RIAA Threatens Harvard Law Prof With Sanctions

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Unhappy with Harvard Law Professor Charles Nesson's motion to compel the deposition of the RIAA's head 'Enforcer', Matthew J. Oppenheim, in SONY BMG Music v. Tenenbaum, the RIAA threatened the good professor with sanctions (PDF) if he declined to withdraw his motion. Then the next day they filed papers opposing the motion, and indeed asked the Court to award monetary sanctions under Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

Comments

Your Honor

[whisper_jeff]

Your Honor, we would like you to impose sanction against him. He's not supposed to fight back. Please punish him for fighting back. Our strategy doesn't work when intelligent lawyers fight back. This must be put to an end right now.

Pathetic RIAA.

Re:modern version of sending pictures

[Thanshin]

"Stop this (perfectly legal thing) or our teams of lawyers will fuck up your life" seems to be the new iteration of having thugs beat up a family member or sending pictures of your kids playing outside.

I may consider stopping the kids from playing outside if they sent me those pictures of the lawyers beaten up by the thugs.

RIAA reaching new heights of credibility

[meist3r]

First they get the live online-coverage of one of these processes postponed. Now they try to legally blackmail the defense lawyer. What's next?

"That's an awfully nice courtroom you have here, your honor. Wouldn't it be terrible if something happened to it?"

Jeez, I hate these guys.

Re:RIAA reaching new heights of credibility

[meist3r]

Well you're right. English is not my primary language and even though my vocabulary is pretty good (I even knew extortion) sometimes I mix stuff up. So cut me some slack please?

If you don't I'll black-extort you.

Re:RIAA reaching new heights of credibility

[Anonymous Coward]

Is no one reminded of the Monty Python skit?

"Sure is a nice army base you have here, Colonel. It would be a shame is something....happened to it"

Re:When the client is a lawyer ...

[Thanshin]

It's a thing of beauty, but I suspect it's not legal.

As always.

Wait, this isn't the britsh pedophiles topic.

Re:Who is this guy, & why does he not want to

[PopeRatzo]

why is he - or his legal team, taking such extraordinary steps to avoid testifying?

Because he's so morbidly overweight that he's no longer able to leave his bed. That and the bad hair plugs keep him from going out in public. Oh, and he's got one of those crazy eyes where you can't tell where he's looking and he knows everybody on the internet will put his testimony on YouTube and laugh at him and leave mean comments. He's really a very sensitive soul and if you met him you'd like him, except for the horrible odor that comes from his unwillingness to bathe due to his persistent aquaphobia.

That, and if he showed his face he'd be in more danger than Barack Obama at a Klan meeting.

Re:Who is this guy, & why does he not want to

[PopeRatzo]

"It is not legal, ethical or cool to copy somebody else's CD for your own use."

Oh, come on. It is kind of cool.

You know it is.

And even cooler is copying DVDs. You can have like thousands of movies in perfect quality, and the best part is that Mr. Oppenheim (if that is his real name) and his Rothchild/Bavarian Illuminati/Reptilian/Council on Foreign Relations/Banking Cartel buddies don't get a single red cent.

And the fun with Blue-Ray is just starting.

Now that's really cool.

Seriously, who's doing the RIAA's public relations?

Re:Who is this guy, & why does he not want to

[PReDiToR]

They who can give up essential backups to obtain a little temporary convenience, deserve neither data integrity nor security.

Apologies Mr Franklin.

Re:You don't get it, do you?

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

if the allegations in their motion are true

You must be new here.