Slashdot Mirror


FSF Files Amicus Brief In RIAA Case

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The Free Software Foundation has requested permission to file an amicus curiae brief in an RIAA case, SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, defending the defendant's Due Process defense to the RIAA's claim for statutory damages. In the brief [PDF], FSF cites some of the leading authorities for the defense, including the 2003 decision of the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in Parker v. Time Warner, which held that excessive statutory damages are subject to the same due process test applicable to punitive damage awards by juries. Additionally, the brief cites three district court decisions, including UMG v. Lindor, and two law review articles — all of which deal specifically with Copyright Act statutory damages applicable to infringement of an MP3 file — to like effect."

49 of 73 comments (clear)

  1. Focusing too much on the minutia? by Mrs.+Grundy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I understand slashdot's obsession with the RI...really I do. But, don't you think stories like this that aren't really even news are getting a little too much attention? There is no decision, no new case, no new theory--not even the filing of an amicus curiae brief, just a petition to file an amicus curiae brief. Next we'll be hearing what the lawyers are eating for lunch.

    1. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is always a motion for leave to file amicus brief filed with the amicus brief. The amicus brief itself is attached. That is the only filing.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    2. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by conureman · · Score: 2, Informative

      This *stuff* lives and dies by the minutiae. Good to see that the court gets plenty o'reasons to look at the precedents. Could save some fees.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    3. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I do not understand why you think this "isn't news". It is, in fact, very encouraging good news: an important new fact regarding a case that is important and very relevant to today.

      The outcome of this case affects, indirectly, whole industries surrounding recorded music and video, and the software industry as well. Being a software engineer, I, for one, am VERY interested in any news surrounding this case.

      I will admit that this does not reflect a new decision, or other outcome. But that doesn't mean that it's "not news".

    4. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed Jane. And I think it's quite newsworthy that the Free Software Foundation has jumped into the fray, recognizing that the RIAA's tactic is to try to rewrite copyright law by suing defenseless people.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    5. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Surely they've already rewritten copyright law and paid lots of politicians to be able to do so.

    6. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by ivucica · · Score: 1

      In Deep-Ones America, Cthulhu eats YOU!

    7. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? by Linker3000 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure it'll be on their twitter pages

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
  2. I'm not sure which will happen first... by erroneus · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...will there be an end to these suits which were claimed to have been stopped long ago or...

    Will I be able to cause all of their heads to explode using the powers of my mind?

  3. Yay!!! by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Funny

    I just love it when a plan comes together.

  4. NewYorkCountryLawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why don't add a brief summary about what your posts actually mean to the non-legal types, rather than this legalese summary each time?

    1. Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer by Loadmaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because he's a practicing attorney and doesn't have the time to break every event down into simple terms (that's what Groklaw is for). I'm sure he would if he could, but that's the way it is.

      I'm glad he does this, though, at least then we're made aware of happenings and can then go find further information about it.

    2. Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer by The+FNP · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Because those of us who have been following along with the RIAA and MPAA and Pirate Bay and Microsoft and Psystar and the EFF and Apple and AT&T and Verizon and Comcast and every other technologically relevant entity who can hire a lawyer and a PR person has now given us a basic understanding of the way these cases work.

      Ray may have already helped me skip the first year of law school, just because of the sheer volume of information he has provided to the /.ers who have been paying attention. If you're new here, read his blog archives and get an idea of what he's already contributed to the community.

      --The FNP

      P.S. I apologize for feeding the A.C., but I've got Karma to burn.

    3. Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer by Splab · · Score: 1

      While I do agree he is helping - a bit of translation for those of us who aren't native English speaking (nor understand US legal system) would very much be appreciated.

    4. Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

      Why don't add a brief summary about what your posts actually mean to the non-legal types, rather than this legalese summary each time?

      There was nothing in the summary that would be confusing to anyone who paid attention during their high school civics class, and who reads a newspaper semi-regularly.

    5. Re:NewYorkCountryLawyer by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 3, Informative

      While I do agree he is helping - a bit of translation for those of us who aren't native English speaking (nor understand US legal system) would very much be appreciated.

