Related stuff
I didn't see this particular news item anywhere else. I hope the legal team finds lots of unpleasant information during discovery.
LinkFriday may mark a significant milestone in the RIAA's legal campaign against file-sharing, as it is the deadline for exonerated RIAA defendant Tanya Andersen to refile her malicious prosecution lawsuit against the record labels. Soon afterwards, discovery will begin, and all sorts of unsavory details about the RIAA's legal campaign against suspected file-sharers are likely to emerge.
Andersen is a single mother living in Oregon who was sued by the record labels in February 2005. She eventually filed a counterclaim against the RIAA, and when the labels voluntarily dismissed their case against her last June, she filed a malicious-prosecution lawsuit. In it, Andersen accuses the RIAA of fraud, racketeering, invasion of privacy, libel, slander, deceptive business practices, and violations of the Oregon state RICO Act.
Last month, a federal judge dismissed Andersen's original complaint, saying that she had "not adequately stated claims for relief," but gave her a one-month window to refile. Her attorney, Lory Lybeck, told Ars that he plans to file a new 80-page complaint tomorrow. "The focus of the amended complaint is essentially the sham litigation and abuse of the federal judiciary to operate this criminal enterprise that has harmed Tanya Andersen and thousands of other people," Lybeck said.
With a new complaint, the case is certain to move forward into the discovery phase, as the judge has told both sides that she would not entertain any further motions to dismiss this case. It's an uncomfortable place for the RIAA to be in.
"Usually, the parties are entitled to liberal pretrial discovery of anything related to the subject matter of the case," copyright attorney Ray Beckerman told Ars. "So the scope of the amended complaint will have a big impact on what is and what is not discoverable."
Lybeck tells Ars that he'll be digging into agreements between the RIAA, RIAA member companies, MediaSentry, and the Settlement Support Sentry. Part of that will involve looking at compensation, like how much MediaSentry gets from each settlement. "I'd love to know what kind of bounty MediaSentry got paid to supply erroneous identities to the RIAA," Lybeck says.
One of the allegations in the amended complaint will involve MediaSentry's status as a private investigator. "MediaSentry claims it is able to gain access to people's hard drives without their permission and collect information," notes Lybeck. "It's illegal because they're not licensed to do that work."
The amended complaint and subsequent discovery will also focus on what Lybeck calls the "flawed nature" of the RIAA's investigations. "We know [the RIAA] cannot identify individuals," he says in response to a question on false positives. "We want to know how many dolphins the RIAA is catching," referring to a former RIAA spokesperson's 2003 comment about accidentally catching a few dolphins when fishing with a net.
The RIAA is likely to fight the discovery process tooth and nail, however, as the information that is unearthed could prove to be extremely embarrassing, if not problematic. "They've operated in this zone of secrecy for five years now, and we hope to put a stop to that," Lybeck stated emphatically, "because it will become obvious that their conduct is illegal an their whole scheme is flawed at its basic core."
So far, the RIAA's attorneys have been uncooperative on discovery issues, according to Lybeck. He says that he has reached out to RIAA lead national counsel Richard Gabriel, who was argued the labels' case in the Jammie Thomas trial, in order to move the process forward. "He's refused," Lybeck said. "I assume we're going to run into the same stall and delay tactics."
Gabriel took issue with Lybeck's characterization, accusing him of making "false statements" about his conduct. "As I discussed with Mr. Lybeck, the Court dismissed all 13 of his client's claims," Gabriel told Ars. "As a result, there are no claims pending at the moment, and his request to schedule discovery is premature. We are eager to resolve all outstanding issues in this case and look forward to doing so in a rational way that follows the process outlined by the Court."
The judge has barred further motions for dismissal, so unless the RIAA decides to settle—a move Lybeck believes is in the group's best interest—the case will proceed through discovery and to trial. Unlike the thousands of lawsuits filed so far, the RIAA does not have the luxury of walking away from this case if there's a real chance of embarrassing information being released. "Once discovery happens in the cases the RIAA brings, they run," Lybeck says. "This is our case now, and they can't run."
I don't know enough about legal proceedings, so here's a question. Could the discovery information be used in other law suits against the RIAA? Also any idea how long before the discovery information is public?
Also another article which notes that the case has already been refiled
Second LinkAP wrote:PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — A woman who claims the recording industry's anti-music piracy campaign threatens and intimidates innocent people has filed a new complaint accusing record companies of racketeering, fraud and illegal spying.
Tanya Andersen originally sued the Recording Industry Association of America after RIAA representatives threatened to interrogate her young daughter if she didn't pay thousands of dollars for music she downloaded from somebody else.
Her amended complaint filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Portland seeks national class-action status for other people allegedly victimized by the industry's anti-piracy campaign and the company it hired, MediaSentry.
The new lawsuit claims accuses the industry and MediaSentry of spying "by unlicensed, unregistered and uncertified private investigators" who "have illegally entered the hard drives of tens of thousands of private American citizens" in violation of laws "in virtually every state in the country."
The information was used to file "sham" lawsuits intended only as intimidation to further the anti-piracy campaign, the lawsuit said.
Lory Lybeck, the attorney for the Beaverton woman, said the lawsuit is partly aimed at forcing the industry to reveal how extensive the spying had become.
"We're very pleased that we'll finally be able to force the RIAA and MediaSentry to give up secret records they have steadfastly refused to disclose in tens of thousands of cases that they've filed," Lybeck said.
Jonathan Lamy, an industry spokesman, said the new complaint repeats old claims.
"It is unfortunate that this case continues to drag on after the court previously deemed all of Ms. Andersen's claims inadequate," Lamy said. "We hope to resolve the case in short order."
The complaint notes the case began when Andersen, a single mother, was sitting down for dinner with her then 8-year-old daughter at their home in August 2005 and a legal process server knocked on her door with notice of an RIAA lawsuit falsely alleging copyright infringement and demanding penalties.
The lawsuit was dismissed by U.S. Magistrate Judge Donald Ashmanskas and Andersen countersued.
Her complaint is similar to one filed in federal court against the industry by Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers on behalf of the University of Oregon to protect the privacy of university students the RIAA has accused of music piracy.
Stephanie Soden, spokeswoman for Myers, said Friday that the state is monitoring the Andersen lawsuit.
"We're definitely watching it closely," she said.
Hopefully yes.