From Yahoo--#8358--Reference Civil RICO
"But, the point is, there IS NO RICO statute that I know of that covers analysts opinions."
I did a little looking. There may not need to be a clause that covers analysts opinions explicityly. From
law.emory.edu
"RICO provides a civil remedy for the victims of these section 1962 crimes, as follows: "Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of [18 U.S.C. 1962] may sue therefor in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee." 18 U.S.C. - 1964(c)."
RICO briefly described: alaska.net
"To establish a prima facie RICO claim, a civil plaintiff or prosecutor must allege the existence of seven elements: "(1) that the defendant (2) through the commission of two or more acts (3) constituting a 'pattern' (4) of 'racketeering activity' (5) directly or indirectly invests in, or maintains an interest in, or participates in (6) an 'enterprise' (7) the activities of which affect interstate or foreign commerce." 18 U.S.C.A. 1962. Moss v. Morgan Stanley, Inc., C.A. N.Y., 719 F.2d 5, 17."
Civil RICO is complex and murky business. The key terms appear to be loosely defined and open to a variety of interpretations
(http://www.lectlaw.com/files/lit08.zip). I was surprised to see the various things it is applied to. Florida is using it in its suit against the tobacco companies, a farmer was using it against a silo manufacturer, somebody else used it against Gateway 2000 over a service agreement dispute... Its really amazing, not the sorts of things I'd normally associate with "racketeering". A friend reminded me that NOW sucessfully sued anti-abortionists under civil RICO.
I'm not at all happy with the implications of the way the law is being interpreted (http://pw2.netcom.com/~jasilver/rico.html). Much of my (and others') concern is over its possible impact on free speech issues; what common sense says should be protected may not in fact be protected. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that an enterprising lawyer could make an analyst's opinion fair game, especially if the focus can be directed to the method of using that opinion for profit and away from the fact that it was an opinion.
Be that as it may, civil RICO is here and its being used with increasing frequency in successful civil suits whether you, I, or anyone else likes it or not. It may not be "just" in the common sense of the word, but it appears to be an effective and increasingly popular legal weapon and is not an idle or frivilous threat. I wouldn't underestimate the seriousness of the situation. With tripple damages there is a strong incentive for lawyers to aggressively pursue this issue for as long as it takes.
Is anyone here a lawyer willing to offer a more informed opinion?
Wonomi
|
