Comments for Class Action Status Requested For Malicious Prosecution Suit Against RIAA

Class Action Status Requested For Malicious Prosecution Suit Against RIAA

2007-08-18T20:31:06Z

Remember Tanya Anderson? After the RIAA's case against the 42 year-old single mother for downloading gangsta rap was dismissed with prejudice, Tanya turned around and sued the RIAA for fraud, racketeering, and malicious prosecution. Now, her lawyers have filed papers in federal court asking to grant her suit class action status. From Ars Technica:

]]> The development, first reported by p2pnet, hopes to make a class out of those "who were sued or were threatened with sued by Defendants for file-sharing, downloading or other similar activities, who have not actually engaged in actual copyright infringement." In other words, a class of the innocent. In the complaint, Andersen alleges that the RIAA "has engaged in a coordinated enterprise to pursue a scheme of threatening and intimidating litigation in an attempt to maintain its music distribution monopoly."This is the first attempt to condense a lawsuit against the RIAA into a class action. We wish them nothing but the best of luck in their crusade against the worst company in America.

RIAA faces possible class action over suing the innocent [Ars Technica]
(Photo: josephp)

Comment from gtr225 on 2007-08-20

2007-08-20T21:17:36Z

Good luck to her.

Comment from Echodork on 2007-08-20

2007-08-20T19:57:25Z

You are not the RIAA's customer. The recording labels are the RIAA's customers. So when the RIAA talks about "protecting their customers' investments," please bear in mind that you are not the target of that statement. What they mean is, they want to protect the profits of their shareholders from you, the pirating public.

Comment from quantum-shaman on 2007-08-20

2007-08-20T18:17:16Z

P.S. the CEO of RIAA made approximately $1.4 million in cash compensation for the '06 fiscal year. That's quite hefty for an organization with only $46 million in revenues. I am sure a big part of that was an incentive payment which means the Board must be pretty pleased with the CEO's/RIAA's performance. Will the compensation go down, post-class action lawsuit? Let's watch!

Comment from quantum-shaman on 2007-08-20

2007-08-20T18:10:49Z

@ju-ju-eyeball: For trade associations who represent their members on "politically sensitive" issues, it's damn near impossible to track down the contact information through the website. It's quite intentional. They don't want to be flooded with emails from pissed off people.

Comment from du2vye on 2007-08-20

2007-08-20T06:22:05Z

How the RIAA gets away with the claim that they represent 90% of music in the U.S. when all they do is collect a fee when a song is "sold" - whether it's a RIAA label or not - to equal the same thing as "representing" musicians is beyond me.

But then I can't figure out the stupidity (or greed - or both) of Congress to let the RIAA continue on as it has. Not only that, put their seal on the claim that downloading is the same as murder and it's a 'homeland security threat'???

It's pretty obvious why the RIAA labels are loosing money. I'm afraid Anderson is just a symptom of a much bigger problem. If she wins, someone will pass a law to make what RIAA does legal.

Comment from ju-ju-eyeball on 2007-08-19

2007-08-20T02:50:09Z

I sent the RIAA this email twice:

Hello RIAA,

I have just a few questions:

When I was in high school I used to tape songs off of the radio. Where were you then? Why was it ok to tape music off the radio then, but not to download it off the internet now?

I have bought over the years hundreds of LPs, 8-Tracks and cassettes that I have lost, destroyed or thrown away. As I have already paid for this music, can I download these songs for free?

Given the quality of music is heading into the garbage, and artist and band releasing only one or two songs worthy of replay (where are the A & R men of the past??), why should I buy an entire CD for only 1 or 2 good songs?

It is also a known fact that CD prices have been artificially inflated for years. Where is my refund?

What if I want song "A" by artist "B" and it is not currently in release? Should I download it, or am I out of luck?

What about public domain music? Can I download that?

Thank you for your attention in this matter. And by the way, I OWN over 200 CDs. (Some great, some good, and some just plain stink!)

I NEVER RECEIVED A RESPONSE...
I do not think they really care about consumers...
And their web site sucks. Why do corporations go through all the trouble to have a web site and then make it so hard to figure out a way to contact them? But that is a whole different rant...

Comment from Jesse in Japan on 2007-08-19

2007-08-19T13:17:17Z

It's about time somebody realized that the RIAA is no different from any other criminal organization.

Those bastards ought to see jail time for their racketeering and extortion campaign.

Comment from ckolony on 2007-08-19

2007-08-19T08:29:44Z

This is excellent. Probably a hard case to get the class certified in, but excellent none the less. I wonder if the RIAA and their cohorts saw this coming?

Comment from homerjay on 2007-08-19

2007-08-19T06:21:52Z

GO freedom train! GO!

Comment from timmus on 2007-08-18

2007-08-19T02:07:53Z

I can't believe it's taken this damn long for people (lawyers?) to get their collective asses together about this.

Comment from doctor_cos wants you to remain calm on 2007-08-18

2007-08-19T00:46:02Z

Consumers are not the RIAA's customers. The RIAA is a 'trade group' whose stated goals are to protect 'intellectual property rights' although typically those belong to the corporations, not the artists. Still looking forward to the day when the last record company gets their head out of their ass and works the system, not the customers.
Fuck DRM, the RIAA, and the MPAA.

Comment from kable2 on 2007-08-18

2007-08-19T00:31:40Z

when they catch someone shareing songs, they should be limited to at the most 3x 99cents per song.

What a concept, sue your customers.

Comment from Nighthawke on 2007-08-18

2007-08-19T00:05:20Z

RIAA built their guillotine, why not allow them to test it upon themselves?

Let the blade fall and fall agian upon their necks!

Count me in for the litigation. They owe me at least $100K for the pain and suffering from the fear that they have levied upon me.

Now don't they owe the rest of us for the cloak of darkness that they have imposed upon the light of knowledge?

Comment from lestat730 on 2007-08-18

2007-08-18T22:34:13Z

kick ass!

Comment from mantari on 2007-08-18

2007-08-18T22:08:04Z

Delicious.

Comment from overbysara on 2007-08-18

2007-08-18T21:29:23Z

WOOOOOOOO

RIAA sucks

Comment from Lin-Z [linguist on duty] on 2007-08-18

2007-08-18T21:26:08Z

finally, someone sues the RIAA!

Comment from dbeahn on 2007-08-18

2007-08-18T20:59:57Z

I hope they gut the RIAA.

Comment from morganlh85 on 2007-08-18

2007-08-18T20:50:33Z

You go girl!