Slashdot Mirror


Obama DOJ Sides With RIAA

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The Obama Administration's Department of Justice, with former RIAA lawyers occupying the 2nd and 3rd highest positions in the department, has shown its colors, intervening on behalf of the RIAA in the case against a Boston University graduate student, SONY BMG Music Entertainment v. Tenenbaum, accused of file sharing when he was 17 years old. Its oversized, 39-page brief (PDF) relies upon a United States Supreme Court decision from 1919 which upheld a statutory damages award, in a case involving overpriced railway tickets, equal to 116 times the actual damages sustained, and a 2007 Circuit Court decision which held that the 1919 decision — rather than the Supreme Court's more recent decisions involving punitive damages — was applicable to an award against a Karaoke CD distributor for 44 times the actual damages. Of course none of the cited cases dealt with the ratios sought by the RIAA: 2,100 to 425,000 times the actual damages for an MP3 file. Interestingly, the Government brief asked the Judge not to rule on the issue at this time, but to wait until after a trial. Also interestingly, although the brief sought to rebut, one by one, each argument that had been made by the defendant in his brief, it totally ignored all of the authorities and arguments that had been made by the Free Software Foundation in its brief. Commentators had been fearing that the Obama/Biden administration would be tools of the RIAA; does this filing confirm those fears?"

21 of 785 comments (clear)

  1. Business as usual by microbox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The RIAA can't win in the courts, with advertising, or education of the young. Lobbyists haven't been able to get new laws passed. So the CEOs get their guys into the DOJ.

    What did we expect?

    --

    Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    1. Re:Business as usual by eebra82 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The RIAA can't win in the courts, with advertising, or education of the young. Lobbyists haven't been able to get new laws passed. So the CEOs get their guys into the DOJ. What did we expect?

      "Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first."

      - Ronald Reagan

  2. Republicans and oil, Dems and Big Content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a registered republican, I knew that the republicans would do everything in their power to secure the oil interests.

    Now that the dems are in power, you're surprised that they are doing everything to secure the media's interests? Really?

    Raise your hand if you were surprised by this posting.

    1. Re:Republicans and oil, Dems and Big Content by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now that the dems are in power, you're surprised that they are doing everything to secure the media's interests? Really?

      Actually, Obama implemented policies to make lobbying, especially by insiders, harder. That includes big media. He also made claims that he would be sure to prevent people from favoring industries where they had just been hired from, or where they had the potential to be hired to (for example people can't leave the executive branch and then immediately become a lobbyist to the executive branch). This is interesting, because unlike most other changes Obama promised, this one was within his executive power. This makes it a good test of his intention since it is not something he has to rely upon and make compromises with Congress in order to accomplish.

      When he appointed these RIAA lawyers they were among a half dozen that made me cringe. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt for a short time as I did with the FOIA issue. Effective lawyers often come with baggage, although I'd rather he appointed some ACLU heavyweights. Now, I'll give him some time to become aware of the issue and take action to rein in his subordinates or replace them. I don't expect that will happen, in all honesty, but I am reserving judgement.

      Raise your hand if you were surprised by this posting.

      I was not surprised. I was slightly disappointed. Still, once these appointments were made, this was a near certainty. The measure will be how it is handled from here. Does he let them continue as they have been? Does Obama become aware of this issue and if so, does he do something about it? That will be the real test of if he is sincere and effective or if he is going to bend to the wishes of powerful lobbyists.

    2. Re:Republicans and oil, Dems and Big Content by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Effective lawyers often come with baggage, although I'd rather he appointed some ACLU heavyweights.

      On the other hand, if you look at the nature of the corporations they previously served, these individuals' ethics were already in question. That should have been enough to disqualify them. Baggage is one thing, but these people have a history of twisting the law around their middle fingers, disrespecting the Court system, and unnecessarily damaging a lot of people in the process. Had they been honorable men they would have put a stop to it, or resigned. That they did not is a clear indication that they are not honorable, and have in no way earned their current positions.

