Why the RIAA Sucks March 15, 2008Posted by BrewFan in Crime, Law, Music, Terrorist Hemorrhoids.
The backlash against the aggressive tactics of the RIAA is starting to build momentum. From a recently filed class action law suit:
For nearly three years of her life, Tanya Andersen and her young daughter were subjected to an outrageous series of baseless accusations and unrelenting threats of financial ruin. The world’s four major recording studios had devised an illegal enterprise intent on maintaining their virtually complete monopoly over the distribution of recorded music. The enterprise is conducted with total disregard for innocent individuals. Dead people have been sued. Children have been sued. People without computers have been sued. As a senior RIAA spokeswoman explained: “When you fish with a net, you are going to catch a few dolphins”. By their own early admission, they were knowingly engaged in a “driftnet fishing” operation and “innocent dolphins” were the collateral damage in their “nets”.
What is interesting about this and some other recent cases is that the RIAA and their agents are going to have to go through the discovery phase, finally. In the past the RIAA has managed to hide much of their shady tactics by dropping suits they filed if they were challenged. If I understand correctly (I’m not a lawyer, I just play one on TV) because they are the defendants they will not be able to avoid discovery. Our resident legal eagles may want to elaborate some.
Go get ’em Tanya, et al.
UPDATE: What other bad news could there be for the companies that make up RIAA? How about musicians redefining the business model for selling their product? Trent Reznor is blazing that trail