p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA in deep trouble with new case
p2pnet news | RIAA News:- Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA is in deep trouble.
In the summer of 2007 Suzy Del Cid accused Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG’s RIAA of extortion and computer fraud.
She said the RIAA Extortion (sorry, Settlement) Support Center was a, “company organized for the sole purpose of contacting prospective defendants and demanding that they pay thousands of dollars each to avoid the prospect of a federal lawsuit against them”.
Del Cid, from Florida and represented by Michael Alex Wasylik, charged the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) with:
- Trespass
- Computer Fraud and Abuse (18 USC 1030)
- Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices (Fla. Stat. 501.201)
- Civil Extortion
The judge rejected the RIAA’s challenge to the counterclaims, says Recording Industry vs The People, instead upholding their validity.
Deeply shocked by this nasty (for it) turn of events, the RIAA quickly organised a confidential settlement before things got out of hand (for it).
Now identical counterclaims have surfaced in Florida in Atlantic v Boyer and this time,” says RIvTH’s Ray Beckerman >>>
[…] the record companies dare not challenge their validity because the judge presiding over the case is the very same Hon.Richard A. Lazzara who wrote the Del Cid decision.
The RIAA lawyers can’t make a motion to dismiss the counterclaims this time around.
If they did, the judge would probably slap them with Rule11 sanctions.
So they’ll have to hold their tongues and let it play out, with the accusations of their clients’ criminality being litigated on the merits, with full pretrial discovery.
Definitely stay tuned.
extortion and computer fraud - RIAA charged with extortion, June 4th, 2007
RIAA Extortion - RIAA extortion company: identified & located?, April 7, 2008
Recording Industry vs The People - 5 Out of 6 Counterclaims Against RIAA in UMG v. Del Cid are Upheld by Court, August 16, 2007
identical counterclaims - IAA accused of extortion, conspiracy, illegal investigation, trespass, computer fraud, deception, April 7, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe
to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.phpNet access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
April 9th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Hey, this username and email (I’m not going to reproduce it here) are not mine, but they appeared in the boxes for this Reader’s Write. Eek. . .
April 9th, 2008 at 8:31 am
^^ Can you email me at p2pnet @ shaw dot ca?
Cheers! And thanks …
April 9th, 2008 at 8:49 am
Whoa - awesome! About time those fuckers got nailed for extortion. “Each file shared is a lost sale” Yeah, right.
At last some of those bastards are gonna go to prison for this and perhaps a label or two will completely die. Let the court cases commence.
These are good times.
April 9th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
” Whoa - awesome! About time those fuckers got nailed for extortion. “
They’re not nailed yet.
Not only can they easily afford these court sanctioned extortion tactics …
” Deeply shocked by this nasty (for it) turn of events, the RIAA quickly organised a confidential settlement before things got out of hand (for it). ”
They can easily afford hush money.
How much to buy the silence of this victim ?
April 9th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
The future of the RIAA:
http://www.valourandhorror.com/lib/VH/modules/Media/lib/getMedia.php?koId=10145
The Future of the majors labels:
http://www.arthistoryclub.com/art_history/upload/thumb/3/38/295px-Nagasakibomb.jpg
April 9th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
The day people aren’t outraged for paying 5k settlement per song is when songs cost 5k. As I see it right now, they really should be suing for pennies =)
April 9th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
@Dreddsnik
Oh, I know there, Dredd. However something like this can open a whole can of worms for them and help to highlight the corrupt links within government that allows them to carry on like this, hush money, the lot.
Perhaps it’ll result in a national scandal which will sort out this whole problem, who knows? At least we can say that the tables are turning and it’s not the whitewash it was at the start. (grin)
“Files shared = sales lost.” Christ that’s an insult to the intelligence. (angry)
April 9th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Yeah if I couldn’t download music (what else is bandwidth good for) I certainly wouldn’t be buying it, and not even listening to it. I mainly collect it as who has sufficient time to listen to it all even once? I can see it turning into trading and selling if not for Internet. We can only hope. So really they’re better off not opposing file sharing as that takes longer and exposes people to new music, saving the cost of promoting, and reaching a greater audience. Discographies are very limited in scope and quality, so people are made aware of music to look for when shopping.
As regards full disclosure, I can’t see that happening, or anything being done about it. We’ll see. Certainly something must be done about them however. They’re loose cannons on society. Litigation is business as usual for them, and the courts put up with it because it keeps all the lawyers in business and helps justify their existence.
May 8th, 2008 at 3:30 am
As far as i am concerned, the Defendants should be awarded $100,000,000 each. Give the RIAA some of its own shit back!