      I'm sorry but my priority has to be get the unvarnished facts out there. If I start watering stuff down, I'm afraid I'll start describing things incorrectly. And to me it seems that the most important role I can play is to report the news, and get the litigation documents online.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  5. Analogy by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 3, Funny

    When a whole new army of Good Guys come riding over the horizon, armed with their magical incantations of Facts and Citations, it may not be the end of the movie but the tide of the war may be turning, and it's a part you probably don't want to miss.

    1. Re:Analogy by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Funny

      it may not be the end of the movie but the tide of the war may be turning, and it's a part you probably don't want to miss.

      Can we all go charging down the mountain side while the light of dawn streams down from behind us (although NYCL might look a bit odd leading the charge in white robes on a white horse)?

    2. Re:Analogy by beav007 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Are they riding in cars?

    3. Re:Analogy by EGenius007 · · Score: 1

      Could someone please tell me the title of the movie he's referencing so I could torrent it?

      --
      I know what you did last summer. Just kidding, I don't work at the NSA.
    4. Re:Analogy by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      There wasn't one, it was purely fantasy. But you could probably relate it roughly to LOR, I suppose.

  6. Sigh by mc1138 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A little off topic, but I wonder what if anything the RIAA actually has accomplished from all these years of lawsuits. People hate them, is the money coming in at all? Does it really come down to just the principle of the matter now?

    1. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Win or lose, the lawyers get paid.

      It is the lawyers who have been scamming a desperate RIAA, which keeps hoping they will come through with big wins eventually. (Suckers!)

    2. Re:Sigh by janwedekind · · Score: 1

      I like that the judge voiced his concerns about the defendants financial situation: "You know, it seems to me that counsel representing the record companies have an ethical obligation to fully understand that they are fighting people without lawyers, to fully understand that, more than just how do we serve them, but just to understand that the formalities of this are basically bankrupting people, and it's terribly critical that you stop it, so there will be a settlement conference in the Tenenbaum case at the conclusion of this hearing."

    3. Re:Sigh by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      A little off topic, but I wonder what if anything the RIAA actually has accomplished from all these years of lawsuits. People hate them, is the money coming in at all?

      They've accomplished absolutely nothing except:
      1. enriching their lawyers and
      2. bringing 4 record companies closer to obsolescence.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    4. Re:Sigh by HiThere · · Score: 1

      The RIAA doesn't depend on being liked by people. It's purpose is to give the various record companies a bit of anonymity and plausible deniability. Most people who see RIAA don't think of this as action by, say, Sony. And the companies can always say that their agent mishandled a case if they *do* happen to get associated with it.

      The RIAA *exists* to do things that the record companies wouldn't want associated with their names.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    5. Re:Sigh by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      The RIAA doesn't depend on being liked by people. It's purpose is to give the various record companies a bit of anonymity and plausible deniability....The RIAA *exists* to do things that the record companies wouldn't want associated with their names.

      Interesting theory. How's the plan working for them? Is there a soul out there who doesn't know that it's the 'Big 4' record companies (EMI, Universal, SONY, Warner)?

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    6. Re:Sigh by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Hi Ray! How about "Warner, EMI, Sony, Universal"? Makes for a better, more realistic acronym. :)

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  7. Indefensible! by foniksonik · · Score: 2, Funny

    "defending the defendant's Due Process defense"

    This sentence construction is indefensible!

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    1. Re:Indefensible! by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      "defending the defendant's Due Process defense"

      This sentence construction is indefensible!

      I throw myself on the mercy of the court.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  8. Why the FSF? by wrook · · Score: 1

    It's nice to see someone go to the effort to file an amicus brief, but why the FSF? Excessive statutory damages for copyright infringement doesn't necessarily seem like something that's in their area of interest (i.e., I can't see how it affects software freedom one way or another). Or is it simply a lawyer at the FSF who happens to be interested? Do organizations often file these kinds of briefs in areas that the organization isn't primarily interested?

    1. Re:Why the FSF? by Loadmaster · · Score: 4, Informative

      The FSF is working with The Recording Industry vs. the People to provide an Exper Witnesses Fund. Basically, they're providing computer experts to combat the misinformation spouted by the RIAA concerning technology.

      http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/11/expert-witness-defense-fund-for-riaa.html

      https://www.fsf.org/associate/riaa

    2. Re:Why the FSF? by nyet · · Score: 1

      Because Tenenbaum's lawyer *royally* screwed up the appeal and failed to cite the most salient case law.

