Slashdot Log In
Class Action Initiated Against RIAA
Posted by
kdawson
on Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:42 PM
from the bandwagon-starting-to-roll dept.
from the bandwagon-starting-to-roll dept.
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Ever since the RIAA's litigation campaign began in 2003, many people have been suggesting a class action against the RIAA. Tanya Andersen, in Oregon, has taken them up on it. The RIAA's case against this disabled single mother, Atlantic v. Andersen, has received attention in the past, for her counterclaims against the RIAA including claims under Oregon's RICO statute, the RIAA's hounding of her young daughter for a face-to-face deposition, the RIAA's eventual dropping of the case 'with prejudice,' and her lawsuit against the RIAA for malicious prosecution, captioned Andersen v. Atlantic. Now she's turned that lawsuit into a class action. The amended complaint seeking class action status (PDF) sues for negligence, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, federal and state RICO, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, trespass, invasion of privacy, libel and slander, deceptive business practices, misuse of copyright law, and civil conspiracy."
Related Stories
[+]
RIAA Going After a 10-Year-Old Girl 510 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The latest target of the RIAA's ire is a 10-year-old girl in Oregon, who was 7 when the alleged infringement occurred, and whose disabled mother lives on Social Security. In Atlantic v. Andersen, an Oregon case that was widely reported in 2005 when the defendant counterclaimed against the RIAA under Oregon's RICO statute and other laws, the defendant's mother sought to limit the RIAA's deposition of the child to telephone or video-conference. The RIAA has refused, insisting on being able to grill the little girl in person. Here are court documents (PDF)."
[+]
RIAA Drops Tanya Andersen Case 164 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "After 2 years, the RIAA has finally dropped its longstanding case against disabled single mother Tanya Andersen in Oregon, Atlantic v. Andersen. The dismissal (pdf) relates merely to the RIAA's claims against Ms. Andersen, and does not relate to her (a) claim for attorneys fees or (b) counterclaims against the RIAA, which are presently before the Court on a motion to dismiss. The counterclaims were first interposed in December 2005. This is the same case in which the RIAA insisted on taking a face to face deposition of a 10 year old girl. Prior to the case, neither the mother nor the child had ever even heard of file sharing."
[+]
Variety Says Class Action May Stop RIAA Suits 133 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Variety reports that Andersen v. Atlantic, the class action which has been brought against the RIAA in Oregon may 'ultimately force the organization to drop or dramatically change the way it uses its principal weapon in the fight against online piracy"'. The RIAA responded to Variety saying that 'We are confident that (Andersen's) claims have no merit....We look forward to presenting our arguments in the next few weeks to the court about why this case should be dismissed. In all our cases, we seek to follow the facts and be fair and reasonable in resolving pending claims.' p2pnet opines that Hollywood's interest in the suit bodes ill for the RIAA."
[+]
New Attorneys Fee Decision Against RIAA 144 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA has gotten slammed again, this time in Oregon, as the Magistrate Judge in Atlantic v. Andersen has ruled that Tanya Andersen's motion for attorneys fees should be granted. The Magistrate, in his 15-page decision, noted that, despite extensive pretrial discovery proceedings, 'when plaintiffs dismissed their claims in June 2007, they apparently had no more material evidence to support their claims than they did when they first contacted defendant in February 2005.....' and concluded that 'Copyright holders generally, and these plaintiffs specifically, should be deterred from prosecuting infringement claims as plaintiffs did in this case.' This is the same case in which (a) the RIAA insisted on interrogating Ms. Andersen's 10-year-old girl at a face-to-face deposition, (b) the defendant filed RICO counterclaims against the record companies, and (c) the defendant recently converted her RICO case into a class action"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
About time someone did this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:5, Informative)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:4, Funny)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, you happen to be wrong about that. That's one of the amazing things about
I think it was this post [slashdot.org]. See, e.g. this comment [slashdot.org], this comment [slashdot.org], this one [slashdot.org], this one [slashdot.org], and this one [slashdot.org], if you want to get the flavor.
