Slashdot Log In
RIAA Accused of Extortion & Conspiracy
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Jun 05, 2007 06:31 PM
from the this-is-new-oh-in-court dept.
from the this-is-new-oh-in-court dept.
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The defendant in a Tampa, Florida, case, UMG v. Del Cid, has filed counterclaims accusing the RIAA record labels of conspiracy and extortion. The counterclaims (pdf) are for Trespass, Computer Fraud and Abuse (18 USC 1030), Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices (Fla. Stat. 501.201), Civil Extortion (CA Penal Code 519 & 523), and Civil Conspiracy involving (a) use of private investigators without license in violation of Fla. Stat. Chapter 493; (b) unauthorized access to a protected computer system, in interstate commerce, for the purpose of obtaining information in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1030 (a)(2)(C); (c) extortion in violation of Ca. Penal Code 519 and 523; and (d) knowingly collecting an unlawful consumer debt, and using abus[ive] means to do so, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692a et seq. and Fla. Stat. 559.72 et seq."
Related Stories
[+]
Entertainment: IFPI Threatens UK Academic For Linking To Article 182 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Apparently the RIAA is getting sensitive about counterclaims. When a British blog author linked to a recent article about a defendant's counterclaims for extortion and conspiracy by the RIAA in a Florida case, UMG v. Del Cid, a record company executive who sits on the board of the RIAA's UK counterpart, the IFPI, threatened the author if he did not take his link down."
[+]
Is RIAA's MediaSentry Illegal in Your State? 200 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Is Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG 'investigator' MediaSentry operating illegally in your state?. The Massachusetts State police has already banned the company, and it's been accused of operating without a license in Oregon, Florida, Texas, and New York. Similar charges have now been leveled the organization in Michigan. Michigan's Department of Labor and Economic Growth, in response to a complaint, has confirmed that MediaSentry is not licensed in Michigan, and referred the complainant to the local prosecutor."
[+]
Florida Judge Smacks Down RIAA 301 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA is going to have to face the music in Tampa, Florida, and answer the charges of extortion, trespass, conspiracy, unlicensed investigation, and computer fraud and abuse that have been leveled against them there. And the judge delivered his ruling against them in in pretty unceremonious fashion — receiving their dismissal motion last night, and denying the motion this morning. The RIAA's unvarying M.O., when hit with counterclaims, is to make a motion to dismiss them. It did just that in one Tampa case, UMG v. Del Cid, but the judge upheld 5 of the 6 counterclaims. The RIAA quickly settled that one. When a new case came up in the same Tampa courthouse before the very same judge, and the same 5 counterclaims were leveled against the record companies, I opined that 'it is highly unlikely that the RIAA will make a motion to dismiss counterclaims,' since I knew they'd be risking sanctions if they did. Well I guess I underestimated the chutzpah — or the propensity for frivolous motion practice — of the RIAA lawyers, as they in essence thumbed their nose at the judge, making the dismissal motion anyway, telling District Judge Richard A. Lazzara that his earlier decision had been wrong. The judge wasted no time telling the record companies that he did not agree (PDF)."
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.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
About Time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:About Time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:About Time! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:About Time! (Score:5, Informative)
Someone has to pick up the tab for the lawyers time, the overhead of getting that law degree, their WestLaw subscription, the rent and power bill for their office, the salary of the receptionist, the salary of the secretary and the salary of the paralegal.
You pay them a 30% cut for a normal case and 50% for one that goes to appeals because a lot of them don't generate any money at all. All of you "non paying people" are subsidizing each other.
You can always pay them by the hour (like any other professional) if you don't like the contingency arrangement.
Parent
I for one... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:About Time! (Score:5, Interesting)
It's different because there is an actual law against copyrigth-infringement, and most of the people threathened are actually guilty of breaking that law. Now, this doesn't make it rigth. It just means current copyrigth-law is bad law.
Copyrigth-law, as currently written, makes everyone a criminal. But only the ones that RIAA (or other large copyrigth-holders) choose to go after, get punished. Which means essentially, that *THEY* are the ones who decide, by criteria dictated by them, who gets punished and who not.
That's not how it's supposed to work; elected politicians are supposed to decide what is legal and what not. But by deciding that "everything" is illegal, they've efficiently handed the keys over to RIAA et al
"Everyone" is very sligthly pushing it, but it's not far from the truth. I was at a lecture about IT and law, and the professor asked those people who have ever willingly broken copyrigth-law to raise a hand. Literally 95% of all hands went up. IT-students have more reason and more expertise, so may be sligthly over-represented, but I'm willing to bet that 95% of current 25-year-olds are guilty of breaking copyrigth-law atleast once in the last year.
We should remove or change laws which we do not intend to uphold. Otherwise we hand over the power of defining de-facto law to those deciding what and whom to investigate. (because if everyone is guilty, by deciding to investigate someone you are de-facto deciding to punish that person)
Parent
Re:About Time! (Score:5, Funny)
I don't think I've ever seen someone type with a lisp before.
