Granny Sues RIAA Over Unlicensed Investigator 206
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "An elderly, non-file-sharing grandmother from East Texas, who had been sued by the RIAA after being displaced by Hurricane Rita, has sought leave to file counterclaims against the RIAA record companies for using unlicensed investigators. In her counterclaims (PDF) Ms. Crain claims that the record companies 'entered into an agreement with a private investigations company to provide investigative services which led to the production of evidence to be used in court against counterclaim plaintiff, including the identification of an IP address on the basis of which counterclaim defendants filed their suit... [They] were at the time of this agreement aware that the aforementioned private investigations company was unlicensed to conduct investigations in the State of Texas specifically, and in other states as well... [T]hey agreed between themselves and understood that unlicensed and unlawful investigations would take place in order to provide evidence for this lawsuit, as well as thousands of others as part of a mass litigation campaign... [T]he private investigations company hired by plaintiffs engaged in one or more overt acts of unlawful private investigation... Such actions constitute civil conspiracy under Texas common law.'"
The RIAA is such a broken record.... (Score:1, Informative)
The RIAA seriously needs to reconsider its position on this entire subject
RIAA put some grannies in the ambulance ... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, her lawyer knew enough to discover this information and file this anyway...
You'll recall from an earlier article that Tanya Anderson's lawyer (in Oregon) http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDFfull.asp?filename
Texas has a similar requirement for private investigators to be licensed. So THIS granny's attorney is filing a copycat countersuit. This is the second buffalo in the stampede.
I expect we'll shortly see television ads from the law offices of James Sokolove asking whether you have received a settlement request from the RIAA, which is about to be nibbled to death by ducks. B-)
Re:you GO, girl! (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshs.shtml [noaa.gov]
first result on google, dude! it's not like filing a legal counterclaim or anything
Re:Good, but... (Score:4, Informative)
Depends on the findings. There was a case that came up just recently where the RIAA is being accused of both federal and state RICO charges as well as quite a number of other things. While this is only a civil case, these are criminal charges. If the findings go to the plaintiff on some of the more serious charges, and were the RIAA not to reform itself, the remedies in a follow-on case from any other party could be quite severe indeed.
C//
Re:Its the little old lady who got a subpoena (Score:2, Informative)
Re:And yet... (Score:5, Informative)
No need to single-click in Windows (Score:3, Informative)
In XP, it's under the file/directory window's Tools->Folder-Options... dialog, on the General tab. Select "Single click to open an item (point to select)".
IIRC, this was called "Web View" when first introduced; it was supposed to make the computer interface more consistent with that of a web browser. I'm not sure that many people use it... except me.
For some reason, I tried it out when I was learning 95, and kept it that way. This didn't strike me as being strange until right now, when I consciously thought about it. Although I like web-view in some ways, it's also a nuisance when you're trying to select multiple files, particularly from thumbnails- incorrectly hovering can lead to files being deselected (and so on). Not sure why I didn't change back- habit, I guess.
Re:Good, but... (Score:4, Informative)
But when I say "RIAA" I'm talking about the 4 major record companies and their labels.
Re:Hell Yeah! (Score:3, Informative)
General rule: each side pays his or her own fees.
Generally lawyer gets paid by the hour.
Lawyer works for "contingent" fee usually only in certain specialized, well-understood areas of the law. E.g., personal injury, tax certiorari, workers compensation, collections.
"Malicious prosecution" cases don't arise until after the earlier case was won by the defendant, which would take years. The malicious prosecution case would then take a number of additional years to play out. Any lawyer who tried to make a living defending cases and doing "malicious prosecution" cases after winning them would be bankrupt very quickly.
Re:Its the little old lady who got a subpoena (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Hell Yeah! (Score:3, Informative)