MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-10-02 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] DRM is Theft
|
Oregon RIAA Victim Fights Back; Sues RIAA for Electronic Trespass,
Violations of Computer Fraud & Abuse, Invasion of Privacy, RICO, Fraud
ATLANTIC V. ANDERSEN
This is the case peer-to-peer file sharers have been waiting for. Tanya
Andersen, a 41 year old disabled single mother living in Oregon, has
countersued the RIAA for Oregon RICO violations, fraud, invasion of
privacy, abuse of process, electronic trespass, violation of the
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, negligent misrepresentation, the tort of
"outrage", and deceptive business practices.
Ms. Andersen's counterclaims demand a trial by jury.
Ms. Andersen made the following allegations, among others:
1. For a number of years, a group of large, multinational,
multi-billion dollar record companies, including these
plaintiffs, have been abusing the federal court judicial
system for the purpose of waging a public relations and public
threat campaign targeting digital file sharing activities. As
part of this campaign, these record companies retained
MediaSentry to invade private home computers and collect
personal information. Based on private information allegedly
extracted from these personal home computers, the record
companies have reportedly filed lawsuits against more than
13,500 anonymous “John Does.â€
2. The anonymous “John Doe†lawsuits are filed for the sole
purpose of information farming and specifically to harvest
personal internet protocol addresses from internet service
providers.
3. After an individual’s personal information is harvested, it
is given to the record companies’ representatives and the
anonymous “John Doe†information farming suits are then
typically dismissed.
4. The record companies provide the personal information to
Settlement Support Center, which engages in prohibited and
deceptive debt collection activities and other illegal conduct
to extract money from the people allegedly identified from the
secret lawsuits. Most of the people subjected to these secret
suits do not learn that they have been “sued†until demand is
made for payment by the record companies’ lawyers or Settlement
Support Center.....
5. Tanya Andersen is a 42-year-old single mother of an
eight-year-old daughter living in Tualatin, Oregon. Ms. Andersen
is disabled and has a limited income from Social Security.
6. Ms. Andersen has never downloaded or distributed music
online. She has not infringed on any of plaintiffs’ alleged
copyrighted interest.....
7. Ms. Andersen has, however, been the victim of the record
companies’ public threat campaign. The threats started when the
record companies falsely claimed that Ms. Andersen had been an
“unnamed†defendant who was being sued in federal court in the
District of Columbia. She was never named in that lawsuit and
never received service of a summons and complaint.
8. Neither did Ms. Andersen receive any timely notice that the
suit even existed. That anonymous suit was filed in mid-2004.
Ms. Andersen first learned that she was being “sued†when she
received a letter dated February 2, 2005, from the Los Angeles,
California, law firm Mitchell Silverberg & Knupp, LLP. The LA
firm falsely claimed that Ms. Andersen had downloaded music,
infringed undisclosed copyrights and owed hundreds of thousands
of dollars. Ms. Andersen was understandably shocked, fearful,
and upset. ....
9. After receiving the February 2, 2005 letter, Ms. Andersen
contacted the record companies’ “representative,†which turned
out to be Settlement Support Center, LLC. This company was
formed by the record companies for the sole purpose of coercing
payments from people who had been identified as targets in the
anonymous information farming suits. Settlement Support Center
is a Washington State phone solicitation company which engages
in debt collection activities across the country.
10. When Ms. Andersen contacted Settlement Support Center, she
was advised that her personal home computer had been secretly
entered by the record companies’ agents, MediaSentry.
11. Settlement Support Center also falsely claimed that Ms.
Andersen had “been viewed†by MediaSentry downloading “gangster
rap†music at 4:24 a.m. Settlement Support Center also falsely
claimed that Ms. Andersen had used the login name
“gotenkito-at-kazaa.com.†Ms. Andersen does not like “gangster
rap,†does not recognize the name “gotenkito,†is not awake at
4:24 a.m. and has never downloaded music.
