Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Case May Be Televised On Internet
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, the Boston case in which the defendant is represented by Prof. Charles Nesson and his CyberLaw class at Harvard Law School, the defendant has requested that audio-visual coverage of the court proceedings be made available to the public via the internet. Taking the RIAA at its word — that the reason for its litigation program is to 'educate the public' — the defendant's motion (PDF) queries why the RIAA would oppose public access: 'Net access to this litigation will allow an interested and growingly sophisticated public to understand the RIAA's education campaign. Surely education is the purpose of the Digital Deterrence Act of 1999, the constitutionality of which we are challenging. How can RIAA object? Yet they do, fear of sunlight shone upon them.'"
I doubt that argument works when it's the defendant that's looking to get the legal proceedings broadcast.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
Because a court case isn't supposed to be a popularity contest and it would bring lots of irrelevant posturing, arguments and expla[...]nations into the court room? One thing is being consistent about what you say in court and out of court, another is to turning it into another PR channel. The judge would have to rein them in endlessly to stick to the legal facts rather than trying to score points with the viewers.
Actually making one's case to a jury is not much different than making one's case to the public. The jury is composed of members from all walks of life, who are basically selected because they have no special knowledge of the legal issues or of the facts, and have no relationship with the parties or their counsel. I.e., the community. Our judicial system was predicated upon the principle that the proceedings are open to the public. And with good reason. If one can expand the size of the public, it is all to the good.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Fear of the unknown. The more people know about what to expect in a trial V. RIAA the less they will fear it. Lawyers know all about court and trials but, the average person knows very little about what to expect at a trial of this magnitude and they are probably scared to death of the possibility of being on the wrong side of one of these. Perhaps people will not be so afraid to share music files after seeing this trial and that has to scare the hell out of RIAA. To think that one of these trials could actually lead to more music files being shared instead of less. P.S. A big thanks to NYCL for all his hard work!
Thanks, GeorgeS. Another of the RIAA's biggest fears is that a publicly available videotape of the proceedings will assist defendant's lawyers in preparing for future cases, and thus reduce the defendants' cost of litigation. The RIAA lawyers' primary goal is to drive up the cost to the defendants of defending themselves. If they could have it their way, they would want every case enshrouded in an all-inclusive confidentiality order.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
Singles don't compare to single track downloads.
Singles were viable back when radio ruled, and each album was constructed to have a single hit, which was what was played on radio. Then people could get the one hit cheaper. Plus another song of the record company's choice as the B-side filler. But if they wanted any of the other songs on the album, they would have to buy the album.
If the download services switched to selling individual tracks for $6, and only select songs bundled with another song of the record company's choice, I think online sales would go the same way as single sales.
I would like the motion to pass so I can watch the RIAA face plant as they try to maintain such flimsy cases in the face of common sense and reason. The fact that they have stopped pursuing any additional Individual cases shows us just how futile their efforts really are... even they recognize it. Do they have any more legs to stand on?
Yes but are you so sure they've "stopped pursuing any additional individual cases"?
I'm not
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
If a juror is an expert in p2p file sharing, he or she is not going to be accepted on a case about p2p file sharing.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful