 major marcoRes Firma Mitescere NescitPremium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA | Weak Causes of Action Of all the Plaintiff's causes of action, the only one that really has any kind weight is RICO, but even then it's on faulty ground because in order for a RICO charge to bear fruit, the question has to focus on wire fraud.
Andersen alleges the RIAA went poking around in her pc for purposes of spying, but I don't see that sticking since that is what P2P is essentially. Shared folders are open for all to see. Her legal counsel will have to do some dancing around that issue and hope the judge is as clueless about technology as most of them usually are in these kind of cases.
As for malicious prosecution, I don't see that carrying any kind of weight either because in order for it to stick, someone from RIAA would have to testify that RIAA pursued people it knew were innocent. I would imagine that the liklihood of happening falls somewhere between getting struck by lighting twice and winning the lottery.
Slander/libel are almost always a waste of time to pursue in court unless you're a celebrity.
Bottom line: As much as we all despise the diaRIAA and would like to see it get its comeuppance, the unpleasant reality is that this case will likely not amount to anything. Like it or not, federal law gives copyright holders the ability to seek recompense via the court system via civil cases, and that is exactly what the RIAA is doing. OTOH, whether the RIAA has done so prudently, is another matter entirely.
--
The Toll
|
|
 TransitManPremium,MVM
join:2000-09-05
Dayton, OH
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by major marco:Of all the Plaintiff's causes of action, the only one that really has any kind weight is RICO, but even then it's on faulty ground because in order for a RICO charge to bear fruit, the question has to focus on wire fraud. The question of Wire fraud??
Telephone conversations, alleged taking of information from her personal computer, just to name a few. They involve the use of telephone equipment and or cable HSI, in other words WIRE.
The RICO act will prevail here, wire fraud and all.
--
PROUD TO BE THE DIRECTOR OF THE CRUNCHENSTEIN ASSOCIATION AND THE HOST OF CRUNCHENSTEIN #2 |
|
 jester121Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·voip.ms
2 edits | reply to major marco
Does anyone know if the RICO act even allows for a private right of action? Meaning, violating RICO Act is a crime, but is there a provision that allows a citizen to bring suit for damages resulting from the violation?
If not then that entire bit gets tossed out, and it's up to the feds to investigate criminally.
----------------
EDIT - never mind, it appears that the RICO statute allows for up to treble damages in a private action. Good for her! |
|
|
|
| reply to major marco
Why only wire fraud? Where did you pull that from? Apart from other misdeeds they sent the woman threatening letters in an attempt to extort... IOW mail fraud!
You make a *big* assumption about P2P there. There are other ways to poke around in people's computers. Has it been established that there was P2P software on the woman's computer?
I also don't see why "malicious prosecution" requires an admission of guilt by an individual at RIAA. The evidence will stand on its own merits and, weighing the facts, a judgment will be made as to whether there was malicious intent.
Bottom line: it's quite obvious that RIAA stepped in it here and they don't even have the good sense to know how to clean off the soil! |
|
public
join:2002-01-19
Santa Clara, CA | reply to jester121
said by jester121:Does anyone know if the RICO act even allows for a private right of action? Meaning, violating RICO Act is a crime, but is there a provision that allows a citizen to bring suit for damages resulting from the violation? 18 U.S.C. Section 1964c allows treble damages and seizure of assets gained by the criminal activity. |
|