Some more examples here [slashdot.org], here [slashdot.org], here [slashdot.org], and here [slashdot.org].
Re:About time someone did this (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:4, Funny)
Re:About time someone did this (Score:5, Funny)
Agreed. You get the pitchforks, I'll find the torches... and I think some tar and feathers would be in order to... BTW, where is there HQ again? If we can't find that, their lawyers' offices will do...
Re:About time someone did this (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I disagree. (Score:5, Insightful)
If society as a whole continually and blatantly breaks a law, the law is unjust. The ramifications are not to be taken into consideration, society has already spoken and are willing to accept the consequences of their actions. What is really sad are the people who are trying to hold on to the last grasp of something that society is not willing to accept any longer.
Re:I disagree. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I disagree. (Score:4, Informative)
In fact this is how speed limits are supposed to be determined, it's called the 85th percentile speed, the speed at or below which 85% of traffic moves. There's a good article here [kentcountyroads.net] explaining how it works. One pertinent quote is this one:
So deliberately posting a speed limit below the 85th percentile speed is not only greedy, it's likely to get more people killed as well. The only benefit is to allow more tickets to be written. Personally I'd prefer to see less people wreck.
Laws on speed limits are modeled after this [ibiblio.org], and should be nearly the same in all states in the US. As someone pointed out on Slashdot before (which is where I learned all this), you can often get out of a speeding ticket by asking if a traffic survey has been done recently on the road in question. (These have to be done every so many years to ensure the speed limit is still at the 85th percentile speed, it can change over time.) If one hasn't been done in the required time the speed limit's not valid as far as enforcement goes, and if the speed posted doesn't agree with the survey you're also likely to have your ticket dismissed. I've never tried this myself (I try not to speed nowadays myself) and it'll probably vary somewhat depending on where you're located and also on the judge you deal with, but speed limits are supposed to make sense so that only the truly dangerous drivers are breaking them. If everyone's speeding then it's definitely not the 85th percentile speed.
Re:I disagree. (Score:5, Interesting)
First of all, RIAA does not care about IP, they care about distribution rights. They do not care about the artists as their contracts are always shady and a scam. The problem with RIAA is that their business model does not fit in this new era and they are trying to criminalize everyone of us.
But not content with that, they are suing common people to spread fear. They think everyone in the Internet is a burglar and that they have the right to do ANYTHING to stop us from stealing them. So as the old Sony rootkit did, they can mess with your computer and erase any file in it without a court order as they tried to with the patriotic act of GWB. Their acts of hate escalates so high they are trying to force us to use special devices or DRM so we loose the right to hear a purchased song after a while, or after a number of times we have heard it. Or to restrict us to listen a song we have paid for, only on one device.
Law is made in the interest of society. Society makes the law, not the RIAA. And the RIAA will face the people and this is going to hurt. Oh Yeah!
Re:I disagree. (Score:4, Insightful)
Thank god, at last (Score:3)
More, please! (Score:5, Funny)
Can you add sheer stupidity and pigheadedness to that?
Oh, and while you're at it, tell them that we plain old don't like them.
Who could join? (Score:4, Interesting)
I know how it'll go down (Score:3, Funny)
RIAA: Yes, we do.
So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
Add me (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, wait... Umm... nevermind.
how do I get in..... (Score:4, Interesting)
These folks chasing after a 10 year old is one thing, but I seem to recall they went after a dead man as well, can't wait to see how this plays out.
On the subject of a class action suit (Score:5, Funny)
Turnabout is fair play, you
rich smokers-of-cocks.
Love, Haiku 4 U
P.S. I look forward to
great music sans you.
CELEBRATE! (Score:3, Funny)
"FLAVOR FLAAAAAAV!"
then I will promptly head back inside and continue to use our company's massive internet bandwidth to keep downloading pirated music.
Verdict (Score:3, Insightful)
In addition to RIAA ... (Score:5, Informative)
Atlantic Recording Corp.
Priority Records
Capitol Records
UMG Recordings
BMG
And lets not forget that RIAA is just a front organization for a host of others listed here --> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=271437&ci
The Association has no product per se, the alleged racketeering is therefore being funded by it's members.
