RIAA Sued For Fraud, Abuse, & "Sham Litigation"

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "It's been a rough week for the RIAA as massive layoffs are about to cost many employees their job. On top of that, the anti-piracy outfit is being sued in North Carolina for abusing the legal system in its war on piracy, particularly for civil conspiracy, deceptive trade practices, trespassing and computer fraud in SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Moursy. Named along with the record companies as defendants on the counterclaims are Safenet (formerly known as MediaSentry) and the RIAA. This case first started out as 'LaFace Records v. Does 1-38' until the court required the RIAA to break it up into 38 separate cases, at which point it morphed into 'SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Doe.' Only after the RIAA finally got its 'expedited' discovery did it become SONY v. Moursy. And from the looks of things, it has a long, long way to go. The RIAA hasn't even filed its answer to the counterclaims yet, but is making a motion to dismiss them on the grounds of legal insufficiency. Sound like a good investment of record company resources, anyone?"

Comments

W/Regards to layoffs:

[GreenEggsAndSpam]

Before anybody starts in on the "Yay, less employees!" style rant, please remember that there are GOOD people who work at bad companies... not everyone is an evil backstabbing conniving shrew with the goal of proving that everyone is evil and owes them billions of dollars.

Of course, I have no proof of this "decent people" there, but one can only assume there would be.

Re:W/Regards to layoffs:

[Foobar of Borg]

No, the defence was: "If I hadn't followed those orders I would have been executed on the spot".

No, the defense actually was "Befehl ist befehl" (orders are orders). In other words, the denial of responsibility by bucking it up to the next highest link in the chain of command. Try wiki. Note also where it says:

"Thus, under Nuremberg Principle IV, "defense of superior orders" is not a defense for war crimes, although it might influence a sentencing authority to lessen the penalty. Nuremberg Principle IV states:

'The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.'" [emphasis added]

Re:Couldn't have happened to nicer people

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

Now THIS is the kind of stuff I like to hear!!! Thanks for the update Ray!!!

In my book the real thanks go to these guys, who took on this case, for the sake of principle, and have been doing a first-rate job ever since. They've taken about 15 penniless college students under their wings, and have really taken the fight to the RIAA. Lawyers like Steve Robertson and the Robertson Medlin firm bring honor to my profession.

Re:Do they have a lawyer fund..

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

I couldn't find a link or any information to go about it in the article; Do you know any details about how we can show support?

Sure, send these guys a check with instructions to apply it to Ms. Moursy's case!

Re:RIAA guilty of promoting copyright infringment?

[tinkerghost]

No that is not correct. You buy a CD like you buy a book. You only need a "license" if the copyright holder has to give you a limited subset of his or her limited monopoly on copying/distribution. You buy the CD, you do not need any of the copying/distribution rights that are reserved to the copyright holder.

The whole point is that the RIAA is arguing that music is only "sold" when it's convenient for them to deal with it in those terms. Otherwise it's licensed. I am looking at 15 of 20 random CD's having the notice that 'unauthorized lending' is prohibited.

Copying to buffers for use as intended was supposed to be covered under law. According to Blizzard V Michael Donnelly it actually requires a valid license. That's software, but as we are fond of pointing out here, data is data. If copying software to ram is a copyright violation without a valid license, then copying music to the ram buffers in an MP3 player without a valid license is also a violation.

The original statement is sort of a unintended consequence train with all of the push to increase copyright strength.