12. Settlement Support Center threatened that if Ms. Andersen
did not immediately pay them, the record companies would bring
an expensive and disruptive federal lawsuit using her actual
name and they would get a judgment for hundreds of thousands of
dollars.
13. Ms. Andersen explained to Settlement Support Center that she
had never downloaded music, she had no interest in “gangster
rap,†and that she had no idea who “gotenkito†was.
14. Ms. Andersen wrote Settlement Support Center and even asked
it to inspect her computer to prove that the claims made against
her were false.
15. An employee of Settlement Support Center admitted to Ms.
Andersen that he believed that she had not downloaded any music.
He explained, however, that Settlement Support Center and the
record companies would not quit their debt collection activities
because to do so would encourage other people to defend
themselves against the record companies’ claims.
16. Instead of investigating, the record company plaintiffs
filed suit this against Ms. Andersen. F. The Record Companies
have no Proof of Infringement.
17. Despite making false representations to Ms. Andersen that
they had evidence of infringement .... plaintiffs knew that they
had no factual support for their claims.
18. No downloading or distribution activity was ever actually
observed. None ever occurred. Regardless, the record companies
actively continued their coercive and deceptive debt collection
actions against her. Ms. Andersen was falsely, recklessly,
shamefully, and publicly accused of illegal activities in which
she was never involved.
Ms. Andersen further alleged:
20. Entering a person’s personal computer without their
authorization to snoop around, steal information, or remove
files is a violation of the common law prohibition against
trespass to chattels.
21. The record company plaintiffs employed MediaSentry as their
agent to break into Ms. Andersen’s personal computer (and those
of tens of thousands of other people) to secretly spy on and
steal information or remove files. MediaSentry did not have Ms.
Andersen’s permission to inspect, copy, or remove private
computer files. If MediaSentry accessed her private computer, it
did so illegally and secretly. In fact, Ms. Andersen was unaware
that the trespass occurred until well after she was anonymously
sued.
22. According to the record companies, the agent, Settlement
Support Center used the stolen private information allegedly
removed from her home computer in their attempt to threaten and
coerce Ms. Anderson into paying thousands of dollars. ....
Under the provisions of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18
U.S.C. § 1030) it is illegal to break into another person’s
private computer to spy, steal or remove private information,
damage property, or cause other harm.
26. Ms. Andersen regularly used her personal computer to
communicate with friends and family across the country and for
interstate e-commerce. Ms. Andersen had password protection and
security in place to protect her computer and personal files
from access by others.
27. The record company plaintiffs employed MediaSentry as their
agent to bypass Ms. Andersen’s computer security systems and
break into her personal computer to secretly spy and steal or
remove private information. MediaSentry did not have her
permission to inspect, copy, or remove her private computer
files. It gained access secretly and illegally.
28. According to the record companies’ agent, Settlement Support
Center, used this stolen private information in their attempt to
threaten and coerce Ms. Andersen into paying thousands of
dollars. ....
31. According to the record companies, Ms. Andersen’s personal
computer was invaded by MediaSentry after she was identified
with a nine digit code (an Internet Protocol Address (“IPAâ€))
obtained from the anonymous information farming lawsuits.
MediaSentry did not have permission to inspect Ms. Andersen’s
private computer files. It gained access only by illegal acts of
subterfuge.
32. The record companies’ agent has falsely represented that
information obtained in this invasive and secret manner is proof
of Ms. Andersen’s alleged downloading. Ms. Andersen never
downloaded music but has been subjected to public derision and
embarrassment associated with plaintiffs’ claims and public
relations campaign.
33. The record companies have used this derogatory, harmful
information to recklessly and shamefully publicly accuse Ms.
Andersen of illegal activities without even taking the
opportunity offered by Ms. Andersen to inspect her
computer. .....
36. Despite knowing that infringing activity was not observed,
the record companies used the threat of expensive and intrusive
litigation as a tool to coerce Ms. Andersen to pay many
thousands of dollars for an obligation she did not owe. The
record companies pursued their collection activities and this
lawsuit for the primary purpose of threatening Ms. Andersen (and
many others) as part of its public relations campaign targeting
electronic file sharing.
37. The record companies have falsely represented and pleaded
that information obtained in this invasive and secret manner is
proof of Ms. Andersen’s alleged downloading and distribution of
copyrighted audio recordings. Ms. Andersen never downloaded
music but has been subjected to public derision and
embarrassment.....
40. The record companies knowingly represented materially false
information to Ms. Andersen in an attempt to extort money from
her.
41. For example, between February and March 2005, the record
companies, through their collection agent Settlement Support
Center, falsely claimed that they had proof that Ms. Andersen’s
IPA had been “viewed†downloading and distributing over 1,000
audio files for which it sought to collect hundreds of thousands
of dollars. This statement was materially false. Ms. Andersen
never downloaded or distributed any audio files nor did the
record companies or any of their agents ever observe any such
activity associated with her personal home computer.....
49. Despite having never observed any downloading or
distribution associated with Ms. Andersen’s personal home
computer and despite refusing Ms. Andersen’s offer to allow an
inspection of her own computer, the record companies wrongfully
continued their improper debt collection activities against
her.....
50. The record companies pursued debt collection activities for
the inappropriate purpose of illegally threatening Ms. Andersen
and many thousands of others. This tortious abuse was motivated
by and was a central part of a public relations campaign
targeting electronic file sharing.
51. An employee of Settlement Support Center admitted to Ms.
Andersen that he believed that she had not downloaded any music.
He explained that Settlement Support Center and the record
companies would not quit the debt collection activity against
her because to do so would encourage other people to defend
themselves against the record companies’ claims.
52. The record companies were aware of Ms. Andersen’s
disabilities and her serious health issues. Settlement Support
Center knew that its conduct would cause extreme distress in Ms.
Andersen. As a result of defendant’s conduct, Ms. Andersen
suffered severe physical and emotional distress and health
problems.
53. The record companies’ conduct resulted in damages, including
harm to Ms. Andersen’s health and property in an amount to be
specifically proven at trial......
55. Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act prohibits those in
trade or commerce from engaging in unfair or deceptive practices
in the course of business with consumers. ORS 646.605 et seq.
56. The record companies’ agent, Settlement Support Center, is a
company doing business in Washington which was established to
engage in debt collection activities in manystates, including
Washington and Oregon.
57. Settlement Support Center acting as the record companies’
agent made false and deceptive statements to Ms. Andersen in an
attempt to mislead, threaten, and coerce her into paying
thousands of dollars.
58. Settlement Support Center acting as the record companies’
agent has made similar false and deceptive statements to many
other residents of Washington and Oregon, and across the
country. The public interest has been and continues to be
directly impacted by plaintiffs’ deceptive practices.
59. The record companies’ conduct resulted in damages and harm
to Ms. Andersen and her property in an amount to be specifically
proven at trial. ....
61. The Oregon Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act
prohibits companies from engaging in organized racketeering or
criminal activities. ORS 166.715 et seq.
62. As fully set forth above, the record companies hired
MediaSentry to break into private computers to spy, view files,
remove information, and copy images. The record companies
received and transmitted the information and images to
Settlement Support Center. As the record companies’ agent,
Settlement Support Center then falsely claimed that the stolen
information and images showed Ms. Andersen’s downloading and
distributing over 1,000 audio files. The record companies
falsely claimed that Ms. Anderson owed hundreds of thousands of
dollars in an attempt to coerce and extort payment from her.
63. The record companies directed its agents to unlawfully break
into private computers and engage in extreme acts of unlawful
coercion, extortion, fraud, and other criminal conduct.
64. The record companies and their agents stood to financially
benefit from these deceptive and unlawful acts. Proceeds from
these activities are used to fund the operation of the record
companies’ continued public threat campaigns.
65. These unlawful activities were not isolated. The record
companies have repeated these unlawful and deceptive actions
with many other victims throughout the United States.
|
|