Parent
Have you been paying ANY attention, troll? (Score:5, Insightful)
> How in the hell is legally protecting your rights by suing infringers who are distributing your copyrighted materials, and offering them a settlement to avoid court cases, an example of "Mafia tactics" or "protection money?"
They abuse court processes by:
* Doing things ex parte whenever possible, making sure that the other side never has a chance to be heard in court.
* Improper joinder of unrelated cases, for which they have been sanctioned in Texas. In spite of having been enjoined by the court, they have routinely ignored that ruling and simply avoided litigating in Texas.
* Unfair settlements. Although they have acknowledged in the press that they "occasionally" find innocent defendants, they pursue even their weakest cases in court until it's obvious they're going to lose. Then they try to get a dismissal without prejudice to avoid having to pay your legal fees. This means that you can either: a) Pay a ~$3,500 settlement or b) Pay a lawyer even more than that to represent you in court. If you're innocent, you end up paying no matter what. Yes, after a long and hard court battle, Debbie Foster *finally* won reasonable attorney's fees, but she's pretty much the only one so far. Usually, they cut & run and you're just out of luck and out of money.
In short, they do precious little to make sure that the people they sue are guilty, they torment anyone they sue in court (even going after your family if you prove to be innocent), and they twist every court rule they can get away with (hint: getting sanctioned & ignoring court orders is NOT something a reputable lawyer does).
So no, I'm not going to condone this "Won't someone please think of the poor RIAA!" crap when the RIAA come preaching this hypocritical holier than thou bit with respect to copyright law, only to turn around and ignore any laws or court orders that stand in their way.
Now please crawl back under whatever bridge you came out from under.
Parent
Re: storing the balance (Score:5, Insightful)
Ya, a copyright infringement website defends copyright infringement. Who'd've thought. also, this lesson has been learned before [techdirt.com].
Besides, I AM an artist. If I were signed with a label/distribution company/other organ, I would make >10 per unit sold. I much prefer that people burn or download my album, then buy me a beer. I get more out of it that way.
Also, 15,010 angry nerds can't be wrong. http://consumerist.com/consumer/worst-company-in-
[/rebuttal] Okay, fair point, the RIAA are just doing their job. We'll disregard for the moment it's a job that doesn't need to be done. In this case, the only thing the RIAA are guilty of is boundless enthusiasm. Unfortunately, the low-income single mothers on the receiving end of the lawsuits don't see it that way.
Okay, I've lost the thread of my argument, so I'm just going to say what I originally intended to say.
Clearchannel.
Money talks. Independent labels can't afford to get music on the radio in America, because they don't have the resource to buy the airtime or lobby the execs. The internet is their only hope. The RIAA, as far as I can work out, is accidentally crushing independent artists while they're going after the roaches. So, sure. Blame the RIAA-haters for depriving artists who already have record labels, have a valid form of income. I'll keep blaming the RIAA for keeping the little guy down with its' clumsy antics.
Parent
Unlicensed private investigators... (Score:5, Insightful)
I do think that this should at least make the RIAA use legal and more robust techniques to win cases.
dont cheer yet (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:dont cheer yet (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:dont cheer yet (Score:5, Funny)
It's quite possible from a legal perspective. This would create a precedent that is only going to encourage the RIAA to sue more and more.
From a moral perspective this is much like seeing a disturbed, criminally insane child accidentally discharge a gun and kill someone, and reward him by giving him an AK-47 in a crowded shopping mall.
Parent
Re:dont cheer yet (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:dont cheer yet (Score:5, Insightful)
*shrug*
Seen it happen before, will happen again. Gee.
Parent
Re:dont cheer yet (Score:5, Insightful)
Still, it'll be fun to watch them crap their pants and try to settle with the person for megabucks. If they flinch, their extortion plans are all over, as getting hit with a lawsuit from them will be like winning the lottery.
Parent
Re:dont cheer yet (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Please... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
"This Space Intentionally Left Blank"
I'd like to see you argue that point.
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
In Alabama, ANAL is strictly prohibited by Penal Code 5432.427c(a).
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
You hit Troll for 1
Troll hit you for -3
You used Administrative Beatdown on Troll
Damaged Troll for 775 (overkill 759)
Troll is Defeated!
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it, that does not make sense!
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
Whereas the Ewoks were developing their own music infrastructure within a program called iWok (which has an internal distribution service for various music genres such as Wok & Woll).
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:5, Funny)
I think superseeding is what got that guy in trouble in the first place.
Hopefully, it will earn him a jury of his peers.
Parent
Re:Please... (Score:4, Insightful)
Having non-lawyers write laws will result in really poorly-written laws with plenty of loopholes. The law is like every other specialized field; it develops its own language for a reason.
Parent
The reason this hasn't happened before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Their supposed expert (actually he is an expert, just not on what he is testifying to) and their investigators only sound good until they are properly challenged. In other words they're only good enough to fool most of the victims and maybe a credulous judge.
Re:The reason this hasn't happened before ... (Score:5, Insightful)
In truth, I think you're right about that. Peer-to-peer served to get massive collections of music into the hands of, well, the masses. Now there are millions upon millions of 50+ Gb private stashes out there. The biggest threat the music industry is facing is the large, portable hard drive
Sneakernet isn't dead: it just got bigger guns.