      Thankfully, the FSF stepped in to fill in the gaps that were missed.

    3. Re:Why the FSF? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Informative
      I think they pretty well explained their interest in the case when they said:

      As an organization dedicated to the rights of computer users and their interaction with copyrighted works, we are concerned with the RIAA's attempt to redefine copyright law through legal proceedings against individuals who are generally unable to defend themselves.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    4. Re:Why the FSF? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      The FSF is working with The Recording Industry vs. the People to provide an Expert Witnesses Fund. Basically, they're providing computer experts to combat the misinformation spouted by the RIAA concerning technology.
      http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/11/expert-witness-defense-fund-for-riaa.html
      https://www.fsf.org/associate/riaa

      Well they don't actually supply the experts. They've administered a separate fund, the Expert Witness Defense Fund, the purpose of which is to provide funds to the defendants with which to hire their own technical experts and/or consultants. The fund has provided financial support to the UMG v. Lindor case, and to the Capitol v. Thomas case.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    5. Re:Why the FSF? by KwKSilver · · Score: 1

      I think they pretty well explained their interest in the case when they said:

      As an organization dedicated to the rights of computer users and their interaction with copyrighted works, we are concerned with the RIAA's attempt to redefine copyright law through legal proceedings against individuals who are generally unable to defend themselves.

      Ray, do you think that the redefinition of copyright law may be the real goal of the RIAA, MPAA and other organizations of their ilk? You and others have occasionally said that the ill-will that is being created cannot possibly be balanced by the monetary payoff. If there is no monetary payoff, there must be an intangible payoff, and the erosion and elimination of user's rights could be an immediate goal. Thinking a little further, taking control of peoples' systems and turning it over to the cartels could have an enormous, if not unlimited, long-term payoff. The thought of root-kitting creeps like these being in control of everything is scary stuff. Glad I've been supporting the FSF.

      --
      If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
    6. Re:Why the FSF? by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

      Ray, do you think that the redefinition of copyright law may be the real goal of the RIAA, MPAA and other organizations of their ilk? You and others have occasionally said that the ill-will that is being created cannot possibly be balanced by the monetary payoff. If there is no monetary payoff, there must be an intangible payoff, and the erosion and elimination of user's rights could be an immediate goal. Thinking a little further, taking control of peoples' systems and turning it over to the cartels could have an enormous, if not unlimited, long-term payoff. The thought of root-kitting creeps like these being in control of everything is scary stuff. Glad I've been supporting the FSF.

      There's no doubt in my mind that that rewriting the copyright law is one of their objectives, as part of their overall strategy of defeating the internet until they can subjogate it to their own monopolistic practices. And it will be interesting to see what the Obama administration -- now packed with RIAA lawyers at the highest level -- will have to say in this case. Are they going to take the legal position, as they did under George Bush -- that smacking teenagers with 'statutory damages' of $750 to $150,000 per mp3 file, payable to the record cartel, is just hunky dory?

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
    7. Re:Why the FSF? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      If the period of the copyright were reduced to 30 seconds then the GPL would effectively be the same as the BSD.

      Thinking of this as an Evolutionarily Stable Strategies match, however, I map BSD onto Dove*, Proprietary onto Hawk**, and GPL onto Retaliator***. (Note that Proprietary onto Hawk isn't a good mapping, because Proprietary has numerous different shadings all the way from a Dove that hides to a patent troll...which I haven't been able to map into the scenario.) Given that this is a rather loose mapping, I expect that GPL is the winning strategy...but because it's so loose I'm not sure. In any case the only time Dove and Hawk can coexist is when Dove has a much higher rate of reproduction (for any of several possible reasons...including Hawk fighting with Hawk).

      N.B.: if the copyright were reduced as suggested in the first paragraph, then the period of time for aggression by the Hawk contingent would likewise be reduces. So all of the various strategies would become more equal.

      P.S.: Yes, this is a VASTLY oversimplified model of the system. It captures certain features only, and not necessarily the most salient ones. But it's a place to start and a way to think about it. If you find something else you want to add, add it to the model. But be aware that you are increasing the computational load for modeling any particular scenario.

