RIAA, Safenet Sued For Malicious Prosecution
DaveAtFraud writes "Tanya Anderson, the single mother from Oregon previously sued by the RIAA — which dropped the case just before losing a summary judgement — is now suing the RIAA and their hired snoop Safenet for malicious prosecution. (Safenet was formerly known as MediaSentry.) Anderson is asserting claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act. A reader at Groklaw has already picked up that she is seeking to have the RIAA forfeit the copyrights in question as part of the settlement (search the page for '18.6-7')."
Im sure noone else will defend the RIAA here, so I may as well be the one to point out the obvious.
From what I understand here the RIAA didnt really want to bankrupt this woman. They really just wanted to assert their IP rights, they typically dont want whatever money would be awarded from a trial against some random individual. The cost of running this whole operation dramatically exceeds whatever they could make in settlements and verdicts. They arent doing it to extort as some claim, they are doing it to deter people from copying their stuff. They dont need the publicity of forcing a woman and her kid to be homeless. Despite what groklaw may say they arent going after people that they dont have fairly good cases against. (and you know perfectly well there are tons of people who they can make good cases against)
This woman should just leave it alone, she already caught a break with the charges being dropped.
So, they're choosing your peers by the least common denominator?
How quaint. We wouldn't want educated people deciding on something like that, now would we?
</rant>
Ignore this signature. By order.