|
People in masks cannot be trusted
|
Another example why to hate the RIAA
Article 1
Quote:
BEAVERTON, Ore. (AP) - An Oregon woman who says she was wrongly accused of music piracy filed a federal lawsuit against the Recording Industry Association of America, claiming the trade group used abusive tactics in its effort to collect thousands of dollars.
Also named in the suit are MediaSentry, a private investigation company, and the Settlement Support Center, described in the lawsuit as the debt-collection arm of the recording industry's campaign against piracy.
Tanya Andersen, 44, a disabled, single mother from Beaverton, said she got a letter in 2005 from a law firm accusing her of illegally downloading music. As directed, she called the Settlement Support Center.
Andersen said she had never illegally downloaded music, but was told she had to pay $4,000 to $5,000 or she would be ruined financially, according to her lawsuit.
Among the abusive tactics cited in the suit was a threat to interrogate Andersen's 10-year-old daughter.
Jonathan Lamy, a spokesman for the recording industry association, declined to comment on the specifics of the Andersen case, but defended the industry's strategy to combat illegal file-sharing.
The industry has taken legal action against 21,000 individual computer users since 2003.
The industry claimed that Andersen used a certain name to illegally download music on May 20, 2004. Andersen searched the Internet for the name, and learned that it belonged to a man in Everett, Wash., who admitted on his MySpace account that he illegally downloaded music.
Andersen provided the information to the record industry, but officials responded by publicly accusing her of downloading a series of violent and profane songs. Andersen, the suit says, only listens to country music and soft rock.
A recording industry expert finally confirmed that Andersen's computer had not been used to download music, but attorneys still demanded that she pay money before they would drop the case.
"They wanted it to appear publicly that they prevailed," the suit claims. "When Ms. Andersen declined to pay them, defendants stepped up their intimidation."
Two years after filing the lawsuit, the recording industry agreed to drop the case if Andersen dropped her counter charges.
Andersen instead filed a motion forcing the recording industry to provide proof that she illegally downloaded music. The industry dropped its suit on June 1.
Andersen continues to seek to recover her legal costs from the recording companies that sued her, according to her Washington-based attorney, Lory R. Lybeck.
Andersen filed a new suit in U.S. District Court in Oregon last week seeking additional damages.
|
Got to love they know she didn't download, but wouldn't drop it until she paid them. And finally would drop it only after she dropped her counter suit. And here is another interesting article
Quote:
Beaverton (OR) – Former RIAA defendant Tanya Andersen is now suing the major record labels and the RIAA for negligent and illegal investigation and prosecution. In a thirteen count civil suit filed in Oregon District Court, she alleges that record labels didn’t use properly licensed investigators and violated her privacy.
You may remember Andersen as the single mother who was accused of illegally downloaded music through peer to peer networks. After a two-year legal battle, she forced the RIAA to dismiss the case with prejudice. Now, with the help of the attorneys at Lybeck and Murphy, Andersen is turning this into a classic case of "hunter becoming the hunted" by suing for direct and punitive damages.
In addition to suing the RIAA, Andersen is targeting Atlantic Recording, Priority Records, Capital Records, UMG Recordings and BMG Music. She is also naming Media Sentry and RIAA’s Settlement Support Center as defendants. Andersen’s lawyers are hitting the defendants with the full power of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and federal and state RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Act), something that is often used against mafia and street gang members.
Andersen claims the defendants used a scheme of “threatening and intimidating” tactics to force alleged downloaders to pay thousands of dollars in settlement fees. The victims often cannot mount an effective defense because they are only given a “short” 10-day time period to answer, according to Andersen.
The lawsuit also claims that most of those targeted by the RIAA are probably innocent because Media Sentry, the company that tracks the downloaders, doesn’t fully investigate the matter. Andersen also says the company is acting like a private investigator, something that Media Sentry isn’t licensed for in the state of Oregon.
|
All I can say is I hope she wins big money big money.
|