      * In the original model Dove represented an entity that never attacked.
      ** In the original model Hawk represented an entity that always attacked.
      *** In the original model Retaliator represented an entity that never attacked unless it was being attacked.
      N.B.: In all three cases I have oversimplified the description of the entities. If you want to read the full description, read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. I think they're described in one of the appendices, and also where he's describing what an ESS (Evolutionarily Stable Strategy) is.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  9. Re:I think you missed the point by Schemat1c · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course this is where you attempt to find some reason why shit you're posting still matters, the whole while thinking the echo chamber you live in in representative of reality.

    RIAA is a joke, and you're an even worse joke for wasting so much time posting trivial shit about them that no one who isn't a total loser cares about.

    Wow, you run out of Prozac or something? If you don't like what the guy posts then don't read it, or better yet don't waste your time and anger commenting on it.

    Sheesh!

    --

    "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
  10. True Irony Alert! by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There is some true irony here as one of the Plaintiffs in this case who is arguing that such damages shouldn't be limited to a single-digit ratio of actual damages, argued (and won) in an Appeals Court case when they were the Defendant that such damages should be so limited.

    Estoppel is the word that first comes to mind here.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:True Irony Alert! by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is some true irony here as one of the Plaintiffs in this case who is arguing that such damages shouldn't be limited to a single-digit ratio of actual damages, argued (and won) in an Appeals Court case when they were the Defendant that such damages should be so limited.

      Yes, when UMG Recordings was a defendant it was crying a very different tune. All of a sudden the Constitution counted, and 'deterrence' wasn't so important.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  11. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? NOOOO by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    don't you think stories like this that aren't really even news are getting a little too much attention?

    No I don't! The RIAA and MPAA are trying their mightiest to bring down the free exchange of ideas, knowledge, and data that we enjoy over the Internet as well as (with the help of Microsoft and Apple lackeys) control what you can and cannot do on your own personal computer. If you think this is some far off battle on some arcane legal minutiae that will never touch your own life, you are so wrong that there aren't words to describe how wrong you are.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  12. Re:I think you missed the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    My grandmother's computer got rooted by Sony.
    My cousin got extorted freshmen year of college.

    We all need to care about the RIAA.

    They will die naturally in 10 years ; but, we
    need to help the process along.

    GuloGulo, I hope your mother doesn't get rooted
    by Sony.

  13. Re:I think you missed the point by ivucica · · Score: 1

    Forgot to check "Post Anonymously" box? :)

  14. Oldies but goldies.. by cheros · · Score: 1

    You're OK, you haven't quite reached the bottom yet:

    http://www.lawschoolbound.net/TO/humor2.htm

    Q. When he went, had you gone and had she, if she wanted to and were able, for the time being excluding all the restraints on her not to go, gone also, would he have brought you, meaning you and she, with him to the station?

    MR. BROOKS: Objection. That question should be taken out and shot. :-)

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  15. Psst! want a rootkit? by KwKSilver · · Score: 1

    Start putting SONY music CD's in your Windows machines.

    --
    If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
  16. Re:I think you missed the point by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    No one cares about your personal cause anymore. It's not 2001. No one gives a shit about irrelevant-to-their every day lives legal wrangling, shit guy.... *snip* And finding a few slashtards to agree with you doesn't mean you're right, it means you've lost perspective.

    And flaming people for liking certain stories and trying to speak for everybody (when it is obvious they don't like it) isn't? You fucking hypocritical nitwit.

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  17. Re:Glad to see you changed your mind Ray. by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 1

    "The EFF or some other organization SHOULD be filing an amicus brief. But not me... I'm just some guy." Ray Beckerman (on Groklaw)

    Glad to see you changed your mind Ray.

    Thanks, but the brief was filed on behalf of an organization... the Free Software Foundation. I was just one of the lawyers.

    --
    Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  18. Re:Focusing too much on the minutia? NOOOO by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    "with the help of Microsoft and Apple lackeys"

    That isn't entirely on topic... But you surely are missing the big picture here, and ignoring the reality of who is using who.

    Just to be short, Microsoft and Apple have everything to gain here, while RIAA people are a bunch of fools.