The class action suit claims 10 days does not provide the letter
recipient with any meaningful time to investigate the allegations.
The letter also conveniently neglects to inform the recipient that
they were the subject of a private "illegal" investigation, or that
there is a known possibility for error or mistaken identity.

"With its legal expertise, the RIAA has a heightened duty to act
reasonably, responsibility, and legally to avoid foreseeable
harm...," the suit claims. Despite knowing the nature of the
investigations, it has acted negligently when it conspired and
coordinated with MediaSentry. The RIAA has used the information
gathered on a "campaign of threat and extortion."

If the complaint is certified for class action, it could pave the way
for others harassed by the RIAA to join the lawsuit. Such a
confrontation was bound to happen given the organization's notorious
tactics, and should it fail, more would doubtlessly find their way to
court. =C2=AE




Michelle Childs
Head of European Affairs
Knowledge Ecology International
michelle.childs@cptech.org