Parent
Why are *AA logs worth anything? (Score:5, Insightful)
The RIAA waves a piece of paper and says "Look, at 11:28 on March 23rd 2007 Zaphod was making 'Stairway to Heaven' available for downloading on the Bittorrent network".
Zaphod: "Err, no, I wasn't."
RIAA: "Yes you did, we have a piece of paper!"
Zaphod: "Give me ten seconds and I can show you a piece of paper saying anything you like."
RIAA: "We have database logs and screenshots!"
Zaphod: "Give me five minutes with a computer and I'll show you database logs and screenshots of anything you like."
RIAA: "We have bizarrely detailed logs from your ISP showing that we downloaded a file from your computer at 11:29 on March 23rd 2007!."
Zaphod: "Yes, it was a picture of me buggering your mother."
RIAA: "..."
Really, I don't understand why the *AA's 'evidence' in these matters is relevant, let alone compelling. Do they have some sort of infallible tool for proving exactly what files Zaphod had on his computer?
Re:Why are *AA logs worth anything? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Why are *AA logs worth anything? (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's say my kids are out playing in my yard and they throw a ball and it breaks a window of your car. If you sued me you wouldn't have to prove they did it, just that it's likely that they did.
Parent
This is music to my ears . . . (Score:5, Informative)
I just read the complaint (Score:4, Interesting)
Thing of beauty. One of the few legal documents I can actually read.
It appears few stones have been left unturned in the counter complaint. It clearly alleges that the RIAA have been using scare tactics to maintain their control on music distribution. The interesting thing is that they have to now prove they didn't. Given that they the big RIAA members have been convicted of collusion in the past, I can't help but see this one becoming a really big nasty mess for them.
Given the U.S. Justice system runs slower than treacle, don't expect the RIAA to be pulled through the coals for a while.
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:4, Funny)
Inconceivable.
Parent
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:5, Funny)
(my gift to you)
Parent
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:How the mighty have fallen... (Score:4, Funny)
A spoon manufacturer?
Parent
Re:No! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:No! (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:hmm look who posted this (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Yes, Ray is a lawyer fighting the RIAA (Score:5, Informative)
Because his clients are generally not wealthy and cannot afford thousands of dollars on experts and legal fees, he's turned to those of us in the technical community who are sick of the RIAA's bullying legal tactics, and I believe he found an Ask Slashdot helpful for once, in spite of the trolls (surely that must be a first...).
If you want to know about the cases he's involved in, he posts about those (and others) over on his blog [blogspot.com]. Or just talk to him when he shows up on Slashdot [slashdot.org]. He's a nice guy, he reads (and responds to) pretty much all replies to his posts, save maybe the trolls. And if he seems a bit curt at times, it's because the RIAA is also watching him. That's right, they've taken note of his blog and possibly other things and tried to twist the things he says and does to use against him in court. I can't see how it's even relevant (it probably isn't), but the RIAA lawyers aren't known for playing nice (or even by the rules, if you look at all the stuff they try and pull ex parte; one Texas judge got mad at them for trying to "defraud" the state of filing fees).
In other words, he's a good lawyer, and one of our few allies in the fight against the RIAA. Very, very few people can afford to represent themselves in court, even if they're innocent, and the RIAA is taking every advantage of that fact
I, for one, intend to do pretty much anything in my power to help him out.
Parent
Re:hmm look who posted this (Score:4, Funny)
You've got to admit it sounds great to the ears
Um that's why people share files. Most of the RIAA music doesn't sound good for the ears, and we're sick of paying for a whole CD to get the one good track on it that they never release as a single!
Parent
Re:more likely to get struck by lightning (Score:4, Insightful)
Just because its rare, doesn't make it right. Murder, as it turns out, is pretty damn rare. Does that make murder right? If its right, it would become more common and suddenly, its wrong! Where does such logic lead?
Parent
Re:more likely to get struck by lightning (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop it, they don't apply to each other.
"...it should be legal to fire at targets in your back yard in a populated area?"
if the odds are that low to hit ANYBODY, then there would be nothing wrong with firing a gun in your backyard. Of course you would be paying for any property damage.
Parent
Re:more likely to get struck by lightning (Score:5, Funny)
To the War on Drugs.
Parent
Re:more likely to get struck by lightning (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:The RIAA Has This In Their Pocket (Score:5, Interesting)
E.g., in Capitol v. Foster [blogspot.com], at a time when the defendant's attorneys fees totalled $55,000, and the judge was preparing to calculate how much of that was "reasonable", the RIAA served a raft of motions and other dilatory requests. The result of this boatload of litigation activity:
-in 2 1/2 months the RIAA's exposure leaped from $55k to $114k
-the judge issued a new decision attacking the RIAA lawyers' motives, veracity, and intellectual integrity, and
-the judge ordered the RIAA to turn over its own attorneys billing records, which will no doubt be described in detail in the judge's order.
I'm estimating the RIAA paid $100,000 for those "additional services".
You tell me if that was money well spent.
Parent