MediaSentry Defied Michigan Investigation For Months

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "You may recall that MediaSentry, the RIAA's unlicensed investigator, has been the subject of an investigation by Michigan's Department of Labor and Economic Growth for its conduct of investigations without an investigator's license, an investigation in which it has made contradictory and false statements to the government's investigators. Well apparently this didn't deter MediaSentry from simply continuing its practice of conducting 'investigations' without a license. In Michigan, no less. We have learned from court papers (PDF) filed in Michigan that the practice continued for months after the DLEG had begun questioning the practice."

Comments

Makes sense

[seeker_1us]

No reason to stop business as usual while he RIAA tries to buy, err make "campaign donations" to more politicians.

Little things like questionable legality and ethics aside...

Re:What could happen?

[daninspokane]

From another article:

The prosecutor can prosecute these cases as felonies, with a maximum penalty of a $5,000 fine and/or up to four years in prison.

Nothing too stiff compared to what you can get for pirating a movie... :/

Re:IANAL, so...?

[nurb432]

Far less then the lives they are trying to ruin with non existent evidence.

Same company

[Enderandrew]

This is the same company that admits to using illegal denial-of-service attacks. They have no regard for the law, and if they get busted, they'll close shop and reopen under another name.

Re:Same company

[RobertM1968]

Oh, they have regard for the law... (a) the ones they can buy, (b) the ones they can use to further their cause, and (c) the ones they can ignore because no one is stopping them.

As for (b) they have already made mention (and the MPAA has already won such suits) of trying to drag these things into criminal prosecution - and folks, though people here claim that is not possible, the laws already exist to allow it. The MPAA won one such case (already talked about someplace on slashdot not too long ago) and the video game industry recently won another:

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/15143.cfm

If they start getting more wins in civil suits, I can guarantee you they will be going for a two pronged attack (civil and criminal) - at least that's my opinion from reading what they have said, what they have done and what the MPAA has done.

The key difference in the type of suit (if I understand it correctly - and IANAL, so I might not) is that for it to be criminal, the person must be doing it for the purpose of gaining some sort of compensation (such as money). (1) I am sure the **AA would love to see that expanded to these type cases, where compensation is not the reason it's done, and (2) I am sure they could always argue that the file sharer is indeed gaining compensation via downloading songs of certain value during or in conjunction with the commission of their distribution crime. Remember, compensation does not have to be monetary... and while this may be a stretch, the RIAA has made numerous other "stretches" that they have been allowed to carry on over the years.

Enderandrew is right - though the situation may become even more bleak as the RIAA become even more desperate.

Big question is, will they shoot themselves in the collective foot before they maneuver or legislate themselves into a protected haven? (wish I knew - wouldnt wanna bet either way)

Re:As soon ...

[Nerdfest]

I'd totally trust Silent Bob. The man's a visionary.

Re:IANAL, so...?

[entrylevel]

I think it is more likely than one might think, but it won't help.

How many people do you think are actually on MediaSentry's payroll? How much actual cash do they need on hand to troll P2P sites and the like?

More to the point, how long do you think it will take after MediaDefender *ahem* I mean MediaSentry is completely dissolved before MediaProtector springs up?

The problem is that the **AA hired these folks to do a job and can't be held accountable if MediaWhatever broke the law unless they explicitly instructed them to do so.

Re:IANAL, so...?

[pxlmusic]

they'll get away with it because they're fighting piracy and by extension something "for the children".

Re:Can't blame them really

[phulegart]

What?? They sure do go dump Toxic Waste because there aren't specific injunctions and court orders not telling them to...
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/11165
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/27/93622.shtml?s=ic
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Toxic_waste_dump_killing_children_in_Kenya_UN_report_999.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/06/MN2510MASF.DTL&type=printable

You think these companies waited until they were in trouble to start dumping their crap?

Re:IANAL, so...?

[Original Replica]

Corporations exist to shield people from liability, not to allow people to indirectly commit crimes.

When you have an amoral guiding principle such as "maximize profit" as the primary goal of your corporation, then there is little to no difference between a "shield from liability" and a carte blanc for white collar crime. I think that is the line that divides good corporations from evil corporations; the primacy of profit. A good corp might have profit as second in it's list of priorities after something like "make the best product we can" or "provide a low cost service" but a soon as profit overrules all other aspects of the company they crossover to the Dark Side. While a protection from liablity is a societially good thing when a good corporation has it, it is a societally bad thing when a evil corp has it. MediaDefender/Sentry/Thug is a tool of the RIAA which is purely based on profit maximization.

Much much better

[symbolset]

Would be to abolish copyright altogether and get rid of this and the whole basket of related problems in one fell stroke.

It's more likely than you might think.