I wish her luck as well a success.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lawsuits. Lots and lots and lots of lawsuits.
Overhyped (Score:5, Insightful)
Please note that this is specifically for those wrongfully accused. The best we can see from this is getting the RIAA to calm down (a good end no doubt).
For those who are wondering, this will not be the death knell for DRM and the RIAA.
-1 flamebait +1 UnfortunatelyTrue
Re:Overhyped (Score:5, Insightful)
This won't be the death for the RIAA, but it might be the end of their tactics of instilling fear and trying to give the impression that everyone's guilty and just they didn't get around to sue them yet.
Re:Overhyped (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps a little research before filing the lawsuit would be useful.
My suggestion for how to make the situation better is to require the plaintiff in any lawsuit to pay the attorney's fees of the defendant.
If the plaintiff wins, then they could recover the fees they paid if the defendant had sufficient assets. If the defendant doesn't have the assets, then why is the plaintiff even suing him?
If the plaintiff requests arbitration and the defendant refuses, then the defendant would pay his own attorney's fees. If the defendant requests arbitration the the plaintiff refuses, then the plaintiff would be barred from recovering any of the attorney's fees from the defendant.
It would force the plaintiff to really do their homework before filing suit and to make a determination ahead of time about whether or not the lawsuit was justified. It would end the RIAA's practice of going after anyone and everyone without any knowledge about whether or not the defendant was the culprit.
Re:Overhyped (Score:5, Interesting)
1. There are plenty of other ways to enforce copyright law.
2. Ganging up, as they are doing, as a "commercial group", is copyright misuse, and some of their conduct is actionable as a violation of antitrust law.
3. Normal copyright lawyers don't sue, they send cease and desist letters. And then they sue if they cannot get a cease and desist agreement, or if the defendant is a bad actor, but they don't routinely sue everyone who may have infringed a copyright and was not willing to pay thousands of dollars in extortion -- er, settlement -- money.
4. No normal lawyer would ever sign off on a case as poorly and as illegally investigated as the RIAA cases.
I.e., it's not the law that's bad, it's the RIAA law-breakers that are bad.
The Big Class Question (Score:4, Insightful)
Certainly the same shoddy, and likely illegal, MediaSentry investigative methods were used against all defendants. And the Settlement Support Center refused to dismiss anyone from a lawsuit who didn't pay them the extortion tax regardless of the evidence -- or lack of it. And even innocent defendants had large legal bills if they fought. Plus all had their computers, privacy, and reputations besmirched by the RIAA publicity steamroller regardless of the outcome of the suit -- with no apologies offered afterwards.
But is this enough in common to qualify as a class? While I hope so, the legal system doesn't operate with the same kinds of logic I employ in ordinary, everyday life.
Asking for too much (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember folks, many, if not most, of the *IAAs victims are technically guilty. True, the RIAA and friends are coming down on them unnecessarily hard, but it's not like they are truly innocent. It's the innocent ones that, thankfully, get the nice press.
The fact that many or most of the defendants are actually guilty will greatly weaken any class-action suit.
A much better solution is to make judges nationwide aware that just because the RIAA/MPAA say someone is violating the law doesn't make it so. Many judges are already waking up to this fact and stopping the mafIAA from taking the "easy road to victory," ending ex-parte motions and other dirty tricks.
If the RIAA think my IP address is stealing, then get a court to order my ISP to order me to contact the court and, after hearing from both sides, let the court decide if the RIAA is entitled to my contact information. Allow my lawyers to subpoena records from the ISP before the RIAA gets my personal information. If the judge denies the RIAA's request, or if they eventually lose at trial, make them pay all my reasonable and actual expenses. If the suit was done with malice, with reckless disregard for the facts, or as a fishing expedition, have the court fine the RIAA for wasting everyone's time.
Re:Asking for too much (Score:5, Informative)
The real problem of the digital age and music... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why have the record companies fought Apple for higher prices? Why have some companies refuted the potential profits of a deal with iTunes?
It is the a la carte concept of iTunes, allofmp3, kazaa, napster, etc... you name it that's the real issue at hand here...
I think the big motivating factor for downloading music is NOT based on an unwillingness to pay a small fee for the songs you want, it's based on an unwillingness to pay $20 for at most 3 songs that you want...
Since the glory days of the music industry, they've primarily sold albums as it was the most convenient and economical form of distribution. This method suited the consumer well as he didn't have to rush out to the store everytime a new song came out, it suited the musician well as it allowed to him to make a good hour or so of music, then go on tour and wow the crowds, and it suited the industry well because even if only 1 or 2 of the songs on the album became hits, people would still shell out the full price of the album for those songs they wanted.
Fast track to the present, and the internet has tipped the economic balance in favor of the consumer. Although the album system is still convenient in the ways listed above and many not-listed...(for instance "branding"), consumers appear no-longer willing to buy full albums for the most part.
So, I find it funny that
People are not rushing out to the cd store anymore. Hell, I haven't stepped foot in one in over a year. People are downloading the SONGS they want, and that's it...or they're waiting for their friends to get it and send it to them. In my opinion though, these people are not thieves, just opportunists, responding to a large imbalance in price between the traditional cd, and the legal or not-so legal per-track alternatives.
Why else has it taken so long for legal download services such as iTunes to come about. How many years after Napster's destruction did it take? Why didn't the RIAA look at the story of napster (after they sued the piss out of it) and build their own legal alternative? Because they know what it means...it means they can no-longer fleece the consumer with the album like they've been doing for a loooong time.
So, although the album will likely remain a convenient unit for musicians and for "branding" purposes, I see the concept of consumers purchasing full albums a fast-fading one.
The album....is dead
Interesting countersuit (Score:3, Insightful)
What is interesting that each and every individual amendment will need to be addressed to be thrown out. The legal proceedings will not be able to 'carte-blanche' throw out the case on a single motion, it needs to address 'malicious prosecution' and 'trespass' and every other complaint, similar to someone convicted of multiple felons. It's quite an all-encompassing CAS - RIAA will have a very very hard time trying to survive it because I'm sure she's not willing to settle out of court. She's pretty PO'ed and will want the whole gambit in court. But I'm making that assumption...
Can Artists Get Back Their Copyrights? (Score:4, Interesting)
If I have some intellectual property, sell the copyrights to someone else, and that person then uses those rights to break the law, do I have any way of rectifying that? Or, at the very least, can I sue for damages against the copyright holder?
Re:So, Mr. NewYorkCountryLawyer, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So, Mr. NewYorkCountryLawyer, (Score:5, Insightful)
As long as the RI.... Record Companies lose, I'm OK with that.
Re:So, Mr. NewYorkCountryLawyer, (Score:4, Funny)
If you are right, wouldn't that make you a winner too?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hmm... So, if only the lawyers win, you win $10, which means that the lawyers AREN'T the only winners, so you shouldn't win your $10. But then the lawyers would be the only winners! Now if only they'd all disappear in a puff of logic...
Re:So, Mr. NewYorkCountryLawyer, (Score:5, Informative)
The vast majority of class actions are neither won, nor lost, but settled. In this case, I would imagine that the defendants' shareholders are already starting to wake up to the reality that they have been played for suckers by their lawyers, and the companies will be most eager to settle.
Re:So, Mr. NewYorkCountryLawyer, (Score:5, Informative)
Re:So, Mr. NewYorkCountryLawyer, (Score:4, Informative)
IANAL... but here's a layman's guess to justify the claims....
===
By the way, THANK YOU NewYorkCountryLawyer for your time and energy to bring these stories to Slashdot and for your pursuit of change within an industry that is so important to us. It is more than music that is at stake... it is culture... and without that then life become one big huge business - and it wouldn't be any fun for anybody.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
SO you commit theft when you came to
Or perhaps you really mean Downloading a product whose copyright doesn't allow it is theft?
of course, that's just plain wrong to. That's
Re: Class Action Initiated Against RIAA (Score:5, Funny)