Class Action Complaint Against RIAA Now Online 176
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Recommended reading for all interested in the RIAA's litigation war against p2p file sharing is the amended class action complaint just filed in Oregon in Andersen v. Atlantic. This landmark 109-page document (pdf) tells both the general story of the RIAA's campaign against ordinary folks, and the specific story of its harassment of Tanya Andersen, and even of her young daughter. The complaint includes federal and state RICO claims, as well as other legal theories, and alleges that "The world's four major recording studios had devised an illegal enterprise intent on maintaining their virtually complete monopoly over the distribution of recorded music." The point has been made by one commentator that the RIAA won't be able to weasel its out of this one by simply withdrawing it; this one, they will have to answer for. If the relief requested in the complaint is granted, the RIAA's entire campaign will be shut down for good."
Re:Well, well, well... (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, since I live in NZ, they're not our overlords yet, but we do have the RIANZ down here, who are cut from the same cloth.
In fact, here it's illegal to make any copies of music at all. Hence, until the iTMS arrived, it was a pretty good bet that almost all music on any digital devices was illegally uploaded. Law changes are proposed, and the RIANZ wants to keep the law the same, but they give their word they won't chase the little guy, but want the law to remain the same just in case.
keep reading, it gets better. (Score:5, Informative)
I suggest you keep reading, the best parts have references. Yes, there are about six or seven pages of introductory opinion but by the time you get to page 7 you start to get into the meat of it. They quote three disgusted Federal judges who use terms like, "gamesmenship", "speculation" and "hammer" to describe the suits. By the time you finish, terms like "sham", "illegal" and "outrageous" sound accurate.
Technicality, but still... (Score:4, Informative)
That would be an oligopoly, not a monopoly. "Monopoly" means "one seller". We have four fish to fry here.
Re:unprofessional (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This could backfire (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This could backfire (Score:5, Informative)
For example, the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth recently pointed out [blogspot.com] that
(a) MediaSentry has no license to conduct investigations in Michigan (b) MediaSentry needs a license to conduct investigations in Michigan (c) MediaSentry appears to have been conducting investigations in Michigan and (d) the penalty for conducting investigations without a license in Michigan includes up to 4 years in prison.
Re:This could backfire (Score:5, Informative)
Of course the Napster case was settled shortly thereafter.
Re:This could backfire (Score:4, Informative)
It's been demonstrated that the recovering of "damages" is their primary goal. They set up a fscking Settlement Support Center [p2pnet.net] as a for-profit corporation to streamline their extortion. If they're just trying to scare people, why do they need a new corporation (which has it's own army of lawyers) to process the payments?
Scaring people is just a happy side-effect. The "settlements" are revenue-generating.
Re:Well, well, well... (Score:3, Informative)
That only hold true if the goal of the politician is to serve the people. If the goal of the politician is to have power over the people or to serve someone who wants to have power over the people, then having the majority of the people open to prosecution at your leisure is a very useful tool. Most parking and speeding tickets are a lower level of this sort of criminalizing of the average person:"The National League of Cities says 47% of the nation's cities raised fees and fines last year. Most of the added money came from parking tickets. Revenue from these fines and fees now rivals property taxes as a major source of municipal income, says the league's Chris Hoene." [usatoday.com]Now obviously, the city governments that generate a significant portion of their income through tickets don't actully want everyone to start parking legally, nor do they want to make more legal parking easily available. They want money, just like the RIAA does.
Re:unprofessional (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This could backfire (Score:2, Informative)
Re:'big 4' and RIAA (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I don't mind lawyers getting rich. (Score:3, Informative)