Racketeering Trial of MS and Best Buy Can Proceed

mcgrew (sm62704) writes with news that the Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by Microsoft and a unit of Best Buy to dismiss a lawsuit alleging violation of racketeering laws. This means the class-action complaint can go to trial. The case was filed in civil court and the companies, with the US Chamber of Commerce behind them, wanted the Supreme Court to put the brakes on the expanding use of RICO laws in civil filings. The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act was designed to fight organized crime, but in recent years more than 100 times as many civil as federal RICO cases have been filed.

Comments

Re:Organized crime?

[MichaelKaiserProScri]

The deal between AT&T and Apple sucks, but is legal, because it is disclosed ahead of time. The deal between MS and Best Buy is illegal because it was not disclosed.

Re:Important to note

[ejdmoo]

Replying to my own post, check this post from the Consumerist out...

I'm almost ashamed to admit this, but it did happen for the longest time. Ever get signed for something at Best Buy, but you swear that you never signed up for anything. Here is the trick that is used, and that I was taught from a Best Buy manager. When a customer would refuse either AOL, MSN, NetZero, magazine offers, or whatever other D-SUB we had, we'd sign you up anyway. You know those Best Buy gift cards that are all over the store? Well those are just American Express cards, with a Best Buy face. So, we'd go through the motions of selecting your address but when it asked for your credit card, we'd swipe through a gift card. Since it was an American Express card in reality, the system took it and you were signed up. The customer had to deal with the late fees because they couldn't charge the credit card the provided. Not our problem.

Re:Important to note

[vux984]

I thought gift cards generally were completely useless unless activated, to make stealing them pointless? Is this a recent thing, or are the Best Buy cards not like this, or something?

Yes, they were completely useless, insofar as that nothing can be charged against them. But they still have a number, and a functioning mag-strip. And if the system just requires a mag strip swipe with a valid number. (and by valid, we only mean "properly formatted"), then its good to go.

Nothing is actually ever attempted to be "charged" or "authorized" against the card number until the 6 month trial is up, at which point it doesn't work, of course, because the card is useless.

Re:Organized crime?

[Bacon Bits]

Suing absolutely can be illegal (or, if you prefer, legally actionable). It's known as barratry, abuse of process, vexatious litigation, or frivolous litigation.

If you bring a case against someone solely to punish them with legal proceedings, that's often illegal. Even if it's not, it gets lawyers disbarred.