      Furthermore, looking at the cases in which they're choosing to intervene (given that there are certainly more substantive cases they could spend our money upon) I'm taking the view that their "baggage" is actively influencing their present behavior. How else could that be, given that after starting their new jobs they immediately began carrying on the RIAA's program? Is that even legal? Seems to me an investigation is in order: I, for one, would like to know for whom they really work. If it's not us they should be fired on the spot.

      I'll bet the champagne was flowing freely at RIAA headquarters when Obama's appointments were announced.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  3. Re:Third Party by Samschnooks · · Score: 5, Insightful
    He has put out the word that he wants a dialogue with Iran.

    He made changes with Guantanamo.

    He's made changes in the tax system - albeit not enough for my tastes.

    He's dealing with one of the worst economies in decades.

    It looks like we're finally getting out of Iraq and maybe things in Afghanistan will improve too.

    Maybe he is a tool of the RIAA. I don't know, but considering the other shit happening in this World, the RIAA and their actions are not exactly high on people's list.

    I'm all for third parties myself - I voted for Barr - but I think Obama is getting much of his changes through. It's just not the "working in the system peaceful revolution" that I think many folks expected.

  4. Animal farm anyone? by logjon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

    --
    The stories and info posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
    Only fools would take it as fact.
  5. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR THIS

    False dichotomies are lies.

  6. Re:It's government corruption. by Cynonamous+Anoward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Compared to everything else....take this lovely mafia family over here...or this fair and justly operated drug ring in south america....

    All far less corrupt than the fairest of governments.

    --
    "The GPL is viral by design, like any good religion."
  7. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The statement "There will never be a point in voting Libertarian." Is false and most likely flamebait.

    I vote for the person that closest represents my value system and promises to do the things I would like to see done while they are in the White House. REGARDLESS of the fact that they may lose. Voting for either Republican or Democrat because "no one else will win" is not only morally bankrupt it is foolish.

  8. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no point voting the two major parties, they're owned by interests, not by the people.

    BTW, Jesse Ventura won the governor's race as an independent so not only is your logic false, it only serves the status quo.

  9. Re:It's government corruption. by agbinfo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The U.S. government is EXTREMELY corrupt.

    EXTREMELY corrupt? Compared to who?

    Does it matter? Is it OK to be corrupt if some other government is more corrupt?

  10. nuts by zogger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You won't get an expanded menu until you tell the restaurant owner you aren't buying either the chicken and rice or rice and chicken and stick to it. If you just keep buying one of the two exactly the same selections on the menu, he isn't going to change, no matter how much you ask or beg for a third or fourth or fifth choice.

    With voting, you can do this. You have to crack 1% to get to 2%, then crack 2 to get to 3 and so on. We've had examples in the past where third party candidates hit close to 10%, and when that level hit and the high level corrupt goons in the R and D parties got scared, and with the help of the compliant media demonizing or outright ignoring those alternatives and hijacked congress keeping the voting regs tilted in favor of the same two parties, it dropped back down. And the media IS complicit, they only "allow" the two major parties in the so called national debates. The league of women voters dropped sponsorship of the debates over that stance and being forced to acquiesce to some other shenanigans like scripting in advance, they refused to participate any longer and called it a "fraud on the american people". The big corporate media should have had the integrity and balls to do exactly the same at the exact same time, but being mostly controlled tools and way more a propaganda arm of the establishment than being independent journalists, they didn't.

    In other words, I categorically reject the notion that casting the ONE vote you have for who you really want is a waste. Maintaining that criminal gang duopoly by spending your one vote-and that is all you have realistically- on it is the only true waste (that or not voting at all) if you really don't want that criminal duopoly to remain in power. I know I have a clear conscious, been voting third or alternate party for decades now, and I can say I don't vote for the status quo of corruption and malfeasance in government as "business as usual".

