Slashdot Mirror
RIAA Hearing Next Week Will Be Televised
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "One commentator labels it 'another fly in the RIAA's ointment.' In SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, the Boston, Massachusetts, RIAA case in which the defendant is represented by Harvard law professor Charles Nesson and a group of his students, the Judge has ruled that the hearing scheduled for January 22nd will be televised over the Internet. The hearing will relate to Mr. Tenenbaum's counterclaims against the record companies and against the RIAA. In her 11-page opinion (PDF), District Judge Nancy Gertner labeled as 'curious' the record companies' opposition to televising the proceedings, since their professed reason for bringing the cases is deterrence, 'a strategy [which] effectively relies on the publicity arising from this litigation'."
Justice on dowels.
I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
This outta be more entertaining then all seasons of Heroes combined!
televised over the internet??
Either it's televised on the television, or streamed on the internet. Just saying.
Work smarter, not harder.
One million for 7 songs?! How does something like that even get in to court? Can you imagine if I stole $6.93 (.99 x 7) worth of beef jerky from 7-11? Do you think the court would even hear a case where they wanted a million for my crime?
This is the new business model of the recording industry, which is exactly like the old model. Overcharge your customers and when that doesn't work, overcharge and extort from your customers to make up for shortfalls you generated because you have a crappy product.
There's only so much "drug money", oops CD purchases, the listening public will bestow on ungrateful addicts, oops recording artists...
(Yes I'm bitter this morning; still need my meth, oops coffee.)
=Smidge=
Is it just my observation, or is eldavojohn an idiot?
I was wondering if someone could send me a recorded copy of the stream since I won't be able to watch it live.
...was not going to be televised? So much for common wisdom. :-P
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
...they bought the rope, measured the proper length of it, cut it, tied it to a tree, formed one end into a noose, gingerly placed their grinning heads in the noose and tightened it, and now we get to see the looks on their faces when someone who saw their preceding actions takes the logical steps and kicks the stool out from under them.
on bittorrent?
The current order is only for the hearing on Jan 22, as NYCL pointed out, which only involves the legal arguments for motions entered by the Defendant's counsel. Further coverage of the rest of the case will be decided then. The judge made a lot of sense in her opinion though, I especially liked this bit:
"Public" today has a new resonance, especially in this case. The claims and issues at stake involve the internet, file-sharing practices, and digital copyright protections. The Defendants are primarily members of a generation that has grown up with the internet, who get their news from it, rather than from the traditional forms of public communication, such as newspapers or television. Indeed, these cases have generated widespread public attention, much of it on the internet. Under the circumstances, the particular relief requested -- "narrowcasting" this proceeding to a public website -- is uniquely appropriate.
Nice to see judges are starting to catch up to this generation.
Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
The problem is, if the RIAA wins by some convoluted twist of the law (of which they've gotten quite good at twisting by this point), no amount of losses will be able to wipe the smug look from their faces after winning the case on live TV. At which point, the industry is doomed.
Never think that the RIAA is doomed. They always come back.
Planet Zebeth - Metroid with a twist
Of course the RIAA wants the public to hear about this case to deter anyone downloading their stuff.
But they want people to hear it from them. Not directly from the court proceedings. Any idiot knows that your statements are only half as powerful if the other side can retort. And few people are interested in hearling both sides of the story, unless it is hassle free do hear it, they're perfectly happy when they just hear one side telling them "the truth". Do you have an idea how incredibly harder it gets to spin something when the other side can call you bluff and show that you're lying through your teeth?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I once heard that vampires don't show up on camera. Now we'll know one way or another!
If your only tool is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail.
Having read the order, I get the sense that the Judge really really understands what is going on and is not going to let them weasel out of their own lies.
The Judge is going to take their claims perfectly literally with no prejudice. They say that they want public knowledge of the suits, thus, she finds it "curious" that they don't want it televised. So, she takes them at their word (wanting public knowledge of the law suits) and "helps" them do what they say they claim to want to do.
Unlike judges before her, she knows they are lying. They know they are lying. Nesson knows they are lying. The case is a blackmail scam and everyone involved knows it, this time, even the judge.
They are stuck because these are counter claims, and while I'm not a lawyer, even if BMG/Sony drop the suit, I believe the counter claims live on. So, they can't drop it. They have to fight a Harvard Law Professor and his students, and it will all be public for display.
I'm going to buy some popcorn and watch.
"Any rebroadcast, reproduction, or other use of the pictures and accounts of this hearing without the express written consent of the Recording Industry Association of America is prohibited and will be subjected to a fine of no less than $1 million per infraction."
While I generally agree with your post, its worth pointing out that CBS actually bought Last.FM. And haven't shut it down yet. Makes you wonder what they want out of the deal. Maybe its all that personal information they're collecting.
One way or another, I won't let Last.FM anywhere near my computer.
. and this is why I should not be so quick to press submit after hitting preview . but hey, if i effectively. communicated, I guess. it doesn't matter. where i put the period
they have really ugly lawyers?
No. Like most aliens who walk among us impersonating humans, they have modified their appearance.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
RIAA appeals ruling.
You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
Okay, wise guy...I think I just swallowed my false teeth guffawing.
Well being modded "Funny" is, for me, a rarity, so I feel good about that. Except of course about the teeth.
Now, are you gonna take my case against yourself, or what?!?!?
You'd lose.
I do admire your ability to separate work from play
Haven't been good at that lately, every since I got into this war with the RIAA. My idea of play lately has been to hang out on Slashdot, which is not so different than what I do for a living -- i.e. argue, defend myself from abuse, try to make it clear what the law is, etc.
but at the same time being able to get your viewpoint across without compromising your clients, cases, or career in the whole process of upholding a cause by effective* means.
See, my play is a lot like my work.
Kudos, sir! BTW, thanks for all your contributions here on /., and more importantly for your 'real world' efforts in court.
There is a reason I added you to my friends list...keep up the good fight. (your website is the only one I disable Adblock+, and NoScript extensions in Firefox 100%
Thanks
as I also donate any income tax refunds to the EFF-I believe in the cause and am not afraid to support it)
They are a wonderful organization. The only thing I have against them is that they got me into this mess.
PS Red Orbit looks neat.
Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful