Slashdot Mirror
Lessig, Zittrain, Barlow To Square Off Against RIAA
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's case in Boston against a 24-year-old grad student, SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, in which Prof. Charles Nesson of Harvard Law School, along with members of his CyberLaw class, are representing the defendant, may shape up as a showdown between the Electronic Frontier and Big Music. The defendant's witness list includes names such as those of Prof. Lawrence Lessig (Author of 'Free Culture'), John Perry Barlow (former songwriter of The Grateful Dead and cofounder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation), Prof. Johan Pouwelse (Scientific Director of P2P-Next), Prof. Jonathan Zittrain (Author of 'The Future of the Internet — And How to Stop It'), Professors Wendy Seltzer, Terry Fisher, and John Palfrey, and others. The RIAA requested, and was granted, an adjournment of the trial, from its previously scheduled December 1st date, to March 30, 2009. (The RIAA lawyers have been asking for adjournments a lot lately, asking for an adjournment in UMG v. Lindor the other day because they were so busy preparing for the Tenenbaum December 1st trial ... I guess when you're running on hot air, you sometimes run out of steam)."
While this approach may work when suing Gramma, it's a different story when you roll in pro bono representation and evangelical students.
Wonder how long Sony is going to keep writing checks?
but simply restore short terms
The problems with the copyright system aren't just about getting sumthin' for nuthin'. It's about the inevitable abuses of the copyright owners.
A hyperbolic example: having to pay royalties to the RIAA because you sang "Happy Birthday to you" at your friend's party. Some may even say that the RIAA's asking settlements constitute "cruel and unusual punishment".
The primary, and completely valid, reason to dislike the RIAA is that they harass innocent people and cost them a lot of money. They've sued individuals who didn't even own a computer. If the RIAA carefully used ethical methods, and not the shotgun "John Doe" approach they're famous for, they would have a lot more support from the Slashdot crowd. Like the DEA, they don't care at all if they've gone after the wrong person.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Stallman created the GPL to use copyright against itself. He probably would be happy in a world that didn't know copyright or other forms of "intellectual property". Even if people weren't compelled to keep their changes open, a lack of NDAs and the legality of reverse engineering with help would ensure changes got leaked anyway.
I stand corrected, but I will continue to download out of principle because I know that the eventual goal of the *AAs is to charge on a per-listen, per-song basis and they will continue to fight for their revenue stream at the expense of the consumer just as I will continue to fight for the freedom to experience my media with no strings attached. The vast majority of the stuff I download are songs from CD's I bought years ago, or older movies which I see on paid-for cable TV.
I will pay for the media when the content providers develop reasonable business models. I want to enjoy what I pay for on any device that I own without having to satisfy pointless software and hardware DRM requirements and other annoyances such as being forced to sit through previews.
Yeah, well the manufacturers of that shirt might sue you if your picture is taken wearing 'their' shirt. It happens with cars.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Wierd Al Yankovic, among others, have complained that they make less off digital downloads than regular sales. The problem is that the record companies haven't changed their royalty system to accommodate digital sales and probably won't. For physical media, record companies would deduct from sales for things like manufacturing and distribution out of the artists' royalties. With digital sales, there are not any real manufacturing costs and retailers like iTunes Store absorb the distribution costs. But the record company would still deduct these costs from royalties.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
"I guess when congress sells you a few new laws every year, delaying is a pretty smart business tactic."
I'm not so sure the Obama administration is going to be rubber stamping MAFIAA legislation.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
I'll bet if Weird Al were to sell his digital downloads directly on his own webpage without RIAA support he'd have a different opinion on the profitability of digital music sales. Especially if Steve Albini's numbers are correct.
Al is probably earning about 2% of each sale. I'd be pissed too.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
The copyright environment sucks.
I was using a torrent to download a linux distro the other day. I was actually concerned about being "tracked" by my ISP as a file pirate.
This is so wrong. Corporations are using private law backed up by copyright statute to create a Kafka-esque "guilty because we say you are guilty" environment. Oh, sure, they don't have the power to imprison you, but with the courts they do have the power to bankrupt you with lawyers fees with no credible evidence.
I'm serious, people need to start fighting back, and not just in the courts. Who says they get to make the rules? What they are doing is not fair, it is not civilized, and it is not human. The fight, therefor, need not be either.
If every lawyer and executive that works for a RIAA company gets egged every day on the way to work. If every car they own gets its tires slashed. If every time they are in a starbucks, someone pours hot coffee on their suit. If every time someone sees one yells at the top of their lungs "CRIMINAL F(*&CK GET OUT OF HERE." Maybe they'll start to see that the money they are being paid to ruin people's lives will in turn ruin theirs.
We don't have the money to fight them in court, but we can ruin their lives just as easy as they can ruin the lives of innocent people. If they don't have a conscience, perhaps we should perform that function for them. I'm not calling for violence, not at all. I am calling for wholesale property damage. Break everything they own when ever they get it. They feel perfectly comfortable wreakig financial havoc on people, we should feel the same until they stop.
How is it possible to hold a copyright on Happy Birthday? The lyrics change every time you sing it.
What does their copyright look like?
Happy birthday to you
Happy birthday to you
Happy birthday dear *
Happy birthday to you.
Or have they filed millions of copyrights?
Copyright 2234257612, Happy Birthday to You, Aaby version.
...
Copyright 2234257613, Happy Birthday to You, Aaron version.
Copyright 2234257614, Happy Birthday to You, Abe version.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Fortunately, they are not critical components of our economy, and as such, do not deserve bailouts. The auto industry directly and indirectly employs millions of middle class Americans, where as the recording industry only employs a few tens of thousands of upper-middle to upper class people who beleieve they should be repeatedly paid for doing work once. I could care less if these parasites lose their livelyhoods, the music I listen to is done by artist who enjoy creating music, and releasse it freely in digital format, and only ask to cover the costs of media if you want a hard copy.
Ignorance is Bliss -- And the Opposite is True -- Genius is Madness