        If you vote for one of those back room and media picked for you political sock puppets. no matter what your reason if it is anything except really wanting that particular doofus...that's it, that is who you voted for and you are affirming their continuance of corruption and malfeasance. It doesn't matter what you think in the back of your mind, what matters is that you personally gave them a signal that what they are doing is perfectly fine. If you don't want to do that, then don't, and it is that simple.

      The more people who are not made artificially afraid of that the better. I refuse to be intimidated by this threat of "wasting your vote", because I've been around long enough to clearly see the only major difference with those two criminal gangs is which of your pockets they want to pick first, and which of our born with rights they put at the head of the list to infringe on. I just slap refuse to vote in the affirmative for either of those bogus alleged choices.

  11. Re:Third Party by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First, the RIAA is basically irrelevant in this day and age. There is no need to make sure that the record labels continue. Record labels do not add anything to culture, or to the economy, artists do. The record labels do more harm than good to the artists. Back before the internet, it was important to be signed on to a record label for a few reasons.

    A) Recording the song, today though, with a small investment anyone can record songs that sound about as good as professionally done songs.

    B) Giving the song air time. Today, radio is a dead medium. Sure, it reaches some people, but internet radio, music video games (Guitar Hero, Rock Band, Tap Tap, etc), online promotions, YouTube, etc will reach a larger number of people, and all those do not require a record label.

    C) Giving the album store space. Today, most music sales are digital, its not too hard to put a song on iTunes, Amazon MP3, etc. And while a record label will certainly help getting you into a physical store, that is not the only way.

    Today, all the functions of a record label can be done by the band and a few others. There is no need to make sure the record companies survive, only the artists. Because the record companies do not help the artist, why keep them?

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  12. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by jdcope · · Score: 5, Insightful

    while it may look like a choice of rice and chicken versus chicken and rice, until you can get the menu to expand you pick one of the two or you don't eat.

    What can someone do to expand this menu other than vote third party and volunteer for a third party campaign?

    Revolution.

  13. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by jlarocco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's really depressing that so many people are this stupid. Every argument against voting third party eventually boils down to "third parties can't win" which completely misses the point.

    If you're voting against what you really want just so you can brag that you voted for the winner, then you're doing it wrong. Do us all a favor and stay home next election day.

  14. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by mqduck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no point voting for the major parties. They're going to win anyway.

    --
    Property is theft.
  15. Re:It's government corruption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If said official can't be bribed for less than a million dollars, then that greatly reduces the mischief that can be done.

    So wealthy corporations and private interests would be the only ones with enough money to to bribe. Exactly the way it is now. All you have done is raise the price.

  16. Re:If you didn't vote libertarian, you ASKED FOR T by Darth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There will never be a point in voting Libertarian.

    1) The candidate won't win.
    2) You'll only peel votes from a Republican.
    3) Some of them are scarier than the devils we know.

    There is always a point in voting for the person you would actually like to see in office.

    1) I don't vote to be on the winning team. I vote for who i want to see in the position. Independents will never be able to win if you keep voting against people instead of for people.

    2) This one is ridiculous. If you are voting for the Libertarian, you clearly dont want the republican in office, so how are you peeling a vote from the republican? If i dont want any of the people running in office, i dont vote for any of them. The lesser of two evils is still fucking evil.

    3) I dont vote for scary libertarians.

    i do not hold a political party affiliation. I'm not advocating voting libertarian. I'm advocating voting for anyone, regardless of party, that you think would be good in the position.

    --
    Darth --
    Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
  17. Re:It's government corruption. by amiga3D · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hell...the founding fathers knew this. They had problems with corruption right at the start. That's why the constitution has so many limits on the power of government. Limits that are just blatantly ignored today. The constitution has been under non-stop assault for decades now as the jackals in DC chip away at the protections in it. I noticed the saying "that government governs best which governs least" was not in my childrens history books. I guess it's not PC nowadays.

  18. Re:Cheney and Bush: 1,000,000 killed. Lula: 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Typical American attitude at the moment. "Woe me, my country is going to implode and it's the most corrupt and worst place on the planet!" Fucking Americans, try living in some of these other places before whining about how bad your own place is.