RIAA Vs. Web 2.0? Social Media and Litigation

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "After learning that Professor Nesson's CyberLaw class at Harvard Law School has set up a Facebook page to assist in its defense of Joel Tenenbaum in an RIAA case, SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, Wendy Davis of the Online Daily Examiner opines that 'Web 2.0,' and more particularly, the 'social media,' are playing an increasingly important role in RIAA litigation. We at Slashdot have already learned that principle, and have made good use of it, as have our friends at Groklaw."

Comments

Re:Oh no!

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

To be fair, he did put Web 2.0 in quotes, indicating that Wendy Davis used that term as if it meant something, while NYCL knew better.

Well let's be fair to Wendy too. I know her and she is one of the smartest and most savvy people I know. I think 'Web 2.0' can have meaning. E.g.:

"Web 1.0 = the internet prior to the end of the first internet boom; dominated by large web sites and attempts to monetize content. E.g. Google, eBay, yahoo!, Amazon".

"Web 2.0 = the internet subsequent to the end of the first boom; dominated by social networking sites and encouraging people to create their own content. E.g., MySpace, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter."

Using a Facebook page, or a blog, to do some grassroots organizing and join together with a community... is more Web 2.0 than Web 1.0.

Re:Vexatious Blog

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

I'm speechless... the RIAA has the audacity to accuse a defense lawyer of inappropriate harassment because he brought legal precedents to the attention of his peers? They should be reprimanded for making such an outrageous request.

Agreed. Which is why I made a Rule 11 motion for sanctions against them. It appears that they find the truth to be "